Tag Archives: SPG

ANTI-FASCISM , ANTI-NEO NAZISM WITH THE ANTI-NAZI LEAGUE HERE IN BRITAIN DURING THE ANTAGONISTIC STREET BATTLES AND RALLIES DURING THE 1970’S -1980’S

Posted on by
Reply

HERE IS MORE INTERACTIVE DOCUMENTARY AND HOPEFULLY EDUCATIONAL FOOTAGE TOUCHING UPON THE ANTI NAZI MOVEMENTS HERE IN BRITAIN DURING THE 1970’S- 1980’S .

240113

PLEASE DO BE AWARE THAT  THE CRIME THROUGH TIME COLLECTION , IT’S OWNER , OR ANY OF IT’S STAFF HERE AT LITTLEDEAN JAIL HAVE NO AFFILIATION , CONNECTION OR INVOLVEMENT WITH ANY EXTREMIST , POLITICALLY MOTIVATED OR OTHERWISE MOVEMENTS WHATSOEVER …… WE SIMPLY EXHIBIT AND TOUCH UPON A GREAT MANY POLITICALLY INCORRECT AND TABOO SUBJECT MATTERS THAT NO OTHER VISITOR ATTRACTIONS DARE COVER IN THE WAY WE CHOOSE TO DO HERE. …. “IT’S ALL HISTORY FOR GOODNESS SAKE”….EVEN IF ON OCCASIONS, SENSITIVE , THOUGHT PROVOKING SUBJECT MATTERS THAT INCITE STRONG DEBATE .

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Anti-Nazi League

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (July 2008)

Anti-Nazi League logo

The Anti-Nazi League (ANL) was an organisation set up in 1977 on the initiative of the Socialist Workers Party with sponsorship from sometrade unions and the endorsement of a list of prominent people to oppose the rise of far-right groups in the United Kingdom. It was wound down in 1981. It was relaunched in 1992, but merged into Unite Against Fascism in 2003.

The initial sponsors included Peter Hain (a former Young Liberal leader; then the communications officer of the postal workers’ union UCW, more recently Secretary of State for Wales), Ernie Roberts(deputy general secretary of the engineering union AUEW) and Paul Holborow (of the Socialist Workers Party (SWP)).[citation needed][edit]History

In its first period, 1977–1982, the Anti-Nazi League was supposedly run by an elected committee nationally and similar committees throughout the country, although in practice many local and National ANL initiatives were launched directly by the SWP. Many trade unions sponsored it as did the Indian Workers Association (then a large organisation), and many members of the Labour Party and MPs such as Neil Kinnock.[citation needed] The Anti-Nazi League was best known for the two giant Rock Against Racism carnivals of 1978: involving bands such as The Clash, Stiff Little Fingers, Steel Pulse, Misty in Roots, X-Ray Spex andTom Robinson, they saw 80,000 and then 100,000.[citation needed] In 1981 with the eclipse of the National Front and collapse of the British Movement the initial incarnation of the ANL was wound up. Some elements within the ANL opposed the winding up of the organisation, including some members of the SWP. After being expelled from the Socialist Workers Party some of these elements formedRed Action and with others organised Anti-Fascist Action, who had a much more open view to using violence to intimidate groups and individuals they considered fascist. In 1992 the Socialist Workers Party relaunched the Anti-Nazi League due to the electoral success of the British National Party.[citation needed] In 2004 the ANL affiliated with the Unite Against Fascism group alongside other groups such as the National Assembly Against Racism.[1][2]

[edit]Beliefs

Most of the ANL’s activities in the 1970s were in opposition to the National Front, an organization led by John Tyndall who had a long history of involvement with openly fascist and Nazi groups. The ANL also campaigned against the British Movement which was a more openly Hitlerite grouping. The ANL was allowed to run down in the early 1980s.[citation needed] The organization was revived in 1992. In the 1990s its main efforts have been to oppose the British National Party, which denies that it is a Nazi Party.

[edit]Activities

The ANL carried out leafleting and other campaigns against Far Right groups which it claimed were not just racist but fascist; see BNP and British National Front. The ANL was linked to “Rock Against Racism” in the 1970s, and has worked with a similar group, “Love Music Hate Racism“, from 2001 onwards.[citation needed]

[edit]Blair Peach killing

Main article: Blair Peach

In April 1979, an ANL member, Blair Peach, was killed following a demonstration at Southall against a National Front election meeting. Police had sealed off the area around Southall Town Hall, and anti-racist demonstrators trying to make their way there were blocked. In the ensuing confrontation, more than 40 people (including 21 police) were injured, and 300 were arrested. Bricks were hurled at police, who described the rioting as the most violent they have handled in London. Among the demonstrators was Peach, a New Zealand-born member of the ANL. During an incident in a side street 100 yards from the town hall, he was seriously injured and collapsed, blood running down his face from serious head injuries. He died later in hospital.[3] An inquest jury later returned a verdict of misadventure, and Blair Peach remains a symbolic figurehead for the ANL. Campaigns continue for a public inquiry into his death. A primary school in Southall bears his name.[4]

[edit]The ANL’s Leadership

The ANL National Organiser at the time of the creation of Unite Against Fascism was Weyman Bennett, a member of the Central Committee of the Socialist Workers Party. Its previous National Organiser was Julie Waterson, also a member of the Socialist Workers Party and a former member of the National Executive of the Socialist Alliance.[citation needed]

[edit]Challenges and criticisms

[edit]Denials of Fascism and Racism

When the National Front and the British National Party were led by John Tyndall, his record of involvement in openly Neo-Nazi groups made it far easier to assert that the National Front and BNP werefascist or Neo-Nazi in nature. Similarly, his convictions for violence and incitement to racial hatred provide ample grounds for the ANL to claim both organisations were racist.[5] The ANL and other anti fascists argue that the BNP remains a Nazi party irrespective of the fact that it has adopted what the ANL describes as the ‘Dual Strategy’ of cultivating respectability in the media while retaining a cadre of committed fascists. This position is countered by BNP members who claim that their party is increasingly democratic in its nature. Journalistic investigation by The Guardian newspaper (December 22, 2006) has supported the ANL’s view that the BNP remains a fascist party.[6]

[edit]A popular front against fascism

More broadly, the ANL is seen as a form of anti-fascism that seeks out alliances with a broad spectrum of progressive organisations usually rooted in the Labour movement. Socialist historian Dave Renton, for example, in his book Fascism: Theory and Practice,[7] describes the ANL as “an orthodox united front” based on a “strategy of working class unity”, as advocated by Leon Trotsky. Critics of the ANL, such as Anti-Fascist Action[8] argue that the ANL’s co-operation with “bourgeois” groups who work closely with the state, such as Searchlight magazine and the Labour Party, rule out this description, making it a classic popular front.

[edit]Free speech

Critics of the ANL (including people opposed to the far right) claim that its “No Platform for Nazis” policy and call for far right parties to be “shut down” amounts to denying the democratic rights tofreedom of speech and freedom of association. For some, this reflects the fact that freedom of speech is either universal or non-existent; others take the more nuanced position that this reflects the greater protection to be accorded to those sub-sets of freedom of speech and association which deliver ‘democracy’ (so political speech would attract greater protection than forms of speech, such as pornography, which do not contribute to democracy). This view point accords with those anti-fascists who believe that the best way to defeat the far right is by debate rather than censorship, which they say is both ineffective and hypocritical. Relatedly, the ANL has been subject to the more pragmatic criticism that its constant calls for groups like the BNP to be banned will allow the far right to portray themselves as victims of censorship, and the anti-fascist movement as intolerant and undemocratic. The ANL response to this criticism derives from the argument that, because fascist groups ultimately seek to curtail democracy and suppress democratic rights (even if they initially seek to obtain power through democratic means), the curtailment of their democratic rights can be justified as a means of protecting those of the broader citizenry. Militant anti-fascists, however, have criticised the ANL for relying on the state to prosecute or censor fascism, rather than promoting direct action by citizens.[citation needed]

[edit]Relationship with the SWP

The ANL has been accused of being a ‘front’ for the Socialist Workers Party; that is, of being controlled by the SWP and having the agenda of recruiting members to that organisation, while giving the impression of being independent,[9] generally by left-wingers who are not associated with the SWP

GLOUCESTERSHIRE POLICE CONSTABULARY’S FINGERPRINT KIT (CIRCA 1940’S)

Posted on by
2

A SUPERB PIECE OF GLOUCESTERSHIRE POLICE CRIME SCENE MEMORABILIA  ON DISPLAY AT LITTLEDEAN JAIL

JUST ONE OF A GREAT MANY BRITISH POLICE MEMORABILIA ITEMS THROUGH THE AGES ON DISPLAY IN ONE OF THE UK’S LARGEST PRIVATE COLLECTIONS OF LAW AND ORDER MATERIAL . 

BELOW ARE VARIOUS IMAGES OF WHAT  IS BELIEVED TO BE ONE OF THE VERY FEW SURVIVING VINTAGE  GLOUCESTERSHIRE CONSTABULARY’S FINGERPRINT KITS (CIRCA 1940’S) . COMPLETE WITH IT’S ORIGINAL BOX, INKS, ROLLER, POWDERS AND BRUSHES ETC .ALSO VARIOUS APPROPRIATE  DOCUMENTATION FOR FINGERPRINT EVIDENCE PURPOSES . VIEW OF  UNOPENED FINGERPRINT KIT BOXVARIOUS POLICE AND CRIME SCENE DOCUMENTATION FOUND WITHIN THE INNER SLEEVE OF FINGERPRINT KIT BOX

Fingerprint Bureau

Very many books and scientific papers have been published on the subject of Fingerprints, and reference to ‘the prints from man’s hand’ can even be found in the Bible.

The study of the application of fingerprints for useful purposes appears to have started in the latter part of the 17th century when, in 1684, the anatomist Doctor Nehemiah Grew published a paper on the subject which he illustrated with drawings of various fingerprint patterns. About the same period, in Italy, Professor Malpighi was investigating the function of the skin.

It was in 1860 that the use of fingerprints as a reliable means of individual identification really started. Sir William Herschel, an administrator in the province of Bengal, India, appreciated the unique nature of fingerprints and established the principle of their persistence. Fingerprints are formed in full detail before birth and remain unchanged throughout life unless they are affected by a deep seated injury. A method of classifying fingerprints and research in this field was initiated by Sir Francis Galton and Henry Faulds independently at the end of the 19th century.

Anthropometric measuring devices

Anthropometric measuring devices in brass and mounted on wood. Used in the Alphonse Bertillon system of identification

In 1900 a committee was appointed by the Home Secretary under the chairmanship of Lord Belper to enquire into methods of the ‘Identification of Criminals by Measurement and Fingerprints’. About this time, Mr. E.R. Henry, later to become Sir Edward Henry, Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, published his book, ‘The Classification and Use of Fingerprints’. This proposed a method of fingerprint classification and comparison to replace the inaccurate Bertillon anthropometric measurement system, which was then in use, which only partially relied upon fingerprints for identification. Henry was one of sixteen witnesses invited to appear before this committee to explain the system which he had devised. Following the recommendations made by this committee, the Fingerprint Branch at New Scotland Yard was created in July 1901 using the Henry System of Classification.

The Fingerprint Branch at New Scotland Yard, which started with just three people, has expanded over the years and the present Identification Service is now provided by a staff of 600 technical and administrative officers. Today, there are two Fingerprint Bureaux at New Scotland Yard, viz. the National Fingerprint Office (which together with the National Criminal Record Office forms the National Identification Bureau) and the Metropolitan Police Scenes of Crime Branch, which incorporates the Fingerprint, Photographic and Scenes of Crime Examination Services.

The importance of having a National Fingerprint Collection has been recognised by all police forces in the United Kingdom even though they have their own local fingerprint bureaux.

Each day, the fingerprints of people who have been sentenced to a term of imprisonment, and those who have been arrested and charged with other than the most minor offences, are sent to New Scotland Yard for processing. The fingerprints of those who are not subsequently convicted are, of course, destroyed.

One of the primary functions of the National Fingerprint Office is to establish whether the person has a previous record. After a name check has been made, the enquiry fingerprints are compared with the master set of any suggested match. If this proves negative, the fingerprints are coded and the coding transmitted to the Police National Computer at Hendon.

The coding of the enquiry prints is analysed by the computer and only those criminals whose prints could possibly match are listed as respondents on a computer print-out.

Until recently, Identification Officers would make a comparison of the enquiry with the paper fingerprint forms of the respondents, which are all filed in the National Fingerprint Collection, in order to establish whether any computer suggestion was positive.

However, after some years of research and planning, an automatic retrieval system known as the ‘Videofile System’ was installed and fingerprint comparisons are now made by Identification Officers at Visual Display Units.

These processes, which have eliminated the need for much laborious searching, often result in a rapid reply from the computer indicating that there is no inclusion which matches the coding enquiry fingerprints.

Within the organisation of the Scenes of Crime Branch there operates a field force of 200 Identification Officers and Scenes of Crime Officers who are responsible for examining Scenes of Crime throughout the Metropolitan Police District. Scenes of serious crime are examined for fingerprints by Senior Identification Officers. The function of these officers is to detect and record any finger or palm marks which an offender may have left at the scene. They also retrieve forensic clues, e.g. blood samples, shoe marks, etc., which are then forwarded to the Forensic Science Laboratory for analysis.

Finger and palm marks are sent to the Metropolitan Police Scenes of Crime Branch at New Scotland Yard where, after various elimination and checking procedures, the finger marks are coded for search on either the Police National Computer (Scenes of Crime System) or the Automatic Fingerprint Recognition System (AFR). The suggested possible fingerprint matches may be compared using the Videofile System or by browsing through the actual fingerprint collections. The Automatic Fingerprint Recognition System is a computerised method of matching fingerprints found at scenes of crime with recorded fingerprints of known offenders. The computer lists, in order of probability, any possible fingerprint matches, but does not itself make any ‘identical or not identical’ decisions. Palm marks are retained for comparison with the palm prints of persons suspected of committing the crime. Final comparisons between crime scene marks and offenders’ prints and decisions as to the identity are carried out by Identification Officers.

One of the earliest cases involving the use of fingerprint evidence was in 1905, when a thumb print, left on a cash box at the scene of a murder in Deptford of shopkeepers Mr. & Mrs. Farrow, was identified as belonging to Alfred Stratton, one of two brothers. As a result of this identification they were jointly charged with the crime and subsequently hanged.

Since then, fingerprint identification has played an important role in many major crime investigations, including such cases as the Great Train Robbery in 1963, and the sad case of Lesley Whittle, who was found brutally murdered in a drainage shaft at Kidsgrove in 1975, and the intriguing case of the ‘Stockwell Strangler’, who was responsible for the murders of eleven pensioners in 1986.

Apart from the technical assistance which is given by Fingerprint Staff in the investigation of crime, positive identification by means of fingerprints has given vital help in cases of serious accidents; for example, train and plane crashes. They have also been valuable in identifying people who have suffered from amnesia.

Like any other major organisation, the Identification Services are always seeking ways of improving the service provided. Although computerisation leads to greater efficiency, it cannot replace the individual expertise of trained Identification Officers and the final decision as to identity which is always made by a qualified Fingerprint Expert.

HOW TO COMPARE FINGERPRINTS … A SHORT VIDEO