Some points of interest in reading the below article:

1) The biased headline is written to immediately place the reader against the soldier ie: "REVENGE" attack

2.) No background or effort in finding more information as to when and what were the past "number of attacks" on the soldier - why he was attacked - and by whom (one can postulate easy enough -links)

3) No effort or investigation was made by the reporter or by the police service as to why the police previously refused to help Alan White by not taking further action on finding and arresting the gang of "Asians" who accosted the lone soldier. White had been minding his own business and walking home from the store,  when gang member, Ayaz Abdullah, proceeded to punch Alan White in the face -  in a unprovoked attack. The excuse that the police needed the victim to provide the attackers names and addresses, before and investigation could begin, is pure rubbish. So the British police now want the victims to do the police work???

4)Thus, at the what amounted to a suggestion by the British police to find out, on his own, who the perpetrators of the assault against him were.  Mr. White and his father set out to find the gang of muslims. Upon rather effortlessly finding the gang and calling the police for assistance, the White's car was surrounded by the muslims and the senior Mr. White was attacked. No effort or investigation was made by the reporter or by the police service as to why the police, for a SECOND time did not quickly assist Mr. White and his father who, at this point in time were surrounded by the same gang of muslims while calling for police help.  This second failure, by police, to immediatley come to the Whites aid resulted in Alan White's father being beaten so savagely, by the muslims, that he was nearly unconscious and sufferd a fractured jaw and broken nose.

5) Alan White, in what is clearly an act of self defense, used a pool cue to ward off the assailants. But, this is where lo and behold the police finally took some action - and arrested Mr. White for "use of a weapon".

6)Thus a serving soldier, who if need be will risk his life to defend Great Britain, was found guilty for protecting himself and his father NOT for revenge. The second attack on Mr. White was not provoked by any action other than he and his father sitting in a car doing what the police refused to do which was find the muslims who had previously punched him. Clearly, Alan White's use of the pool cue had everything to do with the muslim mob surrounding the duo and savagely beating his father, right infront of him,  NOT seeking revenge for a prior assault.

7) If you look at the very bottom of the article - highlighted in red by me - you will see a postscript stating that Mr. Abdullah, the man who started the whole mess, was found guilty of assault and has to spend a whopping 24 hours in an "attendance centre". 

Despite all of the above, Mr White was fined 1740 pounds - some of which will be used for victim compensation. Clearly this is an instance where police inaction resulted in placing the REAL victim (Alan White) in greater danger as he was literally told by police that the only way they could help him find the men who attacked him was for White to go out and do the investigative work the police should do. The media bias - as well as the court bias - against the indigenous British is well evident as I have described above.

This is another incident of muslim gangs accosting and harming innocent people in unprovoked attacks and once again being seen as the victims of violence rather than the perpetrators.

entire article - emphasis mine

SOLDIERS REVENGE ATTACK WITH POOL CUE

A SERVING soldier from Brierfield who used a pool cue in a revenge attack has been fined £1,500 by Pennine magistrates.

Miss Julie Reddish (prosecuting) said Mr Abdullah had been with a group of friends in Brierfield when a car drove towards them, White got out and hit him over the head with a pool cue. The pair had been involved in a row 20 minutes previously in which White had been assaulted by Mr Abdullah.

Mr Mark Irlam (defending) said White had been subject to a number of attacks which police had not taken action on

On this occasion, he had been returning home from a shop when he was approached by a group of Asian males and hit in the eye by Mr Abdullah. He suffered a black eye, was taken home by his father, the police were contacted and Mr White was told there was nothing that could be done unless they had the assailant's name and address.

White and his father went out to see if they could track down the men and came across them in Chapel Street. They again contacted the police and their car was surrounded by the group. White's father was hit, White got a pool cue from the glove compartment, got out of the car and hit Abdullah to force him away from the car.

"It was clearly excessive. Had he punched him, he would have pleaded not gulity and said he was acting in self-defence. Because of the use of a weapon, he has entered a guilty plea. His father was nearly unconscious and sufferd a fractured jaw and broken nose," said Mr Irlam. "It was sheer frustration at the total lack of action in previous incidents. He offers his apologies to the court, the police and his victim for his actions."

• In a hearing last month, Mr Abdullah admitted assault by beating and was ordered to attend an attendance centre for 24 hours.

• Last Updated: 12 May 2008 8:38 AM
• Source: n/a
• Location: Burnley