Immigration. After all those promises, the fruit of 14 years of Conservative Party rule is that immigration into the UK has hit an all-time high.
Martin Webster
These latest shocking immigration figures (according to a Daily Telegraph report linked to at the foot of this post) and the huge cost burden on Britain’s economy, built up after 14 years of Conservative Party rule.
The pro-Tory Party media assert “It might have been even worse had Labour been in power for the past 14 years”. But that is speculation. The fact is that it built up to current levels under a succession of Conservative Party governments.
Boris Johnson must take especial blame. Apart from not seriously attempting to “get Brexit done” as he promised — he was so inactive on that front that he actually frustrated “a real Brexit”. He also ignored increasing immigration levels in order to please the Tories’ business backers who wanted, as ever, a constant supply of cheap labour.
Johnson still poses as a right-wing patriot, but in messages to London’s Jewish community in 2008, when standing for the leadership of the Greater London Council, he regaled them with details of his Turkish-Jewish ancestry and his ardent support for Jewry.
The by now traditional Conservative Party policy of betraying the British people over immigration was put into over-drive by Johnson’s successor, Rishi Sunak. He had made himself a billionaire as an executive of the Wall Street-based Jewish international usurers Goldman Sachs, and who is from an Indian-Hindu immigrant family. How could we expect a man with Sunak’s background to bear down on coloured immigration?
Out of office since last July, the Tories have recently elected an Afro-Nigerian woman, Kemi Badenoch, — also big on anti-immigration promises — to lead them. In my first draft of this article I confused Badenoch with one of her competitors for the Tory leadership, the Asian Suella Braverman.
In a sense, my error made a point: The Conservatives are now so politically bankrupt and devoid of talent that in their recent leadership election they presented the membership with a choice between:
- A Nigerian-African woman (Badenoch) whose husband is a Western Isles Scot;
- An Asian woman (Braverman) whose husband, Rael Braverman, is a Jew. In a 2023 interview given in the HQ of the Jewish Community Security Trust (CST), Suella described her husband as “a proud Jew and Zionist”.
- An apparently ethnically-British man, Robert Jenrick, who married an Israeli Jewess and whose children are being brought up as Jews. (This compares exactly with Labour Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s marital arrangements); and
- Tom Tugendhat, whose self-description is quoted in the left-leaning Wikipedia: “… a Catholic who identifies with Jewish people”. “Identifies”? What does that mean, exactly? His paternal grandfather was an Austrian Jewish émigré from Vienna, who converted to Catholicism — by no means the first Jew to do that, a fact which prompted the Roman Catholic Church in medieval times to create ‘The Holy Inquisition’, but I digress…
What a bunch!
This array of candidates perhaps explains a fact revealed in The Guardian’s 2nd November report of the Tory leadership election:
“The contest revealed Conservative party membership appears to have fallen by almost a quarter over the past two years with the 95,000 people who voted in this year’s contest a record low.”
MPs’ immigration vote stifled in 1950s
The Conservatives have been lying to the indigenous British people about “restricting” immigration since the days of the last Winston Churchill-led administration in the 1950s. By deploying a mixture of intimidation and bribery, that last Churchill government frustrated an effort by Sir Cyril Osborne MP to get the issue of coloured immigration debated in the House of Commons.
For full details of how they did that, see the last chapter of historian Andrew Robert’s 1994 book Eminent Churchillians. The chapter includes the memorable sentence:
“… and so the greatest demographic change in the entire history of the British nation was achieved without any democratic ratification whatever …”
I should add that Roberts — now ‘Lord’ Roberts — now wishes he had never written that book, as he has become a professional Jews’ lick-spittle and Tory Party toady.
During the 1990s Roberts was ‘right wing’ enough to entertain Ian Smith, former Prime Minister of Rhodesia, to dinners at his posh Chelsea home on occasions when Smith was in London. Smith’s government had in 1965 declared its ‘UDI’ in order to escape the catastrophe of Black majority rule since inflicted on South Africa.
I attach a photo of Roberts at a recent Hoover Institution panel in the USA, (2nd from left) along with like-minded other holders of the ‘Order of the Brown Nose’ such as British historian Niall Ferguson (4th from left), whose internationalist credentials include a black/Asian wife.
From the end of WW2 neither the Conservative Party nor the Labour Party has ever put into any of their general election manifestos a policy of turning Britain into a multi-racial society. So the British electorate has never been allowed to grant or deny a mandate for such a development. Thus the multi-racial horror that has been imposed on us has no democratic legitimacy. Moreover, laws were enacted to try and prohibit and criminalise trenchant criticism of multi-racialism.
What is democratic about any of that?
Allison Pearson gets ‘Knock-on-Door’
It is as a result of the attempt to criminalise “Racist Thought Crime” initiated by the Race Relations Act that the Telegraph columnist Allison Pearson got a ‘Knock on the Door’ from two members of Essex Police last Remembrance Sunday asking her to accompany them to the local Police Station.
The cops wanted her to make a statement concerning a Tweet she had posted a year ago on X which might have been a “Non-Crime Hate Incident”, or might even have been a full-blown act “… intended or likely to incite racial hatred, contrary to the Public Order Act as amended by the Race Relations Act…” — an ‘offence’ for which I was convicted on two counts and sentenced to six months in jail (suspended) by Mr Justice Figgis at Kingston Crown Court in 1978.
In her voluminous, self-congratulatory, writings about the incident, Ms Pearson does not indicate she has any awareness that the ‘Knock on the Door’ to which she was subjected was the inevitable (indeed, the “intended”) outcome of the thinking behind The Race Relations Act; or any idea that the Race Relations Act was:
- a proposal circulated as a booklet during the 1950s under the title The Group Libel Bill by the Board of Deputies of British Jews; and then
- developed by a team of Jewish lawyers into the first version of The Race Relations Act; and that
- all subsequent amendments to that Act have all been drafted by Jewish lawyers with connections to the Board of Deputies.
Why, you may ask, are all these Jewish-connected matters so relevant to Ms Pearson?
This apparent ignorance of, or shyness about, the Jewish origins of the ‘Police State’ oppression about which Ms Pearson so rightly complains, is strange bearing in mind her close association with the Jewish community, as this item reveals.
When on 20th April 1968 Enoch Powell MP spoke up for the British people about immigration, the then Conservative leader Edward Heath sacked him from all his party posts and set about trying to get him de-selected from his Wolverhampton constituency. Eventually, Powell had to decamp to Northern Ireland to secure a Unionist-voting constituency to retain a place in the House of Commons.
Yet in the 1970 general election, when Heath became Prime Minister, the Conservative Party’s manifesto included six categorical promises to restrict immigration and regulate the settlement of those allowed to enter. Among these were that immigrants “would not automatically be granted permanent right of settlement” and would not be allowed to settle in places already over-burdened with immigrants.
Not the slightest attempt was made to implement any of those six promises — but then Heath was a notorious liar. How can we forget his assertion that “Membership of the European Common Market does not involve Britain in any loss of essential national sovereignty”! What is “non-essential national sovereignty”?
I should add that Powell helped me in May 1973 when I stood as the National Front candidate in a by-election for the West Bromwich constituency, achieving 16.02 per cent of the poll — the first time, before or after WW2, that a racial-nationalist candidate ‘saved a deposit’ in a UK Parliamentary election, which was then set at 12.5 per cent (nowadays it’s 5 per cent). Powell publicly refused an invitation to speak at a meeting held in support of the Conservative Party candidate who, like me, was beaten by the Labour Party candidate.
Thatcher’s “sympathy” for those who feared Britain was being “swamped”
In the run-up to the 1979 general election the Conservative leader Margaret Thatcher MP declared on TV how much she “sympathised with those who feared that Britain was being swamped by immigration”, thereby implying that if elected, she would take action to allay those fears. It was by that trick that she drew to the Conservative Party votes which might otherwise have gone to the National Front which had 303 candidates standing in that election.
Only seven weeks after the Conservatives’ election victory Mrs Thatcher allowed thousands of Vietnamese “refugees” to flood into Britain. So the first of the “boat people” arrived on Britain’s shores in 1979, not decades later, as many people imagine.
Thatcher justified this betrayal on the grounds that the Vietnamese were “entrepreneurs”. She was a one for cupboards full of cash!
On arrival, many of these Vietnamese did indeed turn to money-making enterprises: most notably — as numerous court reports bear witness — the factory-scale production of illegal drugs such as cannabis. They accelerated the growth of cannabis plants by using powerful lighting systems illegally linked to other peoples’ electric power supply! Very “entrepreneurial”!
Thatcher’s betrayal was perpetrated on the advice of civil servant Neville Nagler, head of the Home Office department which advised the government on race relations matters. On his retirement Nagler became the CEO of the Board of Deputies of British Jews.
The British people must never again trust the Conservative Party on the issue of immigration. This is not a plea to support the Labour Party or the Liberal-Democratic Party. Far from it. All of these Establishment parties have conspired together, along with the mainstream media, international big business and sundry Socialist, Communist and Trotskyite parties, to convert our country into a multi-racial dump.
This is being done to Britain and other White-European nations not just to give international big business termite-style raceless, nationless cultureless colonies to exploit, but to achieve by means of immigration, race-mixing and miscegenation the elimination of White-European people as an ethnic group on this planet.
The big secret behind all this is that there is another ethnic group which sees itself as the rightful — indeed, the God-appointed “Chosen People” — to rule the world. They see White-European people as a threat to their destiny. Race-mixing — for all others, but not for themselves! — is their weapon of their choice.
A new and radical approach to reversing the treason and subversion that has been foisted on the indigenous British people — and White people generally — must be commenced, and very soon.
The questions arise: Does a vehicle exist to achieve that purpose – to stop immigration and commence orderly repatriation?
If not, how can it be constructed? What methods should it employ?
The Daily Telegraph report can be seen at https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/11/28/net-migration-hit-nearly-one-million-last-year-170000-more/
