Self published, 2026
British patriotic activist Sam Melia has just finished a new book chronicling his persecution at the hands of the state. Legal, Truthful, Guilty is a clear and accessible account of his strange experience being prosecuted and incarcerated for entirely legal political views.
In a time of pervasive censorship during the first Trump campaign, and seeing dissidents hit with measures as extreme as having their bank accounts closed, Melia was looking for a new way to take action. He had already been active in the civic nationalist pro-Israel party For Britain, but was expelled after comments he had made critical of Jews were brought to light by the far-Left pressure group Hope Not Hate. Reasoning that he needed a way to act outside of social media while remaining anonymous, he quickly arrived at the idea of a stickering campaign.
Melia took the name “Hundred-Handers” from enormous monsters who fought with one group of gods to overthrow another in Greek mythology. He organized a system whereby volunteers could print out their own stickers using only designs he personally approved. This meant that participants could remain anonymous, as they only interacted online and did not need to provide a mailing address for any supplies.
The stickers were placed in public locations such as lampposts and benches, not only in the UK but also in many other white countries, provoking a great deal of denunciation from politicians and the media. They featured phrases such as “It’s okay to be white” and “Tolerance is not a virtue,” which were enough to justify an investigation by the British counter-terror police.
It is often the case that oppressive regimes blame internal dissent on foreign influence to make any opposition appear illegitimate. The authorities initially charged Melia with international financial conspiracy, although thankfully this charge was quickly dropped for lack of evidence. After attempting unsuccessfully to pressure him to give up the password for an encrypted hard drive full of data on local activists, they ultimately charged him with “distribution of material meant to incite racial hatred” and “encouraging racially aggravated criminal damage.” The lampposts were unavailable to testify regarding the latter charge.
The case hinged on his alleged intentions, as the prosecution conceded that none of the content of any of the stickers violated any law. Supposedly he intended to incite racial harassment of minorities, despite never actually insulting them himself. They cited a book in his possession by Oswald Mosey, leader of the British Union of Fascists in the 1930s, as well as a copy of a historical Nazi poster which a friend had sent him as a joke, in reference to the constant allegations against present-day pro-white activists. To the surprise of both his attorney and himself, he was ultimately convicted and sentenced to two years in prison. He was placed in “Category B,” the same category as terrorists, and was sent to a high-security prison with serious offenders.
Melia served nine months before being released to an “assisted premises,” a British term for a halfway house, for most of the remainder of the sentence. Thankfully, his recounting of his time in prison is free of some of the worst things reported to happen to convicts. He was never attacked by the other inmates, attributing this to his relatively unusual habit of never going into debt, as well as never developing a reputation as a snitch. Being mostly surrounded by white people may have also played a role. He was never abused by the guards, and in fact several times managed to gain greater privileges from the authorities by being a model prisoner.
The closest thing to a Hollywood depiction of prison he recounts is being held in solitary confinement for 48 hours. His supporters were holding a protest outside the prison, which somehow the authorities suspected him of secretly organizing using a contraband cell phone, but they could find no evidence of this, so he was spared any further isolation.
You can buy Greg Johnson’s Toward a New Nationalism here.
He did however have considerable difficulty with the character of his fellow convicts. One cellmate who he had considered a friend was revealed to have spread rumors that he was an informant, while himself informing the guards of Melia’s diary, the basis of this book. This angered some of them, as he had noted their sympathy with his politics, but thankfully they returned it unharmed. The offender also denounced another prisoner, but the guards could find no evidence, and the newly exposed Judas was then shunned by the other inmates.
Although the strict “no snitching” code might seem to imply solidarity among the prisoners, they had very little regard for each other. Many were allowed to work at various jobs around the prison, but they rarely proved themselves trustworthy. Those employed in food service would routinely hoard various items for themselves and give double helpings to their friends, sometimes in exchange for drugs, so that others were left with nothing. He ultimately quit his job in “servery,” as it was called, as he found this unconscionable.
Some prisoners were friendly to Melia or even sympathetic to his work, but this did little to raise his opinion of them. One was excited to meet the man who was locked up for “anti-Zionist stickers,” and informed him that the reason the sunset was red at times was that he was using a mirror to counter Jewish influence over the weather. He was often accosted by “nutters” who would either recount their appalling life story or attempt to convey some questionable hidden knowledge.
Others were locked up for rioting after a deadly attack on young white girls by a second-generation Rwandan immigrant. One was sentenced to two years and eight months for chanting “Allah is a pedo” and for making another statement about the threat of Islam which a police officer agreed with on video. Although he sympathized with their anger, he had to admit that “I’ve only met two. . . who aren’t complete scumbags.” One had a record for weapons, robbery, and assault.
He had numerous cellmates, most of whom seemed to have endless complaints but no will to accomplish anything beyond acquiring drugs or shoes. He briefly attended a course to become an English mentor, but thought better of it after observing that his fellow prisoners were “not just thick but belligerently so,” and had no respect for teachers. As he put it, even his friends were “men who revel in violence and intimidation.” Ultimately, he concluded that all but a few of those he met during his time there were a terrible burden on society and should be executed.
Readers are presumably familiar with the hysteria on the part of Western governments in cracking down on anything perceived as “racist,” but they might still be shocked by the lengths the authorities went to in this case. Melia was told that he would be prohibited from having any contact with anyone under 18, including his own daughters, as an assessment was being done on the threat he supposedly posed to children. For approximately two months he was not allowed to see them for family visits, and even emails from his parents mentioning his nephews were rejected by the prison. The justification given by the prison was his dangerous “symbols and iconography,” in other words the Nazi poster he had been given as a joke. Thankfully, they were incompetent in enforcing these regulations, at one point letting him have a letter from his daughter, and ultimately relaxed them under public pressure.
Melia was assigned regular meetings with workers from three departments, Probation, Counter-Terror, and Prevent, the latter being a program to discourage terrorism, and had notably different experiences with them. His “intervention provider” seemed reasonable and friendly, although he described himself as “ex-far-Right,” and seemed to have only ever had a shallow understanding of politics. As his role was only to discourage violence and he never saw any evidence that Melia was violent, they got along well. Counter-Terror was similarly described as “cordial.”
His probation officers, however, were apparently very offended by his rejection of multiculturalism and would argue with him at great length. One officer in particular who he called Dick, although this may not be his real name, used every rhetorical trick the reader may be familiar with to delegitimize pro-white thinking. He accused Melia of merely presenting a façade of being level-headed and reasonable in order to advance his true agenda. The last he heard from Dick was that he had submitted a new referral to Child Services and had found it difficult to think of anything positive to say about him. He even asserted that the couple’s political views would be harmful to their children’s development because there might be “future political disagreements.”
One of the key weaknesses of highly unpleasant people is that they seem unable to put themselves in someone else’s place. They will fill in this embarrassing gap in their understanding by assuming the worst, as Melia saw repeatedly. During his trial, the prosecutor questioned him as to why he would care about the victims of the Pakistani rape gangs. He alleged that since none of the girls were friends or family, Melia could not possibly sympathize with them, and was even faking his tears when discussing the atrocities. This type of mentality may have made sense during the Ice Age, but seems quite out of place in a modern nation where rape has long been considered a crime, regardless of the victim’s connections.
Melia is described in the foreword as having high agency, and this is apparent throughout the book. During his time in prison, he found a number of things to occupy his time, including working at various jobs and building things out of matchsticks, such as a model tank and a guitar with rubber band strings. At one point he was held in a cell with a large gap under the door through which mice could get in. Rather than simply denounce these illegal immigrants, he built a matchstick skirt on the bottom of the door, which successfully sealed the border.
This attitude was also reflected in his interactions with the authorities. He and his wife Laura consistently took their own side, as they have long advocated for white people to do. At one point Child Services produced a report on them full of flaws, including the claim that Melia is “narrow-minded” and that he “does not commit to any shared social contract, including democratically adopted laws of the land.” There were various other biased or false claims which he objected to, and Laura successfully demanded that the report be considerably altered. Amazingly, one updated section largely consisted of material copied and pasted from Wikipedia. They also managed to dissuade Child Services from doing a third lengthy assessment of their family situation after the first two had found nothing untoward.
Most of this book is quite serious, but there are moments of humor. At one point after being released to the halfway house, Melia was faced with a new arrival named Max, the son of Nigerian immigrants. Max was a caricature of a black man, constantly playing rap music and boasting of his felonious exploits, both at a very high volume. At one point someone walked into the room with a banana and Max responded with “Yo! I’ll destroy a banana, me, fam! I’m a monkey!” Melia suspected he was being baited to say something “racist.”
Later the author walked in on a heated argument between Max and another newcomer named Alex over immigration, with the former extolling immigrants’ contributions in food and labor. It was not clear that Max could imagine how he would feel if he had not had breakfast that day, but the author still managed to reason with him. He asked him to imagine how he would feel if Nigeria was suffering a similar demographic decline as the UK and the government was preventing anyone from doing anything about it. Ultimately he agreed that immigration should be cut drastically, and that the British had the right to decide their own destiny. The author explains that he has often come to such an agreement in discussions with non-whites; the argument for self-determination is so compelling that at times even race is no barrier to understanding.
The only real flaw in this book is that it is mostly a diary, and as such covers details of everyday life which the reader may not have any interest in. The author himself admits that he abandoned the diary for some time as his experiences had become too repetitive to continue recording. There were also a few points where the facts were unclear; I was left wondering as to the “five spicy words” of his which he first mentioned halfway through the book as having been used by the prosecution to show criminal intent.
The authorities had the stated intention of “realign[ing] Mr. Melia’s mindset,” but they could not have been further from succeeding. On the contrary, his experiences only reinforced his view that he had done nothing wrong, and that the state’s mentality was appalling. He suggests that he would like to pursue qualifications in law, and once he finished his sentence he immediately rejoined a nationalist group which he had previously been active with. I wish him every success.
Howe Abbott-Hiss
https://counter-currents.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment