The late Alan Clark, MP, once wrote the following words about a meeting he had with two activists of the 'far right': "And I thought how good they were, and how brave is the minority, in a once great country, who still keep alive the tribal essence." Sadly, Clark himself lacked this quality of courage, but did at least make ringing denunciations of the NATO/NWO carnage in Yugoslavia at the very end of his life.

Clark's comments serve as good an introduction as any to the events of mid-December last year, when both John Tyndall and Nick Griffin were arrested on official, though fallacious, charges of 'incitement to racial hatred.' In John Tyndall's case, the 'incitement' consisted of a speech made in Burnley last March which included a few references to the family origins of Michael Howard. The arrests must surely have been among the last acts authorised by David Blunkett before his overdue and unlamented departure from the Home Office.

One top judge (I forgot which one; they're all nearly interchangeable today) has said that political arrests or trials never take place in Britain. But this is the most blatant hypocrisy: the present ruling clique in this country, with its 25 per cent mandate, acts in the manner of East Germany's Stasi. The arrests may have been intended to placate New Labour's Muslim electorate following the Iraq debacle. But most Muslims are intelligent enough to understand quite well that their real enemies are not Griffin or Tyndall, but the likes of Sharon, Bush and Blair.

Underhand spying

The sleazy and underhand manner in which the initial evidence in this case was gathered deserves comment. Suppose a fly-on-the-wall bug or camera were to be placed in the offices of Blair's old sponsor Rupert Murdoch – whose antipathies are said to include Irish, Blacks, Germans and Arabs – might not the BBC have gathered some more interesting and entertaining material? How about Police canteens? Or even Labour clubs?

The Daily Telegraph can make jokey comments about the 'Torah Party' in its pages, but when Tyndall does something similar it becomes 'incitement'. Even though such laws are absurd, isn't there an element of snobbery prevailing here? Michael Howard's ancestry can be alluded to 'in house', as it were, by such an arch-Conservative paper but beware of the dangers of doing the same in front of the 'proles' of Burnley BNP. Mr. Howard himself (and Howard he must remain, for the thought police may be reading this*) can hardly be worried about belonging to what Nietzsche called the "strongest, toughest race in Europe." Oddly enough, Howard is probably less committed to the Zionist cause than is Blair, though this, unfortunately, is not saying very much!

Truth doesn't matter

'Racism' is just a form of words, and it doesn't matter if the words are true or not. The truth is no defence, according to the enforcers of Britain's race laws. But, unsurprisingly, this concept of racism does not extend to activities popular with the governing élite, such as machine-gunning Arabs in the streets of Iraqi towns on behalf of Uncle Ariel, or blowing up Sierra Leonese in the presumed interest of gem companies like Ascorp or De Beers. For Blair, these are 'good' wars! At the back of very many minds is the unstated but persistent thought: where will the war be this year?

The Burnley speech by JT was, ironically enough, somewhat milder than some of the utterances on race by prominent leftists of the 1920s and 1930s, such as George Bernard Shaw or Sidney and Beatrice Webb. On reflection, it's also a good job that the rulings of the thought commissars can't apply to literary giants of past. For under the provisions of the 1986 Public Order Act, numerous authors – from Chaucer to Dickens, from Sir Walter Scott to T.S. Eliot – would face certain prosecution if they were around today. In those far-off times, believe or not, people were 'racists' without ever realising it.

The man in the street is not really perturbed by speeches with an allegedly 'racist' element but is instead most indignant about violent crime or drugs sweeping through his neighbourhood. He's also petrified that Gordon 'Prosperity' Brown is creating the conditions that will lead to the export of his job to China or India (if it hasn't gone already), and he is certainly not worrying about top Tories and their Transylvanian associations.

Brown is presently facing a massive black hole in the national finances. The chronically sick are to be forced off benefits in order to seek 'work' which is either non-existent or gone to immigrants imported for cheap labour. Now the Exchequer would be in a much better shape without the millions upon millions wasted on war and occupation in Iraq. This is a very strange state of affairs, no doubt, for which the Government must surely have its reasons. But perhaps Jim Moran, Cynthia McKinney or Senator Ernest Hollings could tell Gordon Brown the reason why! These are American politicians who virtually ruined their careers by daring to tell the truth about the role of the Jewish lobby in getting America into war with Iraq.

Interesting engagement

The other 'B' in government, Blair, had a rather interesting engagement just a few days before the arrest of John Tyndall. This was the lighting of the Chanukkah menorah inside 10 Downing Street. Interestingly enough, Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sachs was absent from this allegedly religious occasion, making the rather transparent excuse that he had to visit a primary school! Those who did make the gathering included Blair's patron Michael Levy, the Israeli Ambassador Zvi Heifetz and Henry Grunwald, President of the Board of Deputies. Bush's White House had a Chanukuh lighting too, but no Christmas crib.

It was left to Israeli Professor Avraham Oz to point out the anomaly that Christian Arab students in Haifa are not allowed a Christmas tree while Chanukkah celebrations are held in the seats of power in London and Washington. But it would be a mistake to regard the Downing Street ceremony as necessarily anything to do with religion. Rather, it can be seen as a visible act of assent to a geopolitical power structure.

Now while I don't suggest that there is some sort of direct causative connection between this clubby meeting and the nationalist arrests, the conspiratorially-minded may well be wondering!

But the proscription of mild expressions of national feeling and racial solidarity in this country presents a neat contrast to the complete freedom of speech which is utilised by some of Ambassador Heifetz's compatriots. Examples are numerous, such as General Rafael Eitan's description of Arabs as "scurrying around like cockroaches in a bottle." Following General Eitan's demise a few months ago – he was swept away into the Mediterranean by a large freak wave – the system news media's usual description of him was of a "bluff and straight-talking man." Nor does such intense racial hatred content itself with verbal description, as shown by the obliteration of an entire family of seven Palestinian youngsters by a tank shell, while they were picking potatoes in Gaza.

Rule by fear

So while this 'cockroach' talk is acceptable in the Middle East, in this country we are forbidden any reasoned, non-abusive debate on certain issues. As with the witch-finders and inquisitors of old, hardly any of the public believe the PC tyrants' doctrine, but they go along with them out of a mixture of complacency and fear.

Blair claims, in his characteristic half-baked Messianic fashion, that 'freedom' must triumph over 'terror'. It is all of a piece with George W. Bush's much-repeated inaugural commitment to 'free-dumb'. But how much freedom really exists in this country? How much freedom is there for Ernst Zundel, who has now spent two years in US and Canadian jails for thought crimes?

Does 'freedom' in Iraq include the freedom for occupation forces to rape young boys in Abu Ghraib Jail – or the freedom to poison half the population there with DU ammunition, perhaps? Even the free elections held in Iraq under US auspices were not what they seemed: in many areas the issue of monthly rations was conditional on people registering votes.

And does British 'freedom' include the freedom for New Labour functionaries to harass the honest and diligent Dr. David Kelly into permanent silence?

How much freedom is there in the USA for the lab director Kevin R. Ryan, who reported to federal investigators that the steel in the WTC towers couldn't possibly have been melted by jet fuel? The freedom to be dismissed, that's all!

As the old saying goes, there are none so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free.