Author Archives: admin

About admin

I am a writer, blogger, political activist and infant reformer.

Immigration

 

 

 

 

 

 

The recent furore over Gary Lineker’s comments about Conservative government migrant policy on the small boats has exposed clearly the hard left mentality that dominates political discourse in the UK. All the usual suspects have come out of the woodwork against the prospective policies of Rishi Sunak and Suella Braverman: the Labour party, celebrities like Lineker, charities, open borders activists and of course the United Nations and so on.

 

At the risk of annoying all those who have already followed this story, Lineker’s contribution to the debate is not really a free speech issue. He is free to say what he likes as an independent person. However, as a very high profile BBC personality he should be aware of impartiality guidelines in view of the effect his words have on BBC viewers and people generally and realise that his take on government migration policy was outrageous considering the comparison with Germany in the Thirties.

 

The government has an enormous fight on its hands now as it finds itself in an epic battle between open borders supporters and those who believe in the nation state and protection of borders. It was once said that liberals tear down fences that already exist whilst conservatives try and conserve fences as they are there for a reason, and this is reflected by the migration issue.

 

Back in the day, when I was growing up in the UK, it was just taken as given that the world was composed of 195 odd countries which all had their own culture and history, and that you needed a passport or visa to cross a border from one country to another. Otherwise you were transgressing a basic, fundamental boundary that was criminal to sever. Most if not all people would have adhered to that outlook.

 

The world is much changed, and now legal and illegal immigration is running at historic and unprecedented levels. There are those that say it’s too late, the demography is irreversible, but you don’t keep digging if you’re in a hole. Demography is literally everything and we must have a discussion about nationhood, patriotism, history, heritage and what sort of future we want. A fundamental difference has to be acknowledged at the basis of any discussion, that there are those that believe in open borders and others, probably the majority, who believe in borders.

 

Those arguing for proper border controls must first of all be utterly confident in their position and have an unassailable arsenal of arguments to support their view, and they must be fearless in their stance, because the nature of the battle is that they are facing a very powerful bullying and intimidating spirit that shamefully resorts to name calling and cries of ‘bigot’ or ‘racist’ to get its way. A calm reasoned approach may not be popular against such opposition but it will chime strongly with the vast majority of thinking people.

 

Culture, history and nationhood are important because they run deep in our consciousness of who we are, and represent a very strong part of our identity. When we say we are British there are deep connections with a long island history, much of which has been positive and has benefited the world, with historic institutions such as the monarchy and Parliament, the judiciary, the army, universities, the country itself which is full of beauty, customs and mores which are seen as uniquely British, and so on. Although some of these institutions have lost some credibility for one reason or another, people are proud of the things these institutions represent, and you cannot just sweep them under the carpet.

 

Religion also historically plays an important role, although it is less understood by the intellectual and governing classes, Christianity has left its mark both on the physical nature of the landscape with its network of cathedrals, churches and chapels but also on the character of the people. Although the majority would not claim to be Christian, the teachings and commands of the Bible have left their mark on generations of inhabitants, and influence the temperament and character of the people today even if they are not specifically followers of Christ. Waves of immigration have brought other religions to these shores, and many of their adherents have assimilated admirably into our culture, such as the Jews, Sikhs and Hindus, but there have been and are strains on the body politic, and we have seen this particularly with Islam. Political Islam is a very strong strain of Islam which does not fit well with UK history and culture, and this must be recognised with immigration policymakers. There have been too many incidents in the last two decades of fundamental clashes. As Norman Tebbitt said, you cannot have two dominant cultures, Christianity and Islam.

 

This leads to another point. Militant Islam thinks strategically, British governments don’t. It is the price of having a democracy that governments don’t think much beyond the five year election cycle. British governments need to think more strategically about demography, culture and nationhood and how exactly it represents the average patriotic voter making up the ‘somewheres’ in the country as opposed to the ‘anywheres.’ We need statesmen who can see at least fifty years ahead.

 

Continuing to allow huge numbers of legal, and illegal immigrants from alien cultures will simply continue the present trajectory of bigger and bigger percentages of the population being foreign born and smaller percentages being indigenous Brits or indeed settled immigrants who have been happy to make Britain their home. Thus any existing historical culture and traditions will come under increasing strain especially with the discrimination and equality strands so strong in western culture.

 

If governments genuinely want to preserve their nation and culture they have to think of policies which encourage marriage, family and having children, as you only perpetuate your culture through producing the next generation. The former Chief Rabbi maybe made a salient point here when he said that Europeans are no longer prepared to make the sacrifices necessary to raise a family. This will involve ‘discrimination,’ but making judgements for the welfare of society is nothing less than eminently sensible. This might involve tax breaks, tax allowances e.g. interchangeable allowances between couples with children, subsidies or vouchers to encourage father and motherhood.

 

The fundamental problem with the open borders apologists is a failure to understand the nuances and discernment needed to have successful border protection. Protecting your own borders is a completely separate issue from racism and is a viewpoint that understands the argument that all human beings are of equal value and are entitled to be treated accordingly with dignity and respect, but nevertheless we all carry the values, lifestyle, religion and culture of the nation in which were born. Because these issues are so diverse and different across the world there will be significant conflict between them as has always been the case, and allowing huge numbers from alien cultures into your nation will inevitably lead to problems.

 

The UK is a tiny state physically. I have just looked at the World Population Review for 2023 and the UK is the one of the most densely populated relatively large advanced economies in the world after South Korea, India and Japan, in other words it is the most densely populated significant advanced western nation period, with 725 people/square mile, over twice the density of France with 306 people per square mile. Germany is the next most densely populated big western country with 617/square mile. If you drill down deeper, the population density of England as opposed to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is even greater. This alone should make policy makers think very carefully about openness to high numbers of immigrants because of the strain on infrastructure that mass immigration inevitably will bring. It’s such an obvious point that it is difficult to take seriously any arguments of mass immigration activists. There is limited road space, railway infrastructure, hospital capacity, housing space, water resources, etc. and unless you accordingly increase such infrastructure continuing mass immigration is simply foolish. I myself have faced this problem as a local Councillor attending a Southern Water workshop where forecasts of water shortages in the future were shared with delegates.

 

If you believe in the validity of the nation state you must always put your own people first, every time. In other words their welfare is more important than looking after any immigrant. Obviously there are genuine refugees and asylum seekers fleeing from catastrophic circumstances and the UK has a responsibility to help such people, but the British government must ensure the safety and security of its own people as priority.

 

Whatever the pros and cons of immigration it is time for the UK to pause and take stock of the implications of its immigration policy over the last forty years. It seems that arguments for mass immigration have centred around the needs of the economy, the need to keep wages low, the need to fill many low skilled jobs that many British people do not want to do, but surely we should be aiming to get our own people back into work before thinking about importing a workforce, and also we should be having a discussion about nationhood, culture and cohesion at this important time in our history.

Letter sent to BBC in middle of Covid

7.2.21

Dear Sir/Madam

I write with regard to the Covid crisis. Please understand that I am not denying that Covid exists nor the tragic circumstances for many families who have lost loved ones. Nor am I denying the sensitive coverage by the BBC of many who have suffered either directly or indirectly in this crisis. However I do believe the presponse of the authorities and media has been grossly disproportionate.

It is evident to me that the BBC is far too complicit in pushing the narrative that lockdowns are the only way of dealing with the pandemic, followed by the vaccination roll out of course, and in effect you have been operating as the propaganda arm of the government for the last ten months. I have listened to you consistently and there has been no deviation from the official line. I would have thought it more serving of the general public for the main news channel in the country to have a far more circumspect approach, wondering at the very least if there might be a better way of dealing with Covid, and yet there appears to be a frightening level of group think which is unwilling to debate or air sufficiently any other viewpoint.

The government could be forgiven at the beginning of the pandemic for taking a full lockdown approach given the fact that we had not experienced a serious plague for 100 years and what was happening across the world in countries like Italy and the US. However it was evident pretty quickly that the vast majority of deaths were of those over 65 with comorbidities. We had the opportunity then to reevaluate the lockdown policy and debate whether there was a better way. It surely would have been a far more common sense approach to have concentrated on protecting the vulnerable and get the rest of society back to normal as quickly as possible. Instead despite some easing of restrictions in the summer the government imposed mask wearing and doubled down on the lockdown approach with the tier system and further lockdowns in the autumn and into 2021. The BBC just went along with this as if it was the undisputedly correct approach.

It is obvious to anyone with an ounce of discernment that shutting down society to deal with Covid is an incredibly blunt and brutal instrument whose negative effects are incalculable – separating people from one another, splitting families, isolating an enormous number of single households in this country, putting on hold treatment for other health issues, excess deaths from those who had heart, cancer or other issues that were never dealt with, destroyed businesses and consequently broken lives, disrupted education for millions of children (I am a teacher and strongly oppose the union policy of keeping children put of school). The list goes on. Despite any government intentions it could be argued that this was an anti-human and some would say even wicked thing to do in the name of a public health crisis.

This is especially galling in view of the fact that although hospitals have been under pressure the numbers of deaths in historical terms have not been that great, although each death is obviously awful for many families. But be honest, how many deaths have been of fit and healthy people who are not overweight and do not have secondary conditions? Very few. This is where the media have blown the crisis out of all proportion and together with government have projected an unhealthy level of fear over society which in turn has led to an unhealthy level of control which we are now struggling to get out of. This would be considered by many people to be unforgivable.

In the late summer of 2020 an opportunity was given through the Great Barrington Declaration which was supported by over 50000 medical practitioners to change course by concentrating on protecting the vulnerable and releasing the rest of society to get back to normal, a perfectly common sense approach which would have avoided the continuing collateral damage to the economy and society. But it was cast aside by the powers that be who continued with arguably their ruinous lockdown approach. Can you please explain to me why we as a society cannot concentrate on protecting the vulnerable if we can produce reams of directives to regulate every other possible area of society? The proposal could have received at least considerably more debate.

On top of this are the problems with the data. The BBC feeds us with a daily figure of the number of deaths within 28 days of a positive Covid test. Yet neither you nor the government nor anyone else, even medical experts can tell us how many of these people actually died of Covid and how many with Covid. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to surmise that the majority of those people died mainly of other causes given that they were old, such as heart problems, cancer, pneumonia, kidney failure, so on and so forth, and Covid was simply another condition whose extra weight and burden especially to those of great age overcame the patient. In addition is the problem of the high rate of testing with false positives with the popular Covid PCR test, which muddies the waters even further.

Given that what we know about the virus most people under 65 are under little threat from the virus, we then have the issue of social distancing. This whole idea of people being asymptomatic is fraught with difficulty. The idea that we have to socially distance because we might or might not have a virus is a rather tenuous basis for a major public policy. Even if someone had the virus what sort of virus load would they carry especially if they were asymptomatic, and honestly how much threat would they really be to most people they come into contact with, bearing in mind that they might be much more careful with older relatives? The human body is an incredible and wonderful creation and has the ability to develop immunity to viruses through natural means. Surely allowing healthy and younger people to mix normally could go some way to building up a natural immunity to this virus.

There are also disturbing conflicts of interest in this whole affair. We are told for instance that Professor Patrick Vallance has a shareholding of £600000 in GSK which was contracted to develop vaccines. The BMJ put out an article in December concerning the interests of doctors, scientists and academics advising the government on how to manage the pandemic. The article made the point that Downing St has shown little concern that advisors to the coronavirus vaccine task force have financial interests in pharmaceutical companies receiving government contracts. We should be mindful that ‘the love of money is the root of all evil’ and that these issues are worth questioning. Chris Whitty is on the Interim Board of CEPI (coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations) which evidently unites players in biotechnology, Big Pharma and health charities, government agencies, etc to push global immunisation which fits in nicely with a lockdown strategy. These issues are worth querying by both governments and journalists?

Historically my understanding is that national lockdowns have never been used before as a tool of public policy. I am sure that public health policy up to recently would never have entertained such an extreme method to deal with a virus, especially given that we have had very serious flu outbreaks within our lifetime and also potential scares with new viruses which never caused many deaths and certainly didn’t move the authorities to lock down a whole society, and especially as this virus is little threat to anyone apart from the old. The way the government is micromanaging people’s lives is serious government overreach into areas it should have nothing to do with, especially as they are illegitimately taking over the management of risk from private individuals and families into the realms of the State, again something unprecedented in human history. The only type of governmental system that would take such drastic action would be an extreme communist or socialist regime, as we saw with China leading the way.

We now have an impressive rollout of the vaccination programme and the medical and scientific community must be congratulated for all their superb work in producing a way out of the grip of this situation. For many people this has been the holy grail. However we have again been fed a narrative that this is the only realistic way out with an underplaying of alternatives. What about an emphasis on development of other treatments that could be another pathway for people, as has happened with HIV for which there is no vaccine but nevertheless the development of amazing new treatments?

There is also evidence that this is a man made virus which adds another level of intrigue to the plot. It is not beyond the realms of imagination that there is another agenda at work in all this and that unscrupulous people would like to use this virus to bring down nations for their own very suspect purposes. It is little wonder that there are so many doubters over this whole affair as both the government and media have left themselves with too many own goals. People are discerning, you can fool some of the people some of the time but not all of the people all of the time. It is no surprise that people turn to conspiracy theories or ideas that players behind the scenes are engineering this crisis for their own ends, whether for love of money, desire for global government or whatever. You cannot blame people for asking hard questions.

I would like to see a far more open debate in the mainstream media over these issues and a much more critical approach to the efficacy and suitability of lockdown, given that this crisis could go on somewhat longer than people would hope. This would give you more credibility with many who question what is going on at the moment and undermine any accusations that it is in your interests to push this agenda.

I would suggest respectfully that we are being ‘played’ in this Covid crisis by a very powerful spirit of manipulation and control, and both the government and mainstream media are party to this and to a degree are under that spirit. It would be in the interests of everybody to have a far more open debate about the whole issue which would go some way to allay the fears and questions of many.

CS Lewis, one of our greatest thinkers said something very prescient many years ago: ‘Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.’

I humbly suggest that you have to govern for the welfare of 65m people and that we have lost sight of that in this crisis, allowing coronavirus to rule us rather than keeping it in a more realistic perspective.

Thank you for reading this letter, and I look forward to more balance in the lockdown debate,

Yours faithfully

Covid 19 counterfeit religion

If any religion has shaped Britain it is Christianity which has gone deep into the warp and woof of our culture and substantially affected it in profound ways, to the extent that many of us are living off the fat of the land, the rump of Christian culture that is our heritage passed down from generation to generation. However that culture is now seriously compromised and so poses the question does this leave Britain weak when faced with serious challenges such as that which faced our grandfathers in the Second World War.

Covid 19 has proved almost a step too far for our survival as a nation and things were very much in the balance with a fully vaccinated population, vaccine passports and even digital ID in the pipeline at one point. We have and are, like many other countries, in danger of moving swiftly into a surveillance society the end game of which is what we see in communist China with its social credit scores and coercion and control of each individual. The common law, primacy of Parliament, independent judiciary, freedom of worship and association, freedom of speech and all things associated with being British are fast disappearing and will be a thing of the past unless there is a massive backlash.

It is interesting given our Christian heritage to draw some parallels between true Christianity and Covid 19, which became almost like a substitute religion for many people. The foundational difference is that the religion of Covid is based on fear whereas true Christianity is based on faith, hope and love. The fear of course Is fear of death which was ramped up shamelessly by a ruthless government and mass media machine which relentlessly pushed a narrative of the dangers of Covid out of all proportion to the reality. Of course fear of death is a reality, but those with a Christian faith know that death is not the end and that this life is just a precursor for eternal life in heaven forever with their Saviour. Many have no faith apart from the insecure trappings of this life, reliance on personal abilities, intelligence, money, power and material success, so are easy prey to that which threatens their security.

Covid 19 is a Pharisaical religion, based on rules and regulations, crossing every t and dotting every i. This was the only way to achieve freedom from Covid with the eternal mask wearing, track and trace apps, plastic screens, signage and arrows on floors. This was the way of the Pharisees in the New Testament who believed the only way to heaven was a religion of works, adhering to thousands of petty rules which produces a never ending feeling of falling short if one does not adhere to the Covid code, which like the Ten Commandments must be obeyed at all times. Contrast this with real Christianity, a religion of grace, mercy and forgiveness which offers pardon to the most recalcitrant sinner and respects free will. Anyone can choose to follow or reject the message, you still keep your personal liberty.

Any true religion is based on solid rock and its adherents are secure in who they are and what they believe. Covid 19 was an insecure religion and gave itself away by refusing to countenance any other interpretation of how to deal with a virus. We must have lockdowns, everyone has to be vaccinated, we have to limit human interaction to the extent that family members are cut off from one another, weddings and funerals are curtailed and the hard face of the law governs what we can and cannot do. Anyone who thought outside the box was a heretic, even if they were seasoned professionals and experts in their field, and had to be shut down. There is another way of doing things they cried, you are disregarding the huge collateral damage of lockdowns, Covid is of little threat to healthy people, emphasise the importance of a healthy lifestyle, diet and exercise, with lots of sun and vitamin D, let the body build up natural immunity, there are other remedies and medications for Covid apart from vaccinations. But the MSM, the social media giants and government shut down or ignored such voices, shamefully, demonstrating their huge insecurity over what they were doing or supporting. That alone should have been an alarm bell to everyone.

Meanwhile real Christianity emphasises the importance of free will and respect for an individual’s right to make their own decisions on whether they follow the narrow way that leads to salvation or the broad way that means doing your own thing and not submitting to any divine will. It is based on a secure foundation of theology and historical witness, and has weathered the storms of criticism and persecution without having to dominate the narrative and shutting down opposing opinions. Sure, twisted interpretations of Christianity have been use to dominate and control societies in the past, but true Christianity respects the dignity of the individual and its enormous value before God such that you cannot force the Christian worldview on anyone

Covid 19 had its prophets of course, found amongst its so called SAGE experts, spokespersons like Whitty and Vallance and lockdown fanatics like Professor Ferguson. Their platform was the BBC and other mainstream media from which they issued their edicts from on high and mathematical models. They presented their vision, the latest graphs with their doom laden predictions, emphasising how many people could go to hospital or die if we didn’t have another lockdown. They came with their Ten Commandments, to stay at home, not socialise, meet only in a bubble, only visit essential shops, get vaccinated, get a booster, get the flu jab.

Of course counterfeit religions have their rituals and sacraments, and perhaps the most ghastly and soul destroying was the lockdown, a policy which had not had any clear cost benefit analysis on its effects on society but was churned out as the panacea to the Covid problem. But if ever a religion could be accused of taking a leap of faith without any sold evidence that it worked it was in relation to the disastrous policy of lockdown. And the Covid 19 adherents kept coming back to the same policy despite evidence that it didn’t work and the slightly more obvious point that you don’t quarantine healthy people, which is exactly what they did!

The Covid crisis has exposed the leftist stance for what it is. In the UK Boris Johnson”s conservative government has hardly acted in a conservative way in dealing with the pandemic, imposing lockdowns and restrictions on an unprecedented scale. It might be argued that Johnson’s libertarian instincts prevented England from experiencing some of the worst excesses pursued by some governments around the world. Yet behind Johnson were the Labour Party who supported these measures all the way and it is a small mercy that they were not in power as they would have been even more restrictive and coercive in their policies. It was only with the help of the Labour Party that Johnson was able to push through vaccinating NHS workers and vaccine passports for big events in the Commons. The Labour Party have been as useful as a chocolate teapot in critiquing lockdown and all the other big state interventions.

Again you saw leftist policy at play in Europe, in Austria where they mandated vaccinations for everyone, Germany where they considered the same, Italy where you were not able to function in society unless you had a Green pass, and France where Macron set himself against his own people with vaccine mandates. The USA has been one giant experiment in how to deal with Covid. Again it was Democrat leftist states that pushed the vaccine ie mandates, mask restrictions and coercive control measures whilst Republican states left the people to make judgements on whether they want to wear a mask or take a vaccine. Florida is the glorious outlier here, and De Santis the buccaneering governor who did away with all Covid restrictions and encouraged an influx of migrants from other states. It’s always the same, people will move from oppression to freedom, wherever you are in the world, whether it’s east to west Germany or from New York to Florida.

Meanwhile in other parts of the Anglosphere, notably Canada and parts of Australia, the hard left has outdone itself in draconian regulation of peoples lives. Dan Andrews in Victoria has been possibly the most extreme western leader with lockdowns in the city of Melbourne continuing for virtually longer than any other place on earth. The heavy handed behaviour of the police has been one of the most disturbing features of the Australian lockdown.

Sadly, the deception of the Covid narrative has captured the one institution that could have taken a clear alternative angle on all this, the church. Instead of shutting its doors when Covid struck, the church could have kept its doors open and ministered to the spiritual and moral needs of the nation which had been so very great over the previous two years. Admittedly at first when Covid struck we were all flying blind, having not experienced a serious epidemic for a hundred years. This was an unknown and potentially lethal virus and many would say the government could not be blamed for taking a cautious approach at the beginning. However the truth came out pretty quickly for those with eyes to see and who would not bow down to the powerful spirit of manipulation and control which was working through the media. The church could have held the government to account over its draconian restrictions and policies, and challenged the lawfulness of banning normal human interaction in the name of health and safety. The church could have taught the nation the reality of the healing power of God, that deliverance from viruses is not only found on the NHS or through vaccines, but also from the power of prayer and the ministry of the laying on of hands. There have been notable exceptions to this of course, with church vicars criticising state interventions and standing up for freedom, whilst much good has been done in the form of food banks and helping the poor and oppressed, whilst some in the church have threatened the government with legal action over church closures and saw the government back down. All this was very laudable but the case remains that the church was relatively supine, uncritical and far too accepting of the government line and not open enough to the possibility that unscrupulous men and women were using this crisis to further unhealthy agendas. The church is called to prophetic discernment of the times and the seasons and to give spiritual leadership to the nation. In this it singularly failed. A tragedy that will blight our nation for years. The sad fact is that non church people have had more discernment on the wicked oppressive plans that have been rolled out over the last two years in the guise of a health crisis. I have witnessed this myself having attended about five of the demonstrations in London over the last eight months or so of the Covid era. It is those people who have stood up for out freedom and seen the dangers of state overreach so clearly, whilst the church has meekly stood on the side.

However all is not lost. When all’s said and done there is always hope and grace and an opportunity to do things a different way next time round. Who’s to say this won’t be an opportunity for a reboot of society and for the church to rise up in new boldness and faith in a time when courage and fearlessness are in short supply. God is that God of the second chance, and his grace covers a multitude of sins. Who’s to know that Covid may have been a time of seeding, when the hearts of men and women have been prepared in the quiet places for future leadership and influence. The past two years will have opened the eyes of many to the deception and wickedness in high places, working through big government, the MSM and the social media giants and they will have learnt that the greatest malevolent spirit we face is the spirit of manipulation and control that works through the majority. An article was written recently that heralded the rise of war leaders to deal with the present situation. Not made for times of peace, such warriors arise when courage is needed to stand against extreme wickedness

Christianity has the cross, the supreme symbol of self sacrifice as God invaded the earth, becoming a man to bear the punishment for our sin. The past shows us that Christianity gets right in amongst the poor, marginalised and sick to minister relief and healing to people. In the plagues that hit the Roman Empire it was the Christians that got in amongst the sick and diseased with no care for their own well being, knowing the risks of catching deadly disease but motivated by love and care for their fellow man. The church has risen to the occasion in terms of social care, ministering to the poor, supporting food banks and suchlike. However by and large the church has complied with government regulations rather than challenge lockdown which is arguably the worst public policy disaster in modern history. The draconian restrictions on human contact, limits on attendance at weddings and funerals, bans on meeting with loved ones in care homes and hospitals, especially when sick family members were at the end of their lives were an opportunity for the church to face down the government on the unprecedented bans on human interaction. We have to,pray that with future threats like Covid or otherwise, that the church will respond ina more discerning manner.

Letter to Rishi Sunak (How many letters has he received?)

The Rt Hon Rishi Sunak
Prime Minister
10 Downing St
Westminster
London

Dear Prime Minister

Things have come to a head over the illegal immigration into the UK along the southern shore, but it is also the legal immigration that is far too high. I consider successive British governments as complicit in helping to destroy the cohesiveness of our society in allowing these vast numbers to continually come in from abroad, and for that reason alone any party that has allowed this should be annihilated at the next election.
For me immigration is the key and biggest issue facing this nation, far more important than GDP, economic growth, taxes, climate change, the NHS, the lot. Demographics is everything. The UK is a tiny country and is one of the most densely populated countries in the world. It has experienced massive immigration over the last two and a half decades, not supported I suggest by most of the indigenous population. It is utterly unfair on The British people to allow this to continue. Even recently the Daily Mail reports that 1 in 6 of the UK population was born abroad, and it has just been reported that net migration has just risen to half a million. The latest census figures have just come out showing the declining percentage of white people in major cities and the falling percentage of Christians in our society. These trends are very worrying, unacceptable and need an immediate response. You must bring legal immigration right down to a manageable level, in fact there is a strong case for a moratorium on all immigration as there has been far too much. The so-called economic arguments for immigration must be defanged. There are enough people in the UK to make a success of our economy, not least the unemployed and the young who can be trained to fill gaps in the labour market without continually resorting to bringing in people from abroad.
In this regard I see a trade agreement with India is in progress which may entail even more immigration as a condition. I do not want this continual legal immigration. We have had far too much in a short space of time. It is nothing to do with racism and everything to do with preserving the cohesiveness of our society, which is obviously unsettled by continual influxes of often alien cultures. You must stop the policy of allowing family members to enter the UK on the coattails of initial immigrants. Also you must change the law to ensure that no money is paid to legal or illegal immigrants who have contributed nothing at all to our society at least until legal immigrants have been here for, say, five years. Surely we need to think of the usefulness of contributory as opposed to non-contributory benefits.
There are massive strains associated with the level of immigration we have, and none of this scale of immigration has the agreement of the British people. It is obvious to anyone the pressure on roads, railways, housing, health and education services that huge immigration brings. The pressure on the NHS is enormous, and has hit close to home. I suffered a stroke in August and had to wait five hours for an ambulance. There are many other examples. I cannot fathom how politicians cannot see the chaos they are encouraging by not clamping down on immigration, unless of course it is a deliberate policy to destroy the nation, which undoubtedly some people believe.
There are also societal strains especially from importing totally alien cultures into the UK. How does the UK government think in any way it will benefit the country to import so many people from poor developing countries which often have cultures with totally different values? You are allowing for instance many Moslems to come here. The world view of many Moslems is completely in opposition to the historical values of this country which are substantially based on the Judeo-Christian worldview. Even Norman Tebbitt said some years ago that you cannot have two dominant cultures in a country, one Christian and one Moslem. We are stoking up trouble for the future, and any statesman worth his salt would be aware of these things. It is sheer madness to allow so many Moslems to enter the country, it’s not racism, it’s simple common sense.
The British people are going to get increasingly very, very angry over what is happening, and don’t bet on there not being a backlash and a quiet but effective revolution. The political class have no right to allow the level of legal and illegal immigration currently being experienced by the UK. Your first, holy and sovereign duty is to put the British people first and thus to protect our borders. That means robust, strong and decisive unilateral action regardless of what the rest of the world, the French, the EU, the left-wing establishment or media think. I remember the Lebanese border with Israel some years ago. If someone tried to cross the border illegally, a warning shot was fired. If they continued to cross the border, the next shot was not a warning. I am not advocating such a policy, but we are far, far, far too soft, and a laughing stock to those taking advantage of us.
The illegal channel crossings is such a huge issue that if you can sort it I suggest that you can win the next election as Labour has little clue on what to do. I suspect that success on this issue alone would give you enough support for a victory, such is the level of concern. Again this is close to home as I am considering at the moment whether I should rejoin the Conservative party to which I belonged for ten years, or wait for a new Conservative opposition to arise from Reform or some combination of other parties with or without Nigel Farage.
Why don’t you just push the boats back like the Australians did? There is nothing anyone can do, apart from making a lot of noise. Reform say that this can legally be done. We seem to lack the ability to be really hard and ruthless when we need to be, and such a time is now. We must take uniliteral action to impose border control by force if necessary, regardless of what anyone else thinks. If you push the boats back the problem will be solved immediately. Look at what the Hungarians and now the Poles are doing, building a fence or wall and refusing to allow illegals to penetrate their sovereign territory. That is exactly what we should be doing. If we need to leave the ECHR and withdraw from the Human Rights Act in order to be free to protect our borders then the government should expedite this as soon as possible to close every loophole that can be exploited by wicked and unscrupulous people to take advantage of our largesse.
I deeply resent my taxes contributing to paying for the keep of illegal immigrants who have no ties to this country, in fact there is a case for withholding tax because the government is failing in its responsibility to protect our borders and therefore the British people. And why are illegals being put in hotels? This is incredible, why are vast amounts being wasted on this when illegals should be put in the most basic accommodation as a deterrent if they make it to these shores? Old military bases or army camps, or perhaps an old cruise ship that can be anchored mid channel would be far better. You are really treating the British people as mugs in paying for hotels for illegals. Again, it is the indigenous people that suffer from the inability or refusal of the government to do its job. At the very least you should immediately return these illegals simply because they have entered the country illegally, surely that would be a deterrent. If other European countries like Sweden and Germany can do it, surely we can too?
Can I urge you to take swift action to deal with the stupendous scale of illegal migration, and to reduce significantly the legal immigration taking place. The UK is not a giant Heathrow for people to land and take off as and when they wish for economic reasons, but an ancient culture with its own mores and traditions that should be lovingly protected. This has nothing to do with racism and everything to do with taking a principled patriotic stance to carefully steward what has been passed down to us from previous generations. You must change or else the danger is a new political movement that will sweep away the old political order and genuinely put the British people first.
A national emergency should be declared on this issue. The boats should be pushed back to stop the nonsense. At the very least anyone who gets here illegally should be immediately deported. You must not allow any form of amnesty to be brought in to clear the backlog of asylum cases as this will be seen as an enormous betrayal and will send a message that illegal entry will be rewarded with the right to stay here. I expect immediate results on this issue, we need to see numbers of illegals coming right down and being deported straightaway. If I don’t see serious efforts by the Conservatives to reduce legal and illegal immigration with such immediate results I will have to question whether my future is ever to return to the Conservative party. In conclusion, the UK should also seek to disassociate itself from any international migration agreements pushed by bodies like the UN and the WEF which push damaging globalist agendas. They hardly have our interests at heart. You must put our country first, there is enough wisdom and talent within these islands to run our country perfectly adequately without interference from international bodies.
I do thank you for reading this letter, and trust and pray that you will do the right thing for our country,

Yours faithfully

Brexit battle.

Many people around the world could be excused for thinking what has happened to the UK. Historically a great nation on the world stage, but now struggling to extricate herself from the EU nearly three years after a significant vote to leave. We have now been given a date of the 31st October by the EU by which to agree on a deal on which we can leave. It is difficult to fathom quite what is going on as the government and Houses of Parliament seem to be embroiled in an act of self flagellation to the horror of the UK’s weary inhabitants. First we were told we were going to leave on the 29th March, the next date was indeed the 12th April, which has now been abrogated by the 31st October. We now have the prospect of participation in EU elections if we have not left by the 22nd of May. If you have read the book by Yanos Varoufakis on his fight with the EU deep state you would recognise the tactics being used by the EU at this time i.e. to keep the UK in a permanent state of temporariness so that the right hand doesn’t know what the left hand is doing.

Bizarrely, the most infuriating action of the UK Parliament has been to take no deal off the table. For many Brits this is a ridiculous policy which gives away a massive bargaining chip, the ability to walk away if you are not happy with a deal. The EU will never give you a deal which is not in their favour, especially as they cannot afford to let the UK gain any advantage from Brexit. It seems our ruling class just cannot or won’t see the enormous benefits long term of a clean break. This is particularly galling when we are told by an insider that the civil service has prepared very well for a no deal. 

A huge battle now rages over the future destiny of the UK which has centred on Mrs May’s deal in Parliament. This is only one example of the tussle between the globalist agenda, a world of open borders, doctrinaire, state sanctioned multiculturalism and remote government by an external authority, and a vision of the nation state as the best or least worst method of government for human wellbeing. The EU project is the Tower of Babel designed to destroy the nation state and centralise control of our nation from outside our nation. It gave away its intent in the wording of the plaque at the entrance to the visitors centre of the European Parliament: ‘National sovereignty is the root cause of the most crying evils of our times…The only final remedy for this evil is the federal union of the peoples.’ What an offence to any patriots who love their country.

The UK breaking out of the straightjacket that has been imposed on it over the last 45 years or so is a major threat to the globalist agenda, as a free and independent UK can step into a major leadership role unencumbered by the spirit of control that emanates from Brussels. The UK has loosened the lynchpin which holds the EU together and other nations will probably follow in our footsteps. There is great potential in the creativity, innovation and history of independent spirit that encouraged the fight for liberty, the common law trial by jury system and parliamentary democracy in these islands that can still yet be revived. 

The tragedy of the last two years has been the absence of leadership in terms of giving a vision to the British people of the huge opportunities available in a clean Brexit. People could be forgiven for thinking that the establishment saw the vote as a historic mistake whose negative effects should be minimised rather than a glorious opportunity to make a clear although severe course correction. Prophetic leadership is needed at this moment in the nation’s history when its steps are faltering. Even now Mrs May’s deal is a completely unsatisfactory half in half out compromise which fails to deliver on the 2016 vote. Brexiteers should be honest about a no deal, that there will be some rough tossing in the short term as we extricate ourselves from the EU, but in the longer term a clean break means the restoration of self government, the ability to be far more nimble in our decision making both in domestic and foreign policy, the opportunity to develop trade ties more in our own interests, and an end to the huge sums of money sent to support the EU political project.

This is why the US is in a potentially stronger position than the UK with President Trump, who I have little doubt would have had far more success with Brexit than any of our political leaders. He would just not have accepted the continual attempts to sabotage Brexit through the House of Commons and an EU that is desperate for our money. A rogue president has been a breath of fresh air for the US, led by someone who has not been anointed by the liberal establishment. The same is needed in the UK, a rogue leader who will face down the liberal cult of modernity that bedevils the body politic of most western societies. However, such people don’t grow on trees, and it is debatable whether such a leader would be allowed to rise in our two party system given the strong pro EU bent of the majority of MPs. Nevertheless, if Theresa May is forced to step down, there may yet be an opportunity for a much stronger Brexiteer to become PM and to push the UK in the right direction.

I believe the significance of Brexit is lost on many people, especially remainers. Great Britain is the mother nation for many other nations in terms of the influence of Magna Carta, parliamentary democracy, the common law, religious liberty and freedom of speech. Yes much of this has been diminished in recent decades, and the nation is now in a battle between opposing forces such as secular humanism often expressed through political correctness, an Islamist worldview and a fast disappearing Judeo Christian heritage. Her history has often taken a tortuous route but there are plenty of positives. She has been a leader in many fields and breaking free from Brussels will enable her to restore a leadership role amongst the nations. Yes other nations will help her, but she will be a help to many nations too. But she must break free from the EU first to be truly herself.

Biblical comparisons have actually been made in relation to our leaving the EU, notably with the Children of Israel leaving Egypt to enter the Promised Land in the Old Testament, although there was quite a gap between the two, namely wandering in the wilderness for 40 years because of the disobedience of the Children of Israel. The Pharoah of Brussels is seen as trying to keep us locked in an ungodly Union whilst we are trying to break free, and so they are ‘chasing us down to the Red Sea’ to try and prevent us leaving. The comparison does of course have its limitations in that I am not aware of any plague of frogs, locusts or rivers of blood, let alone death of the firstborn. Nevertheless it is an interesting comparison even evoked by Boris Johnson in an article in the Daily Telegraph who talked of summoning up the spirit of Moses in dealing with the EU. Could it be that there is indeed some divine hand at work in the current Brexit chaos, where nations will be realigned to a new paradigm?

The transgender movement

There is a truly dark spirit of deception behind this movement which masquerades under the guise of human rights. Worldwide the old Anglo-Saxon nations are falling into institutionalised foolishness. The fish rots from the head. Not so long ago we had the bizarre situation of the British Foreign Office recommending that certain groups be careful when travelling to North Carolina and Tennessee because of their ‘discriminatory’ laws. The U.K. and US, perhaps the two most influential old ‘Christian’ nations, are now abandoning their heritage and celebrating an aggressive human rights’ culture which will only bring heartache and confusion to many people. Even big corporations such as PayPal are jumping on the bandwagon trying to display their ‘progressive’ credentials. 

Story after story in the mainstream media in the western world brings us the latest manifestation of the advance of transgender rights. In the UK the Sun newspaper some time ago reported that children of four were being asked intrusive questions about their sexuality involving trans issues. PayPal meanwhile in the States under the Obama presidency threatened to pull its operations in North Carolina unless the state legislature rowed back down from its ‘discriminatory’ laws, one of which forbade a man or woman entering a public bathroom that does not accord with their birth gender. Common sense laws I would say! To destroy these norms is a pervert’s charter.

The Democrats are fully signed up to this ideology, just as their ideological cousins the Labour party are in Britain, and not only Labour, this thinking has now infested the Conservative party who recently had a consultation on transgender rights with a view to liberalising the law. It got to the point in the last US administration that we heard that the federal government of Obama was taking out a lawsuit against North Carolina over their ‘gross offence against human rights.’ When you have reprobate thinking at the very highest level in the most powerful nation on earth the western world is in deep trouble. At the time Obama was elected I saw him on television and said to my brother in law, ‘He’s a dangerous man.’ Nothing since then has changed my view of him. ‘Change is coming to America’ from the lips of the most un-American president I have ever witnessed became change of the worst possible kind. Sadly he was the symptom of the decline of a great nation rather than the cause. Funnily enough, Obama admitted that his support for transgender rights may have lost the Democrats votes in the 2016 presidential elections.

However Donald Trump, the Independent reports, is considering removing civil rights protections for transgender people and requiring American citizens to identify as the gender listed on their birth certificates. Another reason for the hard left to abhor a man that has destroyed their dreams. This is fodder for Guardian and Independent readers of course, who think this is just a case of trampling on minority rights and a catastrophic reversal of the rolling out of the worldwide progressive agenda. Opposition has risen up of course. An open letter opposing the Trump administration’s memo on the definition of gender had over 1600 scientists’ signatures. Meanwhile it has been reported that over 40 companies signed an open letter opposing Trump’s effort to ‘erase transgender people from America and strip them of their legal protections.’

Transgender rights swim in the same pool of destructive influences as militant gay rights, radical feminism, militant Islam and secular humanism, all designed to destroy Judeo-Christian civilisation, Magna Carta and the wellspring of liberty that has sprung historically from both these islands and the USA. All have been cooked up in Hell’s Kitchen to destroy the world many of us grew up in and will usher in tyranny and despotism on an industrial scale. The very fact that western governments and public officials are even discussing allowing men and women to use a public bathroom or washroom not of their birth gender shows that western civilisation has become a mere husk and foolish thinking has infected the highest levels of government. Across the main political parties in the UK the same slavish adherence to human rights and anti discrimination doctrine utterly undermines the ability of mainstream politicians to use the foundational gift of any statesman, the ability to discern between good and evil. Even the Conservative Party has fallen into this trap, no longer representing the natural conservatism of an England long lost but every shade of cultural Marxism utterly opposed to many good aspects of traditional culture.

Having said this let me make it quite clear that transgender people should be treated with kindness and respect as people just like anyone else, but why legitimise their state or behaviour as ‘normal?’ The traditional view has been that they are suffering from some mixture of emotional, psychological, moral and even spiritual confusion e.g. gender dysphoria, which needs special help as a mental condition. Reinforcing people’s feelings that they are ‘trapped in the wrong body’ will only multiply the spirit of confusion and deception around this issue. In particular to encourage this deception in children is the worst form of child abuse. There has to be another approach to help these people.

However a doorway has been opened with the transgender movement. Evil has been legitimised. You are dealing with a powerful bully that will steamroller everything in its path unless people start to stand up to it. People with a clear moral compass who will not budge an inch are needed as you are dealing with delusional thinking which is based on a very shaky foundation indeed. Now is the time for every decent concerned citizen to stand against this insanity. I rejoice every time parents protest as they try to protect our most precious heritage, our children, from this mindless spirit of confusion that legislators have let loose. I hope that many parents will create merry hell and pull their children out of the public school system, and home school or set up other schools to avoid poisonous government backed ideology. Meanwhile other political parties and leaders must rise up to confront and challenge the transgender movement and all it entails. It is heartening to see opposition arise to the transgender movement.

This is the danger, that decent people who are capable of changing the situation will stick their head in the sand and hope that this will all go away. It won’t. Now is the time to take a stand, not tomorrow or the next day. Evil triumphs when good people do nothing. The transgender rights movement is fuelled by deception and a completely wrong headed view of human nature, as well as anger and aggression. The end of this narrative is prison and the concentration camp. If you do not believe me just look at what New York has mandated, if you call a transsexual ‘he’ or ‘she’ when they wish to be referred to as a ‘zhe’ you could be fined $250,000. This is sheer insanity and if you fall for such deception you should not be anywhere near any position of governmental authority. You have been warned. 

It is the usual suspects getting it in the neck over transgender rights. The matter came up in the Welsh parliament not so long ago and a Ukip member was suspended for casting doubt over the wisdom of transgender ideology. The three main legacy parties unfortunately have given themselves over to supporting or promoting this ideology, a particular shame for the Conservatives who have again proven to be anything other than Conservative in their policies. And why do I vote for ukip?

To cap it all the Church of England is finding it impossible to take a clear scriptural stance on this issue, choosing instead to follow the well trodden path of modernity, to avoid giving offence by all means possible to those who push the transgender agenda. It is the higher echelons of the church who are proving to be unable to stand clearly on biblical teaching. This is the real tragedy for Great Britain, that the church that should be going moral clarity and guidance to the nation has totally lost its way and is incapable of giving leadership to a rudderless world.

The church has the answer but is ducking the issue for fear of offence. A civilisation based on Judeo-Christian principles whose foundational sacred text states that ‘male and female created He them’ is severing that civilisation from its roots. Not without weight the famous passage in Romans in the New Testament says that ‘because they did not like to retain God in their mind that God gave them over to reprobate thinking. It’s as if God says, ‘ok, if you don’t want to follow my rules and my guidelines for living then I’ll let you get on with it and you can take the consequences.’

In reality the consequences are bearing themselves out, an insistence that we should be able to identify as whoever or whatever we want, which now not only involves identifying as a member of the opposite sex but being able to identify as someone younger than you actually are (might give you more success with the opposite sex!). Then we have ‘transitioning’ ex males assaulting woman in a female prison, male to female sportspersons competing against biological women, the frightening moves to get rid of all references to binary male or female gender in legal documents like passports, or the concoction of 71 different gender options on Facebook.

This is nothing less than an enthronement of self above the moral code that has been handed down to us, that we are entitled to extreme self fulfilment, the right to any behaviour, lifestyle or belief, no matter how bizarre even if this goes against science and nature. Man has an infinite capacity for self deception as long as he or she can do what they want to do. It is a denial of God as creator and sustainer of the universe and the ultimate fulfilment of God’s pronouncement against Adam and Eve that they would be as gods.

The church should be holding the line on these issues, but instead rolls with the culture and becomes completely irrelevant with a whimper, joining in with the mad destruction of everything normal and wholesome. Progressive liberals rip out fences that are there, just as church liberals are doing at the moment, whereas conservatives will ask the question, ‘why are those fences there in the first place?’ Quite!

Dark forces against Brexit.

Brexit is the defining issue for our time and which way it goes will affect the whole world as Britain is a forerunner nation and has a leadership mantle upon it, for despite her decline, there is life in the old lion yet. If she successfully breaks with the EU it will be the signal for other nations to depart. It can be done! There are big rumblings in Italy at the moment, Austria, France, Germany, Greece, Holland and even Sweden have patriotic movements, and there are signs that their patriotic movements can have a bigger impact on their governments than in the UK where the first obvious blow was landed to the globalist agenda, and then there is conservative Eastern Europe which has a huge cultural divide with ‘progressive’ Western Europe.

The key issue in Brexit is where does power and authority lie, in Brussels or in Westminster? Everything else is secondary. Enoch Powell got it in one, and he was a very clever man, ‘Do or do you not want to be ruled by an external authority? This is the key question. Immigration, housing, the economy, money, business, social policy, human rights are important but not foundational. When we decide where power and authority lie, everything else will flow from that. One report in the Sunday Times made it quite clear that the number one reason for voting out was sovereignty and recovery of democratic accountability to the British voter.

This is where the political parties have it all wrong. Theresa May and her government is putting trade, the economy and business before the overriding question. Labour has been going for a ‘jobs first’ Brexit. This is all very understandable but this is guaranteed not to give us a clear decisive break from Brussels. Money, the economy and business are important, no denying that, but they flow from a people, not the other way round. The people of the USA produced a free market economy which flowed out of their culture and world view. Likewise Great Britain developed a mercantile internationally trading economy in the days of the British empire. Cue the idea of the Protestant work ethic having an effect on the Anglosphere. The Soviet Union produced a sclerotic state run economy where what to produce, how to produce it and to whom it should be distributed is decided from on high rather than through market forces, the effect of Marxist doctrine on a nation. When we leave the EU the British people will foster an economy that suits the needs of its citizens. However you can be sure that those intent on keeping the UK in the EU. continue to play the economics card for all it’s worth.

I have even read ‘This Blessed Plot’ by Hugo Young, the very bible of the history of UK/EU integration, which traces in long and tortuous detail our developing ties with the continent, and exposes the deceit at the heart of this relationship played on the British people, the idea that there would be no essential loss of sovereignty and that it was no more than an economic deal. He says in the book that there was sufficient covering up of the full truth such that anyone who wanted to ‘make hay’ later would be able to and with full justification. And so it has happened with the rise of Nigel Farage and UKIP who forced the government’s hand. In a nutshell it can be argued that Edward Heath and his acolytes and successors committed treason by subsuming UK law to EU or European law in the first place and he should not have been able to get away with it.

All the time it seems British politicians want to hang on to Nanny’s apron strings in the EU. It is almost as if the muscle of self government for our nation has become atrophied and needs considerable physiotherapy before any sense of confidence is restored. Where the problem needs a cutting of the Gordian knot that ties us to Brussels, our government is getting bogged down in too much detail.

One danger is that Theresa May and her government will make such a mess of Brexit that the British people will be kicking and screaming to come back to return to Brussels rule, seeing the whole procedure as complicated and difficult beyond belief. Sadly Theresa May was a remainer and therefore one is not sure she’s has a conviction in her heart that she is doing the right thing. The UK needed a Brexiteer as PM to steer it out of the EU port. On occasions she has been questioned about her viewpoint and deflects enquiry by saying that the British people have voted to leave the EU, not of course she herself. The suspicion that the dark arts were employed straight after the referendum to oust Andrea Leadsom from potential leadership of the Conservative party and to ensure that a ‘safe pair of hands’ was put in is difficult to avoid. 

Countless signs that the ‘witchcraft’ continued have beset the whole process. Davis Cameron was supposed to action article 50 but didn’t. Gina Miller brought a court case to ensure that article 50 had to be ratified by Parliament to ensure the UK could not trigger talks on leaving without the approval of Parliament. Theresa May introduced the idea of a ‘transition’ in her Florence speech. Many voices spoke of the impossibility of a clean Brexit when our border arrangement with a Southern Ireland could be compromised. The we heard that the transition deal will allow EU citizens to continue to come here during this time. In addition our fishing industry has been thrown under the bus and must make the fishing fraternity wonder just what they voted for in 2016. 

The most recent manifestation of this incessant desire to lock us into the EU despite the vote is the Chequers agreement which led to the resignation of a number of cabinet ministers including David Davis, Boris Johnson and Steve Baker. This tortuous arrangement which would lead to us collecting customs studies on behalf of the EU, being not quite out of reach of the European Court of Justice, and rather compromising our ability to control our borders seems to have the fingerprints of the establishment civil service all over it, represented by Olly Robbins, bogeyman of ardent Brexiteers. A right royal rumpus this has caused, including a rise in the membership of Ukip, news that will cause nightmares for every remainer MP, especially Anna Soubry. Nigel Farage has also threatened a return to the fray to teach the establishment a lesson they will never forget.

If we stay in the Customs Union we will not be leaving the EU. All our trade arrangements will have to be decided in conjunction with 27 other countries which has everything to do with a political project and nothing to do with making our own trade arrangements. If we stay in the Single Market, which the government assured us we would leave if we left the EU, we have to continue accepting free movement of labour, which given the already porous nature of our borders and half hearted attempts to tighten and implement immigration law, is an invitation to more hundreds of thousands to enter this tiny island.

In essence this is a titanic struggle between the powerful force of globalism whose baby is the EU and a resurgent patriotic spirit that desires nationhood and self government. Those forces are raging against Britain for making the ‘wrong’ choice and will try every trick in the book to keep us tied to this political project disguised as an economic union. The powers that be are still arrayed against Brexit, the majority of the House of Commons and House of Lords, the Bank of England, the EU, and of course big business. They will push the message of financial and economic ruin for all its worth and must be resisted. For this battle will have ramifications for the whole earth, as the downfall of this nation will usher in a new dark age.

I believe the British people made the right choice because in essence a spirit of control emanates form Europe that wants to stifle and crush the spirit of this nation, sucking all its individuality away and pressing it into an EU mould. What Britain suffers from right now is a crisis of leadership, that one man or woman needed with the necessary vision to face down the Brussels bullies and cut the Gordian knot that binds us to Europe. We need someone like Trump, but a British Trump without some of the negatives that have been attributed to Trump. The Donald I would suggest would have got a lot further with Brexit than our present leadership. Cometh the hour cometh the man? You never know!

Maybe we will bumble our way out without the churchillian leadership we need. Whatever happens the good ship HMS United Kingdom has loosed her moorings and is now departing the EU quay, albeit extremely slowly. Those thick heavy ropes that tied her to Europe are unraveling. But what a battle it is! There are some that say this will be reversed, that the EU will clutch the UK back into her bosom through the chicanery and Machiavellian tactics of both its own fanatical globalists and sympathetic remainers in the British government. Others say we we will crash out with a no deal. We shall see!

Dunkirk

I have just been to see the film Dunkirk which is well worth a viewing. It tells the story through a series of interlinking personal stories of the miraculous deliverance of the British Expeditionary Force out of France in 1940 when it was about to be annihilated or captured by the Nazi war machine. It is an admirable effort in every way, tracing the stories of airmen, soldiers, a Royal Navy Commander, and a little fishing boat roped in to save the men on the beaches and return them to Blighty. It is full of dramatic footage of men being strafed and bombed by Stukas on the seashore, Spitfires engaging the enemy, holed warships going down, men struggling to survive in a sea molten with burning oil and trapped soldiers in a ship’s hull. No one can disagree that it is a triumph of modern cinematic technique and a tribute to its director Christopher Nolan and a fine cast.

An armada of small boats set out from English shores to rescue these men (338,226) from French beaches. These were just ordinary folk caught up in a scenario much bigger than themselves, and one has to admire their fortitude given the power of the Luftwaffe to cause mayhem in the English Channel and the strong possibility that German armies would just circle the allies and take them prisoner. How would you feel about to land in France possibly in a riverboat faced by German guns from land and air?

The one thing I noticed watching this movie was an absence of portrayal of the sheer scale of the evacuation, an operation involving a third of a million men. The film fails to reflect that reality, instead trying to recreate the picture by filming long lines of men waiting at the beach front or on assembled wooden piers jutting out into the ocean. This is understandable, short of using real life footage of Dunkirk the bill for so many extras would be prohibitive. No doubt there are techniques for recreating scale of numbers but it would be churlish to make too much of that point.

The fact that this historical event was a miracle of deliverance for the British army also comes through, both at the beginning of the film when the sheer desperate situation is laid out to the viewer, and at the end when a couple of the rescued lads slump in the train home after reaching England courtesy of a small boat and get hold of a newspaper making clear the wondrous nature of the deliverance.

What was missing from the film was perhaps the most important factor in this victory, and one which again would be missed by today’s politically correct media. Namely that King George VI and Parliament called a national day of prayer before Dunkirk and people streamed into churches across the nation to ask for Gods help, including Westminster Abbey. Incidentally this history is not always forgotten, one such prayer day was dutifully included in an episode of Foyles War, that excellent, quintessentially British detective series tracing the exploits of the quiet, understated but very effective fictional detective chief superintendent Christopher Foyle. As it happens, there were seven national days of prayer called by King and Parliament during the war, a fact I am sure most schoolchildren are never told when studying this era of history.

I wonder whether the Almighty really did answer the prayers of the British people at that time. No doubt there were quite a few even then that would have made references to ‘God botherers’ and sky fairies, but let’s look at what actually happened. Event 1 – Hitler gave the command for his armies to halt the advance to the west coast of France for no explicable reason before Dunkirk, giving the British extra time. Why would he have done this when he had the heart and brain of the British army at his mercy on the French coast? Event 2 – a terrible storm whipped up which grounded the Luftwaffe on the 28th May at a time when they could have caused maximum damage. Event 3 – the English Channel was like a millpond for several days at the time of ferrying the troops back on that armada of tiny boats. Glorious coincidence or divine intervention?

Hmm, that’s a difficult one. Great Britain used to be a Christian nation with a much more culturally homogenous population who were familiar with the stories from the Bible and were comfortable with David and Goliath, Joseph and his coat of many colours and Daniel in the lions den, as well as the message of the Gospel and the teachings of Jesus. This was par for the course in the Second World War. They would have been schooled in British history and other times when we perhaps knew the intervention of the Almighty such as the Spanish Armada and Napoleon.

If you doubt what I am saying just read what a British naval officer cabled to London when the allied soldiers were on the beaches facing disaster: ‘But if not.’ I hasten to say not even a tiny percentage of today’s population would have a clue of the significance of those three words. They come from Daniel ch 3 v 17 – 18 in the Old Testament and refer to the time when Shadrach, Meshach and Abed-nego faced the fiery furnace for daring to disobey King Nebuchadnezzar and refusing to bow down and worship his idol.

Here is the full passage: “Our God whom we serve,” they told him, “is able to deliver us from the fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of thine hand, O king. But if not, let it be known unto thee, O king, that we will not serve thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up.”

That naval officer fully expected his superior to understand those three words which tells you everything about British culture at that time. He saw the possibility of deliverance from the Nazis but if not they would still resist the enemy.

Now Great Britain is no longer great, trapped between the forces of secular humanism, a bullying EU making it difficult for us to leave said construct, and militant Islam, with Christianity being choked by more aggressive forces from within and a generation that has been ruthlessly severed from its past by a gigantic onslaught from evil forces. For many this is not a pleasant outlook, but Britain needs to reach back into its history and rediscover some of the things that have exalted this land in the past. Perhaps it’s time for another national day of prayer!

Sweden

 

This last winter I finished watching the Scandi noir series Modus on BBC4, based on Norwegian author, Anne Holt’s novel (she served as Norway’s Minister for Justice between 1996 and 1997). I am not an avid TV watcher but I am partial to foreign detective films like Inspector Montalbano and Wallander, especially when the cinematography is so hauntingly rich as in Modus, with stunning aerial views of Stockholm in winter (and it’s got to be around Christmas time!) and vehicles arrowing through frozen forest and tundra. I missed the beginning of the series, but was sufficiently hooked to catch the last three weeks, especially as in my case you are wallowing in a massive and incredibly comfortable new sofa.

What struck me as I watched it was how powerful a parable it was of our time, perhaps trying a bit too hard to be so. In the old days you had the good guys fighting the bad guys, cowboys and Indians, Robin Hood against the Sheriff of Nottingham, the Brits v the Nazis. Now you have the the exaggerated bogey men of the cultural Marxists or hard left out to destroy the shibboleths of the new politically correct orthodoxy i.e. Such groups as homosexuals, immigrants and Moslems. In the case of Modus, a shadowy extreme right wing fundamentalist Christian sect in America is involved in a bizarre plot to murder homosexuals in Sweden. They send an ex marine who goes by the name of Richard Forrester to do the dirty work in cahoots with a woman who is working for a wealthy Swedish businessman who is of course a homosexual in a same sex relationship with another privileged and pampered male. Together with a lesbian couple they seem to be the parents of a young lad, Noah. The ex-marine is of course clean cut, athletic and good looking but with a suitably hard enough steely gaze to look like a sinister serial killer every time he hovers on the edge of a snowy Swedish scene.

Was there any ‘traditional’ relationship apparent in the programme? Yes there was actually. One of the main characters, Inger, a female criminal psychologist and profiler who ends up working with the police, is a mother of two daughters, one of whom is Stina, an autistic child who has caught a glimpse of the killer at the beginning of the series and so lives under the threat of the serial killer appearing at her bedroom door. However, even the mother is divorced or split from her partner with whom she shares the kids, and as the story develops she is getting closer to one of her work colleagues, detective Ingvar Nyman, a leading investigator in the story, but a ‘classic tormented cop’ with a divorce and dead child behind him. Eventually the two become intimate.

The serial killer who hates homosexuals appears in the programme introduction as a tattooed, bare – backed ‘agent of Satan’ type figure, and his menacing persona is richly massaged by his continual retreat to a small caravan deep in the heart of the Swedish forest, where he skypes or tunes in to his extreme fundamentalist handler, Jacob Lindstrum, who preaches to his ‘hill billy’ congregation somewhere in red neck America and then turns round to speak into a microphone directly connecting to our homosexual hating maniac. Now and again he flips down a roof compartment in the caravan to select a mobile phone from his collection to give or receive another message.

So the story progresses as one homosexual/lesbian after another is bumped off and a plot is revealed by the police to remove six of them violently from this mortal coil. I missed at least one murder coming late to the show (apparently the first victim, a celebrity chef, was strangled ruthlessly) but witnessed the killer stabbing in the neck a ‘right on’ female bishop in the snow on Christmas Eve in the Upsalla area. It seems her mistake was that she had been in a relationship with another female in the past, although now married. She had also argued for gender neutral weddings, not something that would have endeared her to the caravan man.

Then the story swings to a sophisticated urban arty scene, in fact a decidedly dodgy exhibition with a posing naked older man, where a creative type by the name of Niclas is done away with, made to look like a heroin overdose. But steely eyed caravan man is not finished yet. Next we find that the rather louche, down and out son Robin, of Swedish mum, Gunhilla, who is the nanny and housekeeper for Marcus and Rolf, his partner, is a target. She is pretty despairing of his decadent behaviour, eventually he is stalked and has his head smashed against a wall by our friendly local serial killer. He manages to escape but dies later in bed at home.

Meanwhile, a raid by the Feds in the US of A on the highly caricatured church of hating homophobes where everyone looks so weird and out of a zombie film from the some mid west horror film, ends with the killing of our serial killer’s ‘minder.’ Of course this strange preacher looks as weird and ‘out there’ as it’s possible to be. Now there may be church congregations in scattered American rural locations where some of the folk in the pews do look like that, but most if not all of of the evangelicals I have known have been perfectly pleasant and reasonable people who bear no ill will to homosexuals at all.

The story switches to the subterranean world of the Stockholm underground, where we are introduced to a streetwise female artist who paints on walls in some underground den and is friendly with Hawre Ghani, a good looking young man of Afghan migrant appearance who has witnessed terrible suffering where he came from but happens to be a gay prostitute. So now we have two favoured victim groups combined into one, and of course he’s the next target. As he tries to seduce the killer he finds himself swiftly bundled into the afterlife. Inger spills the beans on the ‘right on’ credentials of this series when she concludes about the killer ‘He comes from a Conservative background in which gender roles have remained fixed.’ It sounds like a diversity seminar at the Home Office.

Mr Big, Marcus, the homosexual businessman is found out in the end, as it transpires that he got the ball rolling on this bizarre tale by ordering the assassination in New York of Niclas, one of the victims, the arty one, but the whole thing got out of hand when the homosexual hating extremist group got in on the act and started a vendetta. So it was all to do with Marcus discovering a half brother who was going to inherit the family shipping fortune because his father didn’t like gays. The half brother became the victim. So Mr Big hated his father who didn’t like homosexuals, but loved his grandfather. Realising the enormity of what he has done, including discovering the body of the immigrant prostitute, he shares his secret with his partner, who insists they go to the police, but he bumps himself off with a bullet to the head.

You might be forgiven a yawn here, because Mr Evil personified cannot stop killing people. This time he bumps off Marianne, his accomplice, because she is pressuring him to return home. He is obviously having a bad hair day, as he tells her to shut the … up,and proceeds to strangle her. The body count now resembles Midsomer levels, will anyone at all now survive in Sweden?

Eventually the killer is dealt with of course, but in a suitably scary final scene where he tracks down the psychological profiler female cop to bump her off. He jumps her in the kitchen and proceeds to strangle her, but she has the presence of mind to poke him in the eye (a guaranteed way of giving him a bad day) and manages to grab a kitchen knife to stab him to death after a breathless struggle.

However you interpret the film, although it was undoubtedly entertaining, the use of counterfeits and stereotypes to push a subtle message is clear. Dealing with ‘hate crimes’ of course is at the core of the message. Opposition to homosexuality is grossly caricatured in relation to real life. It is hard not to think that the message that comes over is that opposing homosexuality is wrong, that if you in any way disagree with the practice of homosexuality you are a hater and a bigot. Those practicing LGBT lifestyles are seen in the programmes as good looking, compassionate, prosperous and enlightened, whereas the killer and his acolytes are seen as utterly evil. Even a senior police officer with contempt for gays is the representative of the old guard. Again the patron saint of modernity, or political correctness is the immigrant from an alien culture that is also a gay prostitute. To be ‘tuned in’ we must of course always be compassionate to migrants and pay little heed to their culture or lifestyle. If you are out of tune with this song you are a racist and zenophobe, regardless of whether you have the discernment to see that you must protect your culture from evil or danger from without.

The programme unfortunately reflects a state of thinking that afflicts western society like a disease, a mindset that has perhaps gone further in Sweden than any other country. Sweden seems to represent the vanguard of the liberal progressive bulldozer. However, even in Sweden there are signs that people have had enough, a pushback is arising, particularly on the question of immigration. The programme is especially prescient for 2016 with the turmoil surrounding Brexit and Trump, the first time the liberal progressive cause has received a major setback. But, hey, it was still entertaining TV and I enjoyed it, although the plot was as unlikely as Vladimir Putin running a Sunday School.

Brexit and Trump can only be positively influences for the rescuing of Swedish culture from a morass of institutionalised foolishness inflicted upon it by the last generation of its leaders. Will people watch Modus in fifty years time and think what a strange place Sweden was in 2016, or will they think it another step in the long march to Nirvana?

Syria

Before Donald Trump got elected to be American president last week and caused generation snowflake to go apoplectic I started to pen a letter to Theresa May on Syria. Well what a surprise but Mr Trump seems to have the same views as me on this subject. Perhaps he should elect me as his advisor!

Looking at the headlines in yesterday’s Sunday Telegraph we see that Mr Trump is taking the line that we should be more alongside Russia in their Syria policy rather than helping the Syrian ‘opposition.’ I would have advised the British government to take Trump’s line ages ago, even before this present conflict started. We might have saved ourselves an awful lot of trouble, notably perhaps some of the massive migrant flows into Europe which are now destabilising the continent.

Under Assad Syria was a reasonably stable entity up to the recent conflict. Indeed it was perhaps a bit of a beacon for the Middle East where Christians and Yazidis were free to practice their faith and basically protected by Assad. How many Middle Eastern states can you say that of? Admittedly Syria was no western liberal democracy but is was not a bad imitation of being the least worst option in terms of decent government in that part of the world. Again Assad might not be your favourite uncle who you’d look forward to having a pint with down at the ‘Dog and Duck,’ but he understood a little better the threat that Islamic extremists posed to his country and would have a little more clue than the west about how to deal with them. I daresay his opponents have one language for Europe and another for the Middle East, it was ever so.

So what I am saying is perhaps let’s help Assad deal with these opponents of his rather than doing everything possible to oust him from power, because I venture to suggest that what we will get in his place will be far, far worse. Shades of the Shah of Iran anyone? Thank God David Cameron lost his vote in the Commons in August 2013 to take military action against Bashar Al-Assad in Syria, fuelled I seem to remember by his wife’s Syrian experiences. I think a few angels hanging around in the chamber that day may have whispered in some MPs ears which way to vote. The least worst option in the Middle East is often to help some of these regimes stay in power for a modicum of stability, cue Egypt, Libya and so on, rather than indulge in regime change. Bit of discernment needed here of course as you can’t make it a rule for every situation, but I think we should be very slow to get involved in the Middle East unless it directly affects our interests and there is overwhelming clamour for these countries for our help. We would get more support from the Middle East if countries there knew that their people had begged us to help them dealing with intractable situations.

So I am somewhat aghast at the latest rumblings from the government that Mr Trump should be persuaded not to get too close to Russia on this issue. To think that the whole government machine, the Cabinet, the Foreign Office and all those advisory civil servants will be busy trying to persuade Mr Trump not to support Mr Assad, that’s our taxpayers money folks. It won’t be the best start to a new relationship with our strongest ally.

I can’t help thinking that most of Mr Assad’s opponents in Aleppo and elsewhere are of the ‘bearded extremist’ type who will behead you or worse if you can’t quote a couple of ready verses from the Koran in case they query your Moslem credentials, and are busy constructing the worldwide caliphate beloved of militant Islam. Why we should be supporting such people I have no idea. We should be doing everything we can to wipe them from the face of the earth if it comes to military conflict. There is huge concern about how people are suffering because of the Russian/Assad bombardment of Aleppo, but this is where the US and UK could perhaps bring a little more finesse to the campaign with more precision targeting of the real enemy.

If Mrs Clinton had got in we would be cosying up to her as she pulled full steam ahead with her Syrian policy, perhaps arming the opposition more? No fly zones? A bit of sabre rattling in Putin’s direction? It would only need one or two near misses between Russian Migs and American F35s or Her Majesty’s Tornados in a no fly zone and we could see the start of World War 3, not something the liberal west wants to wake up to as it munches its raisin flavoured porridge in the morning.

Sure, Putin is no angel and may be a leader geared for war, but it sure is wiser to accommodate the Bear rather than poke it with a great big massive stick, especially in the cauldron of the Middle East. This is why I think we have a little less clue than Trump’s pending administration, so I bow to my American cousins on this issue. I by no means condone Putin’s authoritarianism and some of the ruthless actions of the Russian state machine, but in Syria it might be a case of holding your nose to help the Russians destroy ISIS. After all, in the Second World War the Soviet Union and  US were fighting on the same side. Perhaps the Brits can join them to help out.

Meanwhile I must finish my letter to Theresa May. But what do I know compared with those armies of civil servants in Whitehall?