October 2024

Jackboot Justice

Invaders, Traffickers, Assassins, and Two-Tier Tyranny

THE EDITOR

"[W]e will establish national capability across polices forces to tackle violent disorder.... Shared intelligence, wider deployment of facial recognition technology.... the law must be upheld everywhere. ... we will take all necessary action...." [1/8/24] —"The disorder is intolerable. It is incapable of justification. It is clearly racist." [19/8/24]

- Keir Starmer

Starmer gave the impression that just to be angry — about uncontrolled immigration, Islamic extremism, minorities refusing to integrate — constituted a Far Right mindset.

- Patrick O'Flynn (Reform UK), tweet, 3/8/24

Whilst the devastating attacks in Southport were the catalyst, the commonality amongst the protest groups appear to be focussed on three key areas: the desire to protect Britain's sovereignty, the need to uphold British values and in order to do this, stop illegal immigration. ... Arresting people, or creating violent civil disorder units, is treating the symptom and not the cause.

- Donna Jones, Hampshire & Isle of Wight Police and Crime Commissioner (Statement, 3/8/24)

The governing elites in Britain seem to be losing control. A state that is both incompetent, and also arbitrarily aggressive.

- Douglas Carswell (former Tory MP), 13/8/24

It sounds mad. It sounds like I'm subscribing to conspiracy theories. But there's a real sense [that] for the first time, overtly, a machinery of repression is being created.

- Prof. David Starkey, 2/8/24

 

Repression and control: modus operandi and media

Designedto dissolve national sovereignty and eradicate the Christian memory and identity of Western peoples, the totalising agenda of the globalist oligarchy is primarily effected by way Problem-Reaction-Solution. That is, they create the problems — initiating false-flag events and fomenting societal division, conflict and chaos through legislated immorality, unreality, multi-culturalism, open borders etc. — which then allows them to react with ready-made answers — increased state and police powers, sovereignty-crushing transnational treaties, censorship, mandatory 'vaccines', abolition of cash, surveillance etc. — all geared to further their dystopian endgame: control of humanity through a paradoxical technocracy: futuristic in its quantum AI capabilities, yet feudal in its two-tier lord/serf structure.

Like all totalitarian constructs this relentless centralisation and consolidation of absolute power, in a Communist-Fascist fusion beloved of the Rothschild-Rockefeller axis and their amoral underlings, both breeds and relies upon a culture of rampant self-interest, untrammelled lies, rank injustice and unaccountability.

Speaking of post-89 Russia, former Soviet dissident Yuri Samodurov lamented: "We once lived in a totalitarian state that had two main features: totalising terror and a totalising lie. I hope that totalising terror is no longer possible in our country, but we have now entered a new era of a totalising lie."

Previewed by the Covid nightmare, the totalising terror is now roaring towards Western doorsteps on the back of hoaxes and crises contrived and exploited for pre-planned solutions. Meantime, a new era of totalising mendacity is already institutionalised, thanks to a complicit corporate press without which itcould have never taken take hold.

A fearless titan of independent journalism, recipient of countless awards, and a pioneer of online journalism in the 90s, the late Robert Parry plainly stated that "the media has become a threat to democracy and one of the most important tasks that exists today is to build a new infrastructure for conveying information – one that is honest, independent, and incorruptible."

A French researcher similarly observed that "The mass media are the hacks of power and share its lies, all its lies, especially the ones about Covid."

While U.S. Senator Ron Paul also reminds us that "All these wars have been based on lies."  Ditto the dystopian developments rolled out with them — the national security state, global surveillance, censorship, etc. — which agenda, again, is facilitated by a media thatvariously buries, muddies and trivialises the truth (especially about the 9/11 false flag that triggered our dystopic descent) — preferring to parrot governmental liars instead of holding them to acccount.

The recent U.S. presidential 'debate' encapsulated this totalising mendacity of the Western political/media nexus. Three mainstream media moderators ganged up against Donald Trump, challenging his claims and questioning his motives while allowing Kamala Harris to lie flagrantly and repeatedly without correction. Quick fact-checks would have brought up literally dozens of her publicly stated views and policies that totally contradicted the conservative positions she falsely adopted with impunity before the moderators and the viewing public. The prejudicial spectacle rivalled anything that Russia or China could possibly contrive in terms of mendacious political theatre masquerading as free and open debate on public policy. But at least Putin and Xi are serious and competent! America has simply exchanged one degrading farce for another: swapping a fraudulent and medically-demented 'presidency' for the demented cackling and risible incoherence of a woman who recalls the democratic denouement forewarned by satirist H.L. Mencken:

As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.

Indeed, the debate mirrored the Western political landscape in general: a world of rigged systems ruled by competing overlords (super-wealthy familial clans with competing outlooks and agendas) who control the banks which own the corporations that run the gaslighting institutions we call the "entertainment-media" that keeps the hoi polloi in a constant state of distraction, confusion and ignorance.

Once merely dotted with shady and criminal types, this landscape is now strewn with them: amoral and dangerously incompetent placemen at best (e.g., Biden, Harris, and plentiful 'graduates' of the Davos Young Leaders programme), true psychopaths and sociopaths at worst (e.g., Macron, Blair, GHW Bush, both Clintons, Obama, von der Leyen, et. al.).

Starmer in globalist context

Like all his neo-Marxist kin (aka 'progressives'), Keir Starmer falls somewhere on this perverse continuum. He seamlessly succeeds his fellow Uniparty puppet Rishi Sunak, a mega-millionaire placeman parachuted into Downing Street by the usual globalist suspects who position their favoured Goldman Sachs alumni to run international bodies and national governments.

For his part, though clearly viewed from on high as suitable go-getting lefty, Starmer attained power in the natural course of events, despite winning just 34% of the vote from a dire voter turnout of 60% (the second lowest since 1918).

This hollow victory, a foregone conclusion, garnered a whopping 63% of the seats in the House of Commons: i.e., 411 out of 650, not including the Speaker. This provided a huge "simple majority" of 158 seats and an even bigger "working majority" that instantly turned the 2024-2029 electoral cycle into Britain's very own Operation Warp Speed: with New New Labour rushing to cement the ungodly 'agenda' before the unholy 2030 deadline. Hence Starmer channelling Adolf from the off: marshalling the machinery of the state to suppress freedom of expression and give 'dissidents' a taste of what's to come.

Nonetheless, though scandalous the result was at least, mercifully, legitimate.

Still blessed (thus far and despite the best efforts of voting machine manufacturers) by the absence of electronic voting, either online or in person, Britain is yet to experience election-rigging and Big Steals of the sort that saddled America and the world with an invalid presidency that mocked international relations and all Western democracies for four illegitmate, cataclysmic years (cf. "A Biblical Heist!", Nov. 2020; "Gaslit Globe," Nov. 2021).

No, the absurdly inequitable outcome was simply a first-past-the-post electoral system at work. Though effectively a rigged game favouring the major parties, it is hugely popular with the British electorate. Over two-thirds voted to retain it in a 2011 referendum. But this time around it reportedly produced "the most extreme difference between vote and seat shares seen across the whole of the UK and in England for over a century."

The disparity was truly shocking, especially for newcomers Reform UK: a fledgling patriotic 'work in progress', as it were, with a commendable Manifesto replete with pro-sovereignty, pro-freedom, anti-woke policies. Amazingly, this patriotic party won roughly four million votes, finished second in 98 constituencies, and ranked third for overall vote share with 14% of votes cast — yet won just five paltry seats, about 1% of the total. It also won 600,000 more votes than the Liberal Democrats who nonetheless gained a whopping 64 seats!

The Reform UK vote share was achieved in the face of shocking media smears and suppression of the party's platform, which, as its leader Nigel Farage protested, "is denying the public to hear arguments that are gaining great resonance out there on the ground." He insisted that the rules laid down by media regulator Ofcom to enable this suppression were deliberately designed to keep British politics and broadcasting as a "nice cosy club" where "no new challengers are allowed."

"That is blatantly not a properly functioning democratic system — that is a flawed system," stated Reform's Richard Tice, adding: "The demands for change will grow and grow."

 Indeed, along with ever louder calls, also being led by Reform, to finally remove the multi-billion pound anti-Christian, socio-political straightjacket in which the country is held captive by a bloated and biased BBC. But whereas abolishing the "state broadcaster" — sooo post-war and passé! — or re-fitting it for modernity as a private subscription platform guarantees a win-win for taxpayers and the common good, introducing preferential and proportional systems of representation do not provide the same cast iron certainty of breaking up the Uniparty's monopoly on power. They come with their own limitations and aggravations.

In any event, if Biden's tenure was both invalid and cataclysmic, Starmer's empty but legitimate New New Labour premiership has hit the ground running: sprinting, that is, down the same old path of globalist/Blairite ruination. Having spent years taking the moral high ground in (rightly) denouncing Tory scandals, Starmer immediately raised headlines trumpeting his and his party's mendacity, hypocrisy, cronyism, further politicisation of the civil service, and general wanton self-serving.

Mimicking Blair's mantra of rebuilding the country through lasting "change" (to be rolled out, he says, over 10 years), Starmer immediately seized on and ferociously exploited civil unrest long fomented by the state: a slow burning fuse just waiting for a catastrophic "event" to set off a mass reaction to then be duly manipulated for 'progressive' ends.

Thus, crafting the official narrative through his media bullhorn, Starmer framed perfectly understandable anger as incomprehensible, and tarred as "far right" haters and thugs the vast majority of moderate protestors whom he knew full well to be law-abiding taxpayers.

In textbook far left fashion, in other words, he spewed the "far right" lie — at once ludicrous and vicious — to switch attention from underlying causes the acknowledgement of which would have opened up a Pandora's box of indefensible globalist goals to which he fully subscribes. It was these treacherous, sovereignty-crushing policies wreaking havoc in every country that finally brought people to breaking point and onto the streets; being no longer able to tolerate their long years of insufferable neglect and maltreatment by successive governments in thrall to supranational interests and agendas: in this case divisive multi-culturalism in general (involving unchecked legal immigration), and the manifestly suicidal policy of open borders in particular.

Trafficking

Although the main engines for the orchestrated foreign invasions (no less) are Western governments led by sellouts like Starmer, the worldwide population replacement operation is a planned invasion overseen by the UN Office of International Migration (which distributes credit cards to the invaders) and directed on the ground by NGOs (non-governmental organisations: including all major religions, with Catholic charities at the forefront).

A major subset of the asymmetrical war being waged to destabilise Western nations and demoralise their populations, this replacement strategy is simultaneously emptying the asylums and jails of some countries to dump their criminal dregs into others, and dispersing young fighting age Chinese and Muslim men around the world.

All the while it is providing cover for the trafficking of women and children en masse. This satanic criminality deserves an entire edition of its own. But for now let us make do with the following snapshot of the current American migration-invasion 'experience.' (My transcripts and headline insertions; original emphases):

"The youngest child I moved was three months old," confessed Carlos Arrellano during a recent Infowars discussion(1) with fellow citizen journalist Anthony Rubin and host Alex Jones. "A lot of people don't want to believe it, but then [an] Infowars crew have footage of trafficked babies being passed around at the airport."

Arrellano spent more than 20 years working for NGOs and has testified before Congress and state legislatures. He spent seven of those years escorting/delivering children around the country to government 'sponsors'/'custodians' who admitted to him that they gave the children away after a day or two. So "there's no way to find this child anymore" — i.e., to discover if he/she is in sex slavery, or dead/satanically sacrificed, or organ-harvested. "It's a dead end." he said.

Despite their power and resources the FBI and government agencies are not interested, even though courageous investigators like Rubin and Arrellano provide them with full information. "We were given a list, in June of this year, by a government insider," said Rubin. "And the list had 8,000 names of alien children who came across the border without parents, alone, and their last known address."

Jones interjected that "The US Senate now admits, 325,000 children missing, many in sex slavery. Even the New York Times admits that, while trying to cover up the rest of it. The reason the feds won't respond is, they're the ones that complete the smuggling process, so the other agencies aren't supposed to expose it," said Jones. 

"Absolutely," Rubin replied. "And that's why they move these kids at 3 in the morning. It's been confirmed to us that they're moved at 3 in the morning, they're put on a charter plane, and then they're dropped off in the middle of a field, they have the sponsors come to meet them in the middle of a field somewhere."

"It came out last year. Reporters showed the planes, the kids coming off in the field, and being put in vans," said Jones.

Under Trump the smuggling all but stopped. "There were times when I wouldn't even get called for work," said Arrellano:

Then the Biden administration came into place, and we were getting called every single day, I was flying [on] nine to 12 different planes a week. And you would arrive at a certain camp and you were told, well, the kids at this camp are suicidal, they're cutting themselves, the kids at this camp are pregnant, pregnant teenagers. And in 2021 when the Biden administration was in place, you would just hear the craziest stories. You would hear, 'alright, you guys aren't flying today. Your job is to get in vans and drive these teenage girls to an abortion clinic to get an abortion done in California.' That's another one that people don't really know about. It's just countless things that you try to forget about, but you slowly remember when you see these kids again. In California that was a big one. I know it doesn't surprise people that it's in California. But a lot of the people who would get on the airplanes would be kids. Their [the government officers'] job was to drive these girls to an abortion clinic and get the baby ... killed. The other concerning part about the California kids was that, these California camps were erasing pregnant girls from the [official] records at these camps.

"This is a massive legal industry," said Jones. "Search 'Secret nightime flights of children', and you can get the footage from New Jersey and everywhere. [NYT headline: "'Ghost Flights'? Planes chartered by the Department of Homeland Security are flying unaccompanied, undocumented migrant children from the border to federally licensed shelters around the country"] So you can see this, it's on record. This has been going on for years now. But it doesn't get any attention. We get punch drunk, we get conditioned, by this massive evil."

Arrellano also mentioned that most of the children are from Guatemala and they don't speak Spanish but their own dialect. Thus they cannot communicate their situation to others. Since translators are also exceedingly hard to find, Guatemalan traffickers can chat amongst themselves in front of officials safe in the knowledge that nobody will understand the lies they are contriving before responding to questions.

Children who can communicate confirm the sordid truth. Arrellano recalled:

I had one child walk up to me and say, "Hey, the guy I'm with in this shelter, he's saying he's my dad but he's not my dad. He's touching me sexually. He stole me from my home."

And "he stole me from my home" because, back then, there was a policy from the Obama era, where families were allowed to get into the country no matter what. So a lot of these people in Central America were taking these children from anywhere they could, just to get an automatic entry into the country. [New York Post headline, 24/9/24: "Kids as young as 8 are drugged and trafficked into the US by smugglers posing as their parents, Border Patrol warns"]

Jones added: "Sometimes kids have been smuggled multiple times, back and forth, as like a ticket into the country. ... Trump got money for DNA testing. Now they have whistleblowers who've told Congress, as soon as Biden got in, even though the money was earmarked, they killed the DNA testing to aid the smugglers in getting through with kidnapped kids. It's not like the feds are letting this happen, they're aiding it."

Rubin commented:

It's on record. The head of HHS [Health and Human Services] is on record, saying this is like a Ford assembly line. That the job is to move the kids out as fast as possible. ... There are some states that won't even look into this. At least in Florida they're trying to do the right thing. There was a Florida Grand Jury about a year ago, where they have people admitting a situation of over a hundred children being sent to one address in Texas. They reported it to a human trafficking hotline and they got fired, just like that. So this is known, they're doing this intentionally. Or even if it's not intentional, they just don't give a damn. ...

Under current Biden administration policy, they will not send the kids back home. Once they're detained, and they're in the hands of Border Patrol and then HHS, that's it! Even if they say, listen, I just want to go back to my parents, I was smuggled here, they will not send the kid back home. They send them off, at best, to a foster care system. ["State says 1,000 care facilities match sex offender addresses" - LA Times, 27/10/11] Or other times they're sent to a labour-trafficking ring. There was a network of houses in Florida where they sent all these kids to, and it was run by two Guatemalans, illegal aliens. ["Alone And Exploited, Migrant Children Work Brutal Jobs Across the US ... they're ending up in dangerous jobs that violate child labor laws..." - NYT, 28/2/23]

"They're bringing in a permanent underclass they can control," stated Jones. "This has been done on a mass scale by our own government and it's just been normalised now. ... We're losing our heart and soul with this human trafficking."

"You've got to think of the kids, you know," said Arrellano. "You've got to keep trying. Because there's 40 kids right now, it's going to be 40 kids tomorrow, and another 40 kids the day after. One thing we've got to remember when we get Trump back in office, he's going to do his best to fix it but they're going to fight him on it. Just cause he wins doesn't mean they're going to roll over and let him do all that he can."

Rubin finished by warning: "If Trump tries to do mass deportations there's going to be Democrat leftist law firms coming out everywhere, trying to put a stop on this." 

"Total totalitarian takeover"

The migration-invasion requires unimaginable sums. A meticulous researcher interviewed on Redacted (20/7/24) explained that the U.S. State Department doles out unlimited funds to maintain the crippling flow into America, handing $600 million cheques on demand to invader-facilitating NGOs with their snouts in the public trough (to include 'Catholic' charities).

Another researcher, Michael Yon, a former special ops veteran who has fought and survived many wars, is now a globetrotting independent journalist who tracks in person these seemingly endless human caravans and flotellas. During his regular interviews with online platforms, as an eyewitness and conveyor of primary-source whistleblower testimonies, he relates alarming facts and essential information about the migration invasions, and advice on how to survive what's coming.

That Yon's vital first-hand information does not dominate mainstream news every day of the week is sufficient measure alone of the wholesale betrayal of national electorates by establishments on both sides of the Atlantic — which Starmer personifies. Even a "highly respected" military officer known by Yon personally and professionally, whom he likes, has plainly informed Yon that he is perfectly content to comply with the untrammelled influx of migrants.

Like putative 'leaders' everywhere, this officer clearly blocks out the myriad crises besetting his fellow Americans. Not least the living nightmare of residents of Democrat-controlled "sanctuary cities" whose governors heap economic and social pressures on their constituents by welcoming waves of unvetted illegals, many with malign intentions that are quickly acted out.

(Just one low-level Immigration sub-office in Baltimore recently announced that its Enforcement and Removal Operations officers had arrested 153 "noncitizen sex offenders" in a single year. This doesn't count illegal migrant sex offenders who weren't caught. There are 24 main ERO offices across the country, providing some idea of the number of sex-crazed criminals being let into the U.S.)

The migration mayhem is kept far from cosseted political elites and the well-connected whose lucrative careers and place in the globalist pecking order are assured — as long as they toe the line and turn a blind eye to the "deplorables"being economically and culturally displaced, their daily lives made a living hell.

Indeed, everyone suffers in some way, including hapless migrants themselves, who, as we've just explained, are trafficked and abused both during their trek ("80% of Central American Women, Girls Are Raped Crossing Into the US" - Huffington Post, 12/9/14) and afterwards, as with Haitians in Ohio and untold numbers of children.

Everyone suffers except the Lords of the Earth and their underlings.

The highly-informed Michael Yon nailed the dead heart of this traitorous self-serving. "We're talking total authoritarian takeover," he insisted. A takeover by way of "a WAR. Against us," affirms veteran investigative reporter Jon Rappoport. "A foreign invasion. Facilitated by US politicians and their allies." The same people who are aiding and abetting the trafficking.

Of course, the entire neo-Marxist agenda, which like its Soviet prototype forewarned by Our Lady of Fatima stems from the pit of Hell, is one long civilisational war: against the one true God, His one true Church, and His creatures made in His image and likeness. An undeclared war to which the sanctimonious Starmers of the world contribute, whether as woke true believers or compromised puppets.

The Evil Genius behind it all is simply upping the ante of this long-running ungodly assault, through relentless biblical "events" among which the migrant invasion, planned and perpetrated against the common good and expressed will of majorities in all nations, holds pride of place.

Facts and figures

To maintain this war the sort of stark migration realities just recounted must forever be denied and those presenting them misrepresented and shouted down. No transparent debate is permitted. Instead, facile and ludicrous political assertions are magnified by the press to facilitate the crisis by shutting down civil and commonsense discussion of the daunting facts. Consider these jaw-droppers, for instance:

• One in every 27 people in the UK has arrived in the country in the past 24 months.
• 40% of all foreign born people living in Britain (both legal immigrants and illegal migrants) have arrived in the last 10 years.

Only far-left globalists like Starmer, who sneer at those who value national memory and identity, could possibly wave away such sobering figures which speak to the unprecedented pace of population increase that taxpayers have long decried: both for draining the public purse and the overloading of infrastructure that creates conflict. Not just the evidence of our own eyes but hard data supports these claims, which is precisely why objective research has been frowned upon by successive governments held willing hostage to the globalist narrative of open borders.

The Netherlands

The Dutch, however, are not so timid. And their academics have concluded that the current conditions under which migration to Europe takes place are not sustainable.

Conducted by a team of mathematicians led by Jan H. Van de Beek at the University of Amsterdam, the study looked at the fiscal contribution of immigrants coming to the Netherlands from different parts of the world. "It clearly showed that people from Muslim countries were a net burden on the Dutch economy," commented former MP Douglas Carswell while reviewing the study on the American PBD podcast (28/9/23). "They drew more in benefits than they contributed in tax revenue. The Horn of Africa were the biggest net drain on the Dutch taxpayers. From Somalia, essentially. But people from Western countries, culturally compatible countries, were a net benefit." As Carswell noted, the study shows that when it comes to immigration you need to be selective. A no-brainer, of course, yet the antithesis not only of uncontrolled mass migration but also most self-defeating legal immigration policies in the West.

The study estimated that the Dutch government spent approximately €17 billion per year on migration in the period 1995-2019. In other words, more than one billion euros went to migration issues every month! Moreover, while annual net costs of non-Western immigration amounts to €17 billion, annual net benefits of Western immigration total one billion euros.

Distinguishing between Western and non-Western migration patterns, while conceding the complex cultural and economic factors at play, the study comes to a startling overall conclusion: if Dutch immigration remains at 2015-19 levels, the annual budget burden will increase from €17 billion in 2016 to €50 billion. An increase that the welfare state would most likely not survive.

Denmark

The Dutch study mirrored a similar study conducted by the Danish Finance Ministry, which concluded that non-Western immigrants are most likely to remain lifelong recipients of public finances compared to their Western or native Danish peers. Germany is much the same: about 45% of those who receive unemployment benefits are not German citizens, costing taxpayers around £20 billion a year. (In some European countries, immigrants are well-integrated into the labour market: 70% in Denmark, 60% in Poland and the Czech Republic, and 50% in the Netherlands, UK and Ireland. But in others, such as Germany and Austria, the number remains below 20%.)

Crime figures pertaining to Danish immigrants and their first-generation Danish offspring were just as predictable. A graphic presenting the "Proportion of men with criminal conviction by age 30, by country of origin" (involving men born in Denmark whose parents were migrants), reveals that 12 out of the top 16 were from Muslim countries. Kuwait topped the lengthy list of countries with 70% of Danish-born men with Kuwaiti parents having committed crime by age 30. Followed by Ethiopa (68%), Jordan (64%), Somalia (62%), Syria (62%); Uganda (60%), Lebanon (60%), Morocco (54%), Algeria (50%). By contrast, Danish-born men with Russian, Dutch, Swedish, Vietnamese, Thai, or German parents were at the bottom of the chart for convictions by age 30, constituting proportions of 25% or less. Danes themselves were last with 18%.

In the period 2010-21, the conviction rates among first generation Danish migrants relative to citizens of Danish origin, were far worse still! Again, Muslim countries dominate the chart, constituting seven out of the top 10 worst offenders, and 14 out of the top 23. Interestingly, though also hailing from a very different culture, migrants from India committed very few offences compared to Muslims. Law abiding Westerners were low on the crime list, with Americans, as well as the Japanese, committing less crimes than the Danes themselves. 

United Kingdom

Back home, migrants are 34% more likely to be arrested in connection with crimes than UK nationals, according to a recent study from the Centre for Migration Control (CMC), which is based on Freedom of Information requests sent to 26 police forces across the country. (The other 20 constabularies refused to provide the data, claiming that they did not routinely collect or collate data on the nationality of those arrested.):

The CMC report shows that in 2023, the arrest rate for British nationals was one per 94 individuals, meaning that for every 94 people, one arrest was made, though some individuals may have been arrested more than once.

Using data from dozens of police forces, the CMC projected that since 2021 there have been a staggering 369,000 arrests of non-UK nationals on Britain’s streets. This accounts for nearly 19% of the 1.96 million total arrests recorded during this period, exceeding the 16% of Britain's population that is non-UK born.

Almost 90% of the forces surveyed provided data showing that migrants are overrepresented in arrest statistics when compared to their overall population size.

[...] in some areas of England, migrants were dramatically overrepresented in arrest figures. For example, in 2021 in Cambridgeshire, migrants made up 48% of all arrests made.

The data shows that Humberside has the highest migrant arrest rate of all the regions analysed, with one arrest per 29 foreign-born residents.  [GB News, 14/9/24]

Robert Bates, the founder and Research Director of the Centre for Migration Control, claimed that these figures showed that "mass migration is making us all less safe." In his expert opinion:

There should not be a single individual coming to the UK and running foul of the law. The fact that we have seen over three hundred thousand foreign-national arrests since 2021 reveals the cruel damage that open-borders are inflicting on communities across our country.

This is literally mad. Countless lives have been ruined by criminals invited and welcomed into our country by a reckless political class who remain incubated from the worst excesses of the experiment that they have inflicted on the rest of us. Rather than listen to legitimate concerns of the public they have set about planning our nation’s funeral.

This should be the end of the debate. Mass migration has failed. It has not provided a scintilla of the economic growth that we were promised and has eroded our society into one of widespread distrust and unease.

OBR's killer stats

"At a time when European governments are carefully researching the fiscal and social effects of different profiles of migrant, the British state is publishing less, not more, data," lamented Conservative MP Nick Timothy. In May, Tory MP and leadership contender Robert Jenrick warned of a "data desert" around Britain's migration policy. Were British governments ever to gather such telling data from their own impartial studies, and widely publicise them, one-world open-border self-harm would give way to the honest debate required for a firm but fair immigration policy reset, thus avoiding future civil unrest.

On the rare occasions that official statistics do emerge to shine a critical light on mass migration and multi-cultural narratives, they are buried from sight.

All the facile and fatuous mantras that underpin the narratives, like 'diversity is our strength', must be protected at all costs lest the entire house of cards collapse.

Witness the recent report issued by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), the government's fiscal watchdog, which, as one commentator put it, "has blown to smithereens [the argument] that the sort of mass immigration we've been subjected to is economically justified." In other words, it has provided official confirmation of what we've always known. Namely, that the economic argument, on which the entire replacement project relies, is a complete and utter LIE.

No wonder this explosive data has been all but totally ignored by the press. The public was always assured that migration was essential to ensure a strong NHS, a supply of highly-skilled professionals, and so forth.  On the contrary, the OBR data proclaims that migration is not an economic necessity but an economic catastrophe. Just consider that at the age of 81, the millions of low-skilled migrants invited into the UK will cost each taxpayer £465,000 for each migrant. That is to say that from the time they set foot on British soil they are a net drain on the economy. And low-skilled migrants constitute the vast bulk of migrants.

The public has been conned, plain and simple. Successive governments of both parties have always stressed how vital it is to bring in engineers, doctors, scientists. But the OBR reveals that of 3.6 million visas granted in recent years, a paltry 0.8% went to doctors, and 0.6% to scientists and engineers. Only 12% of visas have gone to skilled migrants, just a tiny portion of whom are highly-skilled. Only 5% of migrants are net contributors to the economy, as highly-skilled earners: i.e., one in 20 migrants are contributing as a high-skilled earner.

Another of the principal lies/mantras of the immigration narrative that the OBR figures debunk is that 'Immigration is the backbone of the NHS.' It turns out that last year only 3% of immigrants ended up working in the NHS. The highly-skilled doctors among them constitute less than one percent.

While the OBR offers much more information besides, it clearly sensed the highly consequential nature of its own figures, fiddling the numbers where they could. For instance, the figure of £465,000 cited above, that each migrant costs each taxpayer over the course of their life, is actually much higher. The OBR did not include dependents in the total life-time cost of each migrant, which is of course a huge additional burden on taxpayers, especially as multiple dependents are usually involved. Other sleights of hand unworthy of professional statisticians also downplayed the extent of the crisis they uncovered.

Discussing the OBR report on The New Culture Forum, one member of the panel commented on the monumental and far-reaching import of these findings, obliterating as they do the economic falsehood at the base of the mass immigration pyramid [my transcript; original emphases]:

It's the lie over the past 30 years. Because it's a foundation [allowing] all the other lies to work. So if you can sell this, even though we know it's not true, we don't have to do data to prove it. If you can sell this then you can sell genderism, you can sell decolonisation, you can sell the desire to dehomogenise the culture — because [they believe] we need to be dehomogenised, and wicked white people need brown people coming in or people from different kinds of cultures.

So all of the stuff that is built on the fundamental lie, all of a sudden falls down. The problem is, it will fall quietly. Nobody will talk about it. The BBC, Channel 4, ITV, all of these outlets they're just going to let it go. Because it's fundamental to everything they believe. And this is what people do. They carry on with their beliefs. It's not easy to let something go. They'll just keep it quiet, and we'll carry on, and keep being fed lies.

Even so, in time, it will surely become ever more widely known that the promise of economic growth through migration, always utterly false to the naked eye and lived experience of the electorate, is now confirmed irrefutably by official figures which prove that low-skilled migration is in fact strangling economic growth, being a fundamental cause of the UK's low productivity (about which economic problem experts feign puzzlement rather than face migration facts — for fear of "racism").

Thus, having lived with the deterioration of neighbourhoods, segregation, incompatible cultural practices, housing shortages, crime, etc. etc., which were sold to them as trade-offs for the 'well-funded public services' that economic migrants were supposed to bring, public anger will only rise further upon realising that they have received no economic benefit whatsoever; only sky-high, unsustainable economic liabilities.

Camp of the Saints

Until that time of heightened awakening, Keir Starmer and the lying media will ensure that the lid is kept firmly on the facts of the matter, thus allowing false-charity, ever asserted by our hapless local hierarchy, political has-beens and celebrities, to deny natives and migrants alike the prosperous fruits of true and sustainable Christian charity.

The false-charity only serves to encourage human rights' lawyers, NGOs and those in power to repudiate obvious and essential deterrents needed to stem the tens of thousands of illegals crossing the Channel. Such as deportations, which together with cutting off free accommodation and other unaffordable and infuriating perks would send a charitably stern message that Britain is not a soft touch, thereby reducing crossings and the many consequent drownings of migrants (— tragic deaths which a complicit pontiff, bishops, politicians and bureaucrats attribute to everyone but themselves).

The election results had barely been announced, however, before Starmer cancelled with alacrity the Tory's Rwanda deportation plan. A decidedly uncharitable cancellation for all concerned but especially, as ever, for the ("far-right") taxpayers. Doubly aggrieved, they funded the unused migrant facilities in Rwanda that Labour has abandoned, and now shake their heads in dismay as Germany looks set to grab said facilities as part of its own Rwanda Plan! 

That darkly comic outcome and the whole array of ghastly globalists high and low contributing to the invasions would fit seamlessly into Jean Raspail's apocalyptic novel The Camp of the Saints (1973)in which he first envisioned the mass migration of the Third World to the First World. We may at some point run a review of this remarkably prescient work that weaves secularised social justice clerics into the fabric of a Western 'leadership' perversely fulfilled by the prospect of millions of invaders crammed onto ramshackle Third World flotillas setting sail on one-way voyages to their shores. These characters are mirrored today by the politically correct likes of Pope Francis, the Bishop of Salford, current and former 'Archbishops' of Canterbury, and ex-PM John Major.

As wet and mediocre as ever, Major, the quintessential company man, resurfaced puppet-like to display his culpable ignorance of both Christianity and the human and social costs of the invasion. On cue, he pompously and laughably announced that deporting criminal illegals was "not British" and "unChristian."

According to Pope Francis not only unChristian but a sin. And not just any sin but a "grave" one! On 28 August, addressing the few remaining faithful who bother to attend his Wednesday audiences in St Peter's Square, he declared on behalf of his globalist handlers (whoever they are):

It must be said clearly: There are those who work systematically and with every means possible to repel migrants – to repel migrants. And this, when done with awareness and responsibility, is a grave sin.

Oblivious to his own lack of "awareness and responsibility," he lamented that "seas and deserts" are becoming "cemeteries of migrants," adding: "the tragedy is that many, the majority of these deaths, could have been prevented."

That they could have been prevented if he had not encouraged the mass migration in the first place does not occur to him. Rather, oozing emotion and averse to facts, he asked his paltry audience to "pause to think about the people crossing seas and deserts to reach a land where they can live in peace and safety."

If he himself were to pause a moment and take advice from experts whose only agenda is the well-being of migrants, he would find that vast majority of "the people" to whom he refers are not refugees fleeing persecution but economic migrants: overwhelmingly young single men looking to live off Western taxpayers and very happy to admit the fact. 

Totally misrepresenting the situation, never bothering to make these vital life-saving distinctions, he pushes for even more open borders, strongly condemning anyone who takes steps to oppose the current migration insanity he facilitates from the papal chair — not just publicly but also, as is his wont, on the sly; e.g., Italy’s bishops giving millions to papal confidant’s illegal immigration scheme - LifeSiteNews, 4/12/23].

The zeal with which Francis flogs the issue is one of the most suspicious of all the myriad tell-tale signs of a papal alien in our midst. For, truly, one has to wonder yet again how Catholic is a Pope who simultaneously misleads Muslims into thinking we share the same God (unlike Saint Francis) while facilitating Islam's stealthy conquest of the West at the cost of death and misery for both migrants and the hapless peoples of their host nations: steadfastly refusing to distinguish between legal immigration and illegal migration, or to address the manner in which immigrants should be welcomed and acclimatise to the local culture. It would be much easier to stop calling him a globalist puppet if he would stop acting and talking like one: in this case promoting catastrophic levels of population movement of any kind at all in unison with the well-rehearsed false narrative of the one-worlders. This serves no-one but criminals and those who detest Christ and the Western civilisation He animated by his life, death and resurrection.

It speaks volumes about Christ's current vicar on earth that he clearly — desperately — needs a catechetical reset, starting with the Catechism's strictures on immigration:

[P]olitical authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions, especially with regard to the immigrants’ duties toward their country of adoption.

And again:

[I]mmigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws and to assist in carrying civic burdens.

In 2011, in his message for the 97th World Day of Migrants and Refugees, while quoting from John Paul II to defend the "possibility" for people "to enter another country to look for better conditions of life," Benedict XVI also defended the rights of the home nations to restrict such entries:

At the same time, States have the right to regulate migration flows and to defend their own frontiers, always guaranteeing the respect due to the dignity of each and every human person. Immigrants, moreover, have the duty to integrate into the host Country, respecting its laws and its national identity.

John Paul II wrote for the same occasion in 2001 that the exercise of the "right to emigrate ... is to be regulated, because practicing it indiscriminately may do harm and be detrimental to the common good of the community that receives the migrant."

The difference between these wise, humane, realistic and liberating principles — which, unlike Francis, speak for the Catholic faithful — and the weaponised, agenda-driven soundbites and clichés of puffed-up promoters of mass-migratory bedlam, is the chasm between Heaven and Hell.

Not that the globalist creatures would ever notice! They're too busy showcasing their narcissistic-suicidal empathy. As if to cry: 'Look at me! Aren't I kind! Aren't I one of the good people! Aren't I the most merciful of popes!'

One reviewer summarised Jean Raspail's farsighted explanation for their collective death-wish; proffered fifty years ago when self-important puppets like Major were common enough but a PC pope was unthinkable, and total control of global narratives were still embryonic academic/military projects:

As the Ganges Armada sails the Western elites are either starry eyed about their dream of a world in which there is no us and them — no nation states, just Mankind with a capital M — or paralysed by the one-world propaganda which has been so assiduously fed to them.

Even those members of the elite who do not believe in the One Worldism have developed the peculiar state of mind which arises when propaganda is not only incessant but gainsaying the propaganda is seen as dangerous. Such people do not embrace the content of the propaganda, nor play along out of abject and immediate fear. Rather, they sublimate the fear and develop a feeling that to rebut the propaganda is somehow wrong, although if asked they could not say exactly where the wrongness lay. The state of mind is akin to that of a person who feels that a sick joke is inappropriate if expressed in company even if it makes them inwardly laugh. In short, they have been conditioned to think of certain ideas and words as unclean for no other reason than having been told over and over again that these things are beyond the pale. As for the masses, they have variously bought into the propaganda, had their true feelings suppressed by the constant propaganda as described above or been censored out of public life.

How truly this describes today's de-Christianed and demoralised, propagandised and self-hating First World cargo aboard the Globalist Armada bound for the Apocalypse — where it seems due to arrive anytime.

Providence at play

Barring Divine intervention, of course. And despite our unworthiness we do perceive the merciful hand of Providence at work everywhere amid this devastating crisis. Not so easily discerned in the outcome of recent British, French and Polish elections but clearly evident, for instance, in the re-assertion of sovereignty to a greater or lesser extent by Italy, Hungary, and Holland.

The Italian PM for one is doing deals with Egypt and Tunisia to stop small boats packed with illegals at source, also offshoring migrants to Albania while their asylum claims are considered. Illegal migration has already dropped 62% in Italy. What a surprise.

The eminently sensible Albanian policy ensures that lawyers cannot play the asylum card that makes illegal migrants irremovable once they land — bearing in mind once again that the overwhelmingly majority of illegals in Italy as elsewhere are not refugees but migrants who have paid thousands to be smuggled and are absolutely determined to get their money's worth come what may.

This is why the UK's reckless and unsustainable welfare-'largesse' at the heart of the recent protests makes it such a desirable destination. This is freely admitted to journalists by the migrants themselves, 80% of whom are single men arriving from a safe European country, France, where they refused to claim asylum because French welfare handouts pale against Britain's. (Indeed the new French PM, Michel Barnier, is talking so tough on illegal migration that the smuggling gangs are reported to have already redirected their efforts to socialist Spain.)

Hungary is the most bullish of all, defending its border (and so its economy and beloved Christian culture) with vigour, repeatedly calling out the EU Commission and parliament. Brussels fined Hungary €200 million for breaking asylum rules, and a further €1 million per day until they fell in line, a penalty Prime Minister Orban denounced as "outrageous."

Observing that "illegal migrants are more important to the Brussels bureaucrats than their own European citizens," he gave them a taste of their own medicine. "If Brussels wants migrants," his Chief of Staff announced, "they will get them. We will give everyone a one-way [bus] ticket [to Brussels] if the EU makes it impossible to stop migration at the external border." They would do it, too! Refreshingly, unlike globalist regimes, the Orban government says what it means and means what it says, as here by Viktor Orban himself at a recent conference:

First, just to clarify the position of Hungary on migration.

It's true, that the number of migrants in Hungary: [forms a circle with his fingers] ZERO. And the reason is very simple.

We have a system, which is a fair system. We say that the border is a border. And to cross the border illegally, it's an illegal action. We can't accept that somebody illegally crosses the borderline, you know. It's a crime. It's not a human rights something. It's a crime.

So therefore, we treat everybody who is doing that as a criminal.

[My transcript; original emphases]

When all the obfuscating ifs and buts of bleeding-heart utopians are taken out of the mass migration equation, it's not rocket science, is it? God bless God-fearing Christian Hungary!

But wait, even socialist Sweden, renowned for its liberal attitude to immigration, and now paying a fearful price for it, is fighting back against the ever more aggressive EU dictatorship. There, a new conservative PM addressed an "irresponsible immigration policy" and emergency-level gang violence caused by "failed integration" with new measures that quickly yielded impressive results: immigration falling 15% year on year from January to May 2024; emigration rising by 60% during the same period. Asylum applications reached the lowest level since 1997 and asylum-related residence permits also fell.

In sum, 5,700 more people left Sweden than immigrated to Sweden — the first net emigration in 50 years. All it took was the political will to work for the common (rather than globalist) good: to introduce commonsense immigration and citizenship requirements that realise the will of the lectorate.

Things are so serious that border checks are also back in fashion, threatening to undo the EU's fundamental principle of "free movement." ("Germany begins conducting checks at all its land borders" - AP, 17/2/24)

Meanwhile, headlines in Britain tell a different story:

• "An anonymous civil servant writes that any suggestion migration be reduced is met with horror among staff at the Home Office." [The Telegraph, 15/11/23]
• "Civil servants express 'deep shame' and suggest they should 'resist' plans to ship refugees to Africa." [Independent, 22/4/22].
• "The biggest population increase in 75 years - driven by immigration, figures suggest - Extra 610,000 people during year ending in mid-2023" [The Standard].

All sweet music to one-world utopian ears, of course. But then, like Napoleon and his Animal Farm comrades, elite socialists like Keir make sure not to live with the fallout.

The British PM's recent lightning visit to confer with his Italian counterpart Giorgia Meloni, as if to garner tips on how to  stop the 30-40,000 illegals arriving in Britain every year, was purely for show. Katie Hopkins, whose journalistic career and personal life were ruined by a vicious Establishment when she got too close to the dark heart of political, financial and religious interests in migrant invasions, nailed the disingenuity and deceit that defines Starmer and his crew. On her 16 September podcast, the plain-speaking commentator was in no doubt that:

Starmer's meeting with Meloni is not to learn, or to understand, or to copy methods. It's to give the illusion of trying to do something about it. All the while, if anything encouraging the movement of more illegals, more profit for his banking masters, his political masters, more profit for himself. Because those who control the movement of human flesh, a slave trade unlike anything ever seen before, are the leaders of the major religions, the leaders of political dynasties, and the banking scions, and he global leadership. The movement of every pound of flesh, from Africa upwards,some of the profit from the flesh ends up in their pockets.

There will never be an Albania for the UK. Starmer will never offshore our illegals. He's not trying to control the number of illegals. He's only trying to control the headlines. Nothing will change. Nothing will happen. They had to have an answer-headline [i.e., the Meloni meeting] for the weekend's headline, which was 800 [illegals arriving] on Saturday, 500 on Sunday. This is a bit of excellent communication work by Keir's communication team. For that they should be commended. But for lying to the British people, they share part of that odious guilt of not doing what you are appearing to be doing for people whom you are supposed to represent. [My transcript; original emphases]

Far from mimicking Meloni, expect Starmer instead to grant mass amnesty for illegal migrants, and institute a constitutional right for migrants to claim benefits.

If the modus operandi sounds frighteningly familiar to us, imagine how familiar it is to Tony, Gordon, Mandy, Alastair and all the New Labour spin merchants (with whom you may reacquaint yourselves here, here, and here.) They must be beaming with pride at the first 100 days of their New New Labour protégé and his team. The Times said it all: Starmer calls in Mandelson to inject dose of New Labour's "winning mentality."

So, yes indeed, the "Bliar's" ruinous regime is back, de-facto: already soaked in lies, sleaze and self-interest, devoid of all substance and sincerity, and banging on endlessly about "change" without a thought for devastating consequences.

Trump 

God's mighty hand has also been at work during the two unsuccessful attempts, thus far, to murder the Deep State's bête noire Donald Trump: the businessman who so rudely disrupted their monopoly on presidential power. He threatens to do so once again — big time.

In view of his still massive popular appeal, all the more impressive before the Trump Derangement Syndrome endlessly cultivated by a U.S. Establishment fighting for its criminal life, anything less than another landslide victory will betray another attempted steal (in which huge numbers of illegal votes cast by illegal aliens for the Democrats will play a major role, as always).

Although, so pathetic is the calibre of his opponent and so abysmal her ratings that even cheating on the unprecedented scale of 2020 scale may not be able to save her — according to those who really know; unlike the lying media that gave Trump "zero" chance in 2016, covered up the grand theft in 2020, and are now inflating Kamala Harris' figures to make her seem competitive.

One such credible figure is the legendary financial and geopolitical-cycle analyst Martin Armstrong.

A survivor of murderous targetting by the same shadowy forces stalking Donald Trump, he predicted the second assassination attempt on Trump's life less than a month before it happened while insisting the Deep State would also do everything possible to trigger a war with Russia. "He was right on both counts," noted Greg Hunter of the USA Watchdog podcast.

Introducing his interview with Armstrong on 17 September, Hunter said:

All the chaos, debate fraud and push for World War III comes down to the Deep State knowing it cannot cheat enough to put Kamala Harris into the White House in November. Forget the phony polls where they all say Kamala is running neck and neck with Trump. Armstrong says his “Socratees” computer program shows Kamala’s real approval rating is around 10%, and all his computer models say Kamala is going to lose big in November no matter how much they cheat. Armstrong says, “Just about everybody in politics looks at Socratees now because its track record on politics has been phenomenal for 30 years. They know what is going on.”

Right before the first assassination attempt, Donald Trump came to possess a statue of St. Michael (via his son, Barron, thanks to the providential initiative of Fr. James Altman). Since the second failed attempt he has also very recently posted online the prayer to St. Michael. So if God sees fit to assign His Archangel to see him safely through to election D-Day, we should pray for this victory so confidently projected by Armstrong.

Even if unable to rescue us from the oligarchic structural fight that's going on, he would at very least disrupt their strategic 2030 agenda, to include the racist white-Christian-replacement operation, buying some precious time for America and the world. The degree of fear and panic evoked among elites by Trump's continuing presence on planet earth is reason enough to wish him well.

Just consider that five Trump assassination teams — three foreign-funded, two domestic — are known by the Department of Homeland Security to be currently operating on American soil, according to whistleblower information released on 19 September by Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz, and later confirmed by the Department of Justice. The DOJ subsequently advised that the assassination teams are competing for a bounty of $150,000 placed on Trump's head: a fact rather conveniently discovered in a letter-cum-manifesto written by the second assassin a month before his failed attempt to kill Trump on his golf course.

The reader might wonder why the DOJ, a thoroughly corrupt anti-Trump organ of the Deep State's permanent bureaucracy, would reveal the existence of this bounty when it routinely and steadfastly withholds shooter manifestos from the public?

Well, it could serve them in a few ways.

Firstly, it incentivises other bad actors to attempt an assassination.

Secondly, publicising the presence of these assassination teams, probably funded in whole or in part by the CIA, provides cover for the CIA themselves to do the job (e.g., a surface-to-air missile strike to blow Trump's plane out of the sky) and then blame it on the kill-squads — set up as patsies in classic CIA fashion.

Whatever the case, the homicidal scenarios represent the latest manifestation of Trump-induced high anxiety: desperation vented on 7 September 2016 by Hillary Clinton during a volcanic post-interview rant unleashed at the NBC television studios, after host Matt Lauer had dared to ask an unscripted question (heaven forbid!) about the illegal, private email-server she used when she was Secretary of State. As related by "an NBC associate producer" to media veteran Bill Still, a former newspaper editor/publisher, documentary maker and author:

[Hillary] proceeded to pick up a full glass of water and throw it at the face of the assistant, and the screaming started. She was in a full meltdown and no one on her staff dared speak with her — she went kind of manic and did not have any control over herself at that point. ... She really didn’t seem to care who heard any of it. You really had to see this to believe it. She came apart — literally unglued. She is the most foul-mouthed woman I’ve ever heard.

In fact, the unhinged rant was in keeping with her history (see, "Being Not Hillary", Oct./Nov. 2016, CO website). But the main takeaway this time, amid her expletive-deletive threats against her staff and Lauer, was her flagging of jail time for herself and her cronies if she were to lose the election. "If that f*****g bastard wins," she shrieked, "we all hang from nooses."

That Hillary and her local associates and cronies never got their just desserts (both because Trump was too conciliatory and the Deep State too powerful) did not remove their own trepidation or that of their foreign corporate and state partners in crime. We need only consider the endless other attempts to undo him: via wholly exaggerated or totally bogus accusations and contrived impeachments; through the greatest electoral fraud in the history of America and the free world that denied him the second term he most certainly won; and now the multi-national death squads roaming America.

They have reason to be fearful.

Trump repeatedly emphasised from the outset of his 2016 presidential campaign that "trillions" are at stake: astronomical ill-gotten gains tied up in human trafficking and globalist scams dependent on false narratives which, among world leaders, he alone endangers on a global scale: migration/open borders, the Green agenda, wars, misinformation/disinformation, digital IDs, CBDCs/cashless societies etc. (Of course we should pray that he will also be inspired under grace to reject, not just partially but to the hilt, other globalist narratives surrounding abortion, IVF, 'vaccines', and sodomy, to which he has succumbed.)

The paranoia is such that the Deep State's Big Tech arm tweaked their algorithms to bury all news of the first assassination attempt, seeking to wipe the historic event from public memory by cleansing their all-powerful, all-knowing search engines. Typically, when the Meta (Facebook) AI was asked, "Tell me about the assassination attempt on Trump," it replied: "I can't assist with that. I don't always have access to the most up-to-date information. Can I help you with anything else"! (Subsequently asked: "Tell me about Kamala Harris' campaign for president 2024", it provided full and comprehensive information on the Deep State's moronic puppet.)

In light of the two recent assassination attempts and news that he has survived other such attempts against him kept from the public, renowned journalist and investigative reporter Sharyll Attkisson asked Trump if he’s ever "scared."

In his reply, Trump alluded to Providence at play.

"I can’t be scared," he said. "Because if you’re scared you can’t do your job. I just can’t be. I have thus far had somebody protecting me."

Two-tier justice

We also see Providence at play in the two-edged sword we call the internet, via which truthful voices may still be heard despite ever more intense efforts by Western establishments to control it, and thereby silence every competing voice on earth that threatens their single narrative of events. In this Orwellian regard, Starmer immediately projected the government's routine provision of misinformation and disinformation (as so cruelly and relentlessly during Covid, not least by Starmer) onto those seeking to counter it. Outspoken views that once defined a free and democratic Britain were suddenly framed as dangerous crimes.

He reinforced his dictatorial histrionics by doubling down on the jackboot justice he surely watched taking shape during his stint as Director of Public Prosecutions and head of the Crown Prosecution Service (2008-13), and which now includes Soviet-like arrests for thought crimes (thinking unacceptable thoughts through silent prayer near abortuaries), and insane judgments of the sort that saw a man who merely posted up some stickers on the danger of illegal immigration being sent down for two years.

Instead of concentrating on the simple job at hand — real crimes committed by the inevitable contingent of genuinely violent protesters (some of whom had long criminal records) — Starmer compounded an already perverse criminal justice system with shameless arrests and unjust sentences merely for tweeting comments at odds with the official line, or "observing" the riots, or posting supposedly inflammatory memes, or endless other trivialities hyped up as threats to life on earth.

An impressionable young judge who clearly drank the "race-hate" Koolaid was videoed delivering one of the intimidating judgments demanded by Starmer [my transcript, original emphases]:

You've been committed for sentence, having pleaded guilty to an offence of publishing written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting, intending thereby to stir up racial hatred.
The context of your offence, is that it arises out of the civil unrest and disorder, in many parts of the United Kingdom. As is recognised on your behalf, this offence is so serious that an immediate custodial sentence is now unavoidable. Would you please stand.

The sentence that I pass has been reduced by one-third to reflect your guilty plea. The sentence is one of 20 months imprisonment. You will serve up to one-half of your sentence in custody, before you are released on licence. If you fail to abide by the condition of your licence, you can be returned to prison, to serve some or all of the remainder of the custodial term.

The victim surchage will apply. And I will make a collection order.

Please take him down.

Nigel Farage recently related a telling personal experience of a second-tier judgment that casts the politicised judgment above in its two-tier light [my transcript; original emphases]:

So there I was in Barnsley, campaigning in a General Election, and a lout, opposite side of the street, gets a cup, fills it with cement, lobs it at the bus that I'm on.... It was a very dangerous, provocative, violent thing for this guy to do. Luckily, some builders working on the site grabbed him, apprehended him. He was arrested. Today, he's been given a suspended prison sentence. He will not serve any custodial time at all. But you see, in Keir Starmer's Britain, if you put something intemperate on Facebook, after a couple of glasses of wine, he would have gone to prison. And that's the mess we're in.

Can you believe in the year to March, 147,000 people guilty of carrying knives, some of sexual offences, have been given community orders, which means they don't get criminal sentences. Our prisons are full. We're letting people out, who were violent offenders, to put Facebook offenders, thought speech, some of it not very nice, I'll accept, and to chuck them in prison for a short period of time. Law and order, crime, is out of control. We're even allowing people to shoplift up to £200 without being prosecuted. You simply couldn't make it up.

The double-standards are actually far more sickening still. One CO subscriber surely spoke for many readers, emailing his disgust at the swingeing, self-defeating sentences vis-à-vis Britian's workaday evils indulged and promoted by the likes of Starmer:

Man gets three years for entering a ‘migrants’ hotel’ (Premier Inn). A youth gets over a year in borstal to be brutalised & criminally hardened. 

A woman who ‘bought eggs’ (for the throwing of) — which she denies — is about to appear before the beak…. — probably to be banged up with drug-dealers, child-molesters, et. al.

MEANWHILE ... up & down the length & breadth of this once-fair land corrupted ‘medics’ are poisoning & dismembering innocent preborn babes, poisoning x number of pubescent girls with hormonal ‘contraceptives’ behind their parents’ backs, poisoning other youths, m&f, & eventually chopping off or ‘rearranging’ their private parts.

Where is Justice….?

What is sure — God will not be mocked for ever.

A reckoning is not far off.

Two-tier policing

In 2019, ex-military veteran and ex-cop Harry Miller suffered his own bout of jackboot justice.

After he posted views critical of transgenderism on social media an 'offended' third party in London reported him for "transphobic" tweets. He was then phoned by a workaday Orwellian thought-policeman ("a cohesion officer"!) who famously warned him: "I need to check your thinking."

 Tough as nails and very well informed about the law, the former policeman saw off the fascist constabulary and won his legal challenge against them.

Firstly, for twisting his perfectly lawful tweets (including a limerick!) into a 1984-esque 'crime non-crime' — officially a "hate crime" offence investigated as a "non-crime"!?

Secondly, for logging him on their records in perpetuity as a hate-monger. "I had been defamed without any evidence," he said.

The two-tiered hypocrisy at play was exposed by his lawyer, who revealed that "Keir Starmer said when he was Director of Public Prosecutions, in cases such as these ‘a swift apology and removal of the offending tweet’ should be enough."

Miller is now an outspoken campaigner for free speech and a fierce critic of the rising police state that our new woke PM and the criminal justice system have rocketed to new heights. Commenting on the current state of play, he said: "For me, I think the way the college of policing, and chief constables in turn, have been acting, is nothing short of treasonous. It’s a betrayal of everything that we, as people who live in Britain, stand for" [The New Culture Forum, 7/8/24].

Speaking elsewhere on the uneven application of justice and Starmer's brand of Marxism, he also pointed out the numerous examples of paedophiles and thieves walking free while tweeters are put away, citing the case of a Muslim who abused a 13-year-old girl being set free by a judge who felt he was naive in matters of sex!

Another former police officer interviewed on GB News (12/8/24) provided further shocking two-tier examples:

Look at Harehills [inner-city Leeds], a couple of weeks ago, when dozens of police officers were to be seen running away from brown-faced people who were throwing bricks. Then compare that with London, a couple of nights ago, when many many older white people were being slammed into the road and the pavements by police officers, in full public order kits, the crash helmets and suchlike.

"Isn't that inconsistent policing?" he asked rhetorically. 

Drooling over the opportunities afforded him by Starmer's partisan theatrics the Director of Public Prosecutions piled on, warning that just sharing footage of the riots online may be prosecuted.

"The consequences will be visited upon them," he salivated, relishing the prospect of criminalising those who simply get their facts wrong in a social media post, easily and innocently done in our age of info-overload.

The Free Speech Union noted that "The government’s disturbingly authoritarian reaction further blurred the distinction between speech and action, words and violence."

It is as if the landmark ruling and strong judicial words in favour of Harry Miller never happened.

Mr Justice Julian Knowles had pronounced that the effect of police turning up at Miller's place of work "because of his political opinions must not be underestimated ... To do so would be to undervalue a cardinal democratic freedom. ... In this country," he said, "we have never had a Cheka, a Gestapo or a Stasi. We have never lived in an Orwellian society."

... Until now.

McPherson: root of "anti-racism" and mistrust

In the first place, Starmer's jackbooted response only served to showcase the two-tier justice effectively recommended and subsequently insitutionalised by the 1999 McPherson Report: the lengthy end product of the inquiry into the police investigation of the 1993 murder of black teenager Stephen Lawrence by white thugs in South East London.

Starmer himself dealt with the case during his tenure as Director of Public Prosecutions. Notwithstanding its important work of exposing the corruption, racism and sheer incompetence of some police involved in the Lawrence investigation, the Report weaponised "race" and "hate", ultimately damaging the force far more than the age-old curse of bent coppers ever did.

It goes without saying that the revolutionary spirit of cultural Marxism saw McPherson also upend fundamentals of British justice.

This included the controversial abolition of "double jeopardy": which suddenly allowed those declared not guilty of murder in a court of law to be retried for the same crime if compelling evidence subsequently emerged. (Other serious crimes now qualify for the same treatment.).

More destabilising still was the anarchic morphing of "racist incident" into perceived racism — as adjudged by anyone at all! A recipe for perennial strife, the Report states that:

A racist incident is any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person.

This immediately enabled McPherson to designate the Metropolitan [London] Police Service (still the least trusted in the land) as "institutionally racist": i.e., systemically discriminating against non-white minorities. The devastating tag sent police services across the nation into politically correct overdrive. The claim of "racism" was internalised and is now proclaimed by its most senior officers.

The horrific extent of the reverse discrimination consequently suffered by majority white citizens of Christian faith or descent finally burst into the light when a governmental inquiry finally admitted the rampant sexual abuse of "white British children" by bestial Pakistani-Muslim grooming gangs in England.

Year after year, acting in plain sight with impunity (as they do across the West), the Muslim networks created a living nightmare for the young victims and their families as politicians, welfare bureaucrats and the entire criminal justice system (plus Muslim communities themselves) turned a blind eye to the unspeakable crimes, when they weren't actively colluding or covering up. (See Sola Koranica: 2, CO, March 2015). To them, corruption and physical abuse of white minors by brown minorities were preferable to accusations of "racism" for seeing equitable justice done.

(Given his forelock-tugging before the Muslim constituency, one wonders if then-Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer knew about this earlier monumental and monstrous travesty? If so, what did he do about it? If nothing, for fear of "racism", is his brazen denial of the very existence of two-tier justice, exemplified by the earlier treatment of the grooming gangs, the rationalisation of a guilty conscience? Just pondering.)

Twenty-five years after McPherson lit the "hate crime" fuse, a toxic mix of tick-box policing and woke officers fearful of the "racist" slur has public trust in the police at rock-bottom levels. Concrete crimes go unheeded and unpunished as they accumulate as many so-called Non Crime Hate Incidents (NCHIs) as they possibly can, casting "hate speech" dragnets and knocking on doors on the back of any and every complaint, however flimsy, ludicrous or anonymous, that subject those accused to dreadful ordeals.

"Someone just says they’re offended and you get a policeman coming around," stated the barrister who successfully defended Harry Miller. A police record is then kept, and may be revealed as a ‘hate’ incident on a DBS (Disclosure and Barring Service) check, even if comments were innocuous and no crime was committed.

Ominously, The Free Speech Union reports that police recording of NCHIs has risen over the past 12 months despite the previous parliament legislating to bring the number down. A virulent outgrowth of McPherson's subjective "anti-racist" drum beat, NCHIs are guaranteed to confuse, infuriate, and worsen rather than improve policing and community relations. The FSU provided this representative example:

A man reported that when he had tried to deposit a large amount of cash at a bank, staff, following anti-money laundering protocols that apply to all customers, questioned the origin of the money. The complainant took exception and became angry as he believed this was due to his ethnicity. Although the matter related to banking processes, the force initially recorded it as an NCHI. Following investigation, the officer dealing with the case concluded that it shouldn’t have been recorded and that the force should close the matter. However, a crime reviewer later incorrectly reclassified it as a racially aggravated public order offence, committed by bank staff. Eventually, after a further review, the incident was declassified as a crime.

What an almighty divisive mess! Although in this case, unlike untold numbers of other equally innocent punters, the bank staff were not door-stepped, harassed or wrongfully arrested by police.

The headlines reveal the outcome of this dystopian pass: UK has lost respect for police, says Home Secretary in wake of riots. [ITV, 12/8/24]. Only 40% of people in England trust their police force, research reveals. [The Guardian, 18/4/24]"

On top of the "racist incident" free-for-all it triggered, McPherson embedded two-tier justice in its perverse recommendation to eradicate the very "colour blindness" that ensures fairness and equity in the criminal justice systems of vaunted "multi-cultural" societies. The Report says:

Colour blind policing must be outlawed. The police must deliver a service that recognises the different experiences, perceptions and needsof a diverse society.

One podcaster decoded this woke-speak. What it really says, is: 

Black people, and Middle Eastern people, feel really bad. They feel really bad when you police them for committing crimes. They don't like being arrested, funnily enough. So don't do that.

He hardly exaggerated.

First-tier Muslims

Among other jackboot-justice sentences handed down on the back of Keir's meltdown: a man has been sent to jail for 18 months for sharing something "offensive" that someone else said on Facebook, another man was sent down for three years for posting "anti-Establishment rhetoric," and a third man was jailed for 18 months for chanting "Who the f*** is Allah?".

Apropos the latter sentence — for a perfectly natural but crudely worded query that Muslims may find blasphemous — we could not imagine in our wildest dreams a similar judicial reaction to an actual blasphemy hurled against Jesus Christ: the Creator and Saviour of the world and the living source and foundation of peace and justice properly understood. The sentence reflects Starmer's close affiliation with the Muslim establishment and determination to depict them as victims and treat them with kid gloves at all costs. Reporting for LifeSiteNews, Frank Wright noted the implacable race-card and glaring double-standards:

In one of two questions, a U.K. reporter gently suggested that government policy and the outrageous [Southport] murder itself may explain the "motive" behind nationwide civil unrest. Starmer replied, "It doesn’t matter."

Starmer vowed instead to "protect Muslims … and those attacked for their skin colour and their faith" as he erased any context except racism for the motives of the outraged.

"This is not [a] protest," he said. "It is organised violent thuggery, and it has no place on our streets or online."

Strongly condemning attacks on "places of worship," he said nothing of the 150 churches which have been burned down in the U.K. between 2017 and 2022. Disgusted by the "violence … of far-right thugs," he has recently promised three billion pounds per year to Ukraine, and he stated in October 2023 that Israel "has the right" to cut off food and water supplies to Gaza in its ongoing genocide. He denied saying this later, despite being recorded doing so.

So far, his government has not suspended arms sales to Israel.

As one concerned citizen pointed out on X, the state denouncing violence against itself has "made up a virus, injected people with poison, divided societies … destroyed the economy whilst simultaneously robbing it," saying that these are "the same people who are … allowing your country to be invaded & are trying their hardest to start World War Three."

By contrast, Starmer’s no-context remarks erase the past and present actions of the liberal globalist order he represents.

Hence the non-response to Muslims beating up police at Manchester airport at the time of the protests (breaking the nose of a policewoman). Or to Muslims laying siege to a Manchester police station shortly after the airport violence, throwing eggs at it while police barricaded themselves inside.

Were any Muslims at all charged for this (or for that matter, for defiling national monuments during the pro-Palestinian protests)?

And again, there were no Starmer hysterics about the chanting Muslims waving machetes in Stoke, who descended on a crowd who ran in fear of their lives?

(Note: Reporting the Stoke incident on 3 August, the BBC ignored the machete-wielding Muslims but were sure to note that: "Islamophobic chants could be heard on the same video footage.")

And what of the leader of the leftwing activist group "Hope Not Hate" who posted false allegations of acid attacks on a Muslim woman?

Or the imam who threatened the entire nation, warning one and all on social media : "You will see big protests, I promise you, protests like you've never seen before."

Nary a cross word from the new PM about any of that, never mind arrests and severe sentencing for incitement.

This inequity is not surprising. Hailing from the same socialist stable as Napoleon and Squealer, Animal Farm-'progressives' like Starmer and his comrades apply "unacceptable", "intolerable," "unjustifiable" and "racist" rather more selectively and expediently to non-white minorities, especially those to whom they are electorally beholden. Like the homosexual lobby, Muslim support for Labour is overwhelming, a whopping 85% in 2019, which buys a lot of leverage in the corridors of power and lends itself to a two-tier system. Indeed, as I wrote those very words this latest concrete example landed in my inbox:

Christian street preacher Hatun Tash has won £10,000 in costs and damages from the Metropolitan Police after being arrested, strip searched and unlawfully imprisoned for wearing a Charlie Hebdo T-shirt at Speakers’ Corner.

In video footage of the arrest crowds of Muslim males can be seen chanting “Allahu Akbar” while mocking, jostling and filming the diminutive Christian evangelist as she is frog-marched away by police officers.

Over the past few years, Hatun, an ex-Muslim convert to Christianity, has regularly been targeted at Speakers’ Corner – punched, stabbed, slashed, spat at and knocked unconscious by Islamists.

Speaking after her payout, Ms Tash said that she had been “dealing with two-tiered policing for years” and that a “Muslim mob” that gathers regularly at Hyde Park Corner seems to be “above the law”.
- The Free Speech Union, 27/9/24

Subversive networks and intel

The political underpinnings of this impunity stretches beyond Islamic electoral support, going all the way to the corridors of bureaucratic power which Muslims are making their own. On 13 April 2024, GB News produced an eye-opening report on a disturbing development that explains a lot about the direction of the country:

A Home Office Islamic Network aims to recruit Muslim staff and "influence policymakers" to support "Muslim needs", a GB News investigation can reveal.

Leaked documents show the group of over 700 civil servants say they aim to "promote the recruitment, retention and progression of Muslim staff in the Home Office" and “influence policymakers so that policy is more inclusive of Muslim needs”.

GB News has seen a list of their aims, published on an internal Government website, which also include to “promote a clear understanding of generic Islam", “Provide advice and guidance to senior civil service management on religious issues that affect Muslim staff” and “Facilitate and support Home Office engagement with external stakeholders from Muslim communities”.

So, pushing for Muslim interests "against the interests of the native population holding different ethnic cultural ties, and a completely different and antithetical religion to these people," commented Connor Tomlinson, reviewing the GB News report on The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters. 

According to the leaked documents, the network was set up in 2005. It does not allow non-Muslim staff to become full members but associate members only. "Often, motivated Muslim groups are only one, or a couple of spheres removed from actual terrorists. And yet they're not the ones monitored, they're the ones setting policy," Tomlinson reflected. "So it is an ethnic and religious protection racket setting policy within the Home Office."

A Home Office whistleblower agrees, telling GB News:

Having an Islamic lobby group inside the Home Office represents a serious threat to the government's aims in combatting Islamic extremism and granting asylum to those fleeing Islamic countries over religious persecution. The network has already produced pro-hijab propaganda which it sent to asylum-seeker decision-makers in the Home Office, and explicitly states that it aims to support their religious goals.

Readers will also be interested to know about the wholesale manipulation and gaslighting of the public apropos Islam. Tomlinson explained that:

The Home Office and RICU [the Research Information Communications Unit within the Home Office] conduct PR campaigns in the aftermath of Islamic atrocities, to reduce the backlash against government policies, including mass immigration, and an increase in the Islamic population, as well as the codification of their privilege to be immune from criticism in law, with Islamophobic blasphemy laws, and with preferential treatment, with finance by the Bank of England, making them immune from things like stamp duty tax when buying a house.

According to GB News:

Internal RICU documents seen by Middle East Eye say the Unit is working "at an industrial scale and pace to develop messages that 'effect attitudinal and behavioural change, particularly among Muslims.' The involvement of the UK government is rarely acknowledged.

In operations that contingency planners term "controlled spontaneity," politicians' statements and individuals and inter-faith events are also negotiated and planned in readiness for a terror attack. The campaigns have been deployed during every UK terrorist incident in recent years, including the London Bridge attack in 2017, and the Finsbury Park mosque attack that took place two weeks later. Within hours of an incident campaigns are swiftly organised, with posters designed and distributed according to the location of the attack. Plans are drawn up for people to hand out flowers at the scene of the crime and apparently unprompted gestures of love and support.

The purpose of these operations, according to a number of people involved in their creation, who spoke to Middle East Eye,      is to shape public responses, encouraging individuals to focus on empathy for the victims.

In other words, comments Tomlinson, "'don't look back in anger' or point fingers at the faith and ethnic group that the attacks indubitably came from. You have to wonder just how psychopathic the intelligence assets that tell families to do that really are? Telling families to affirm the multi-cultural narrative publicly while the bodies of their loved ones are barely cold."

Deeper and darker

In order to make informed decisions in these anarchic End Times the sort of information and commentaries presented above are vital food for thought if we're not to become sitting ducks.

However, while I've packed in as much as I can, readers well versed on the topics covered will know that it barely touches the surface of horrors like the all-pervasive trafficking of children — the dark and frightening core of globalism and its mass migration agenda. In which regard, given his unspeakable track record of coddling paedophiles and other sexually deviant clergy it is not surprising that Francis pays mere lip service to child-trafficking in the course of pushing open borders, since, like the drownings, he facilitates the former by promoting the latter.

Beyond the mass-abuse of women, children and infants, much more could also be said about other mass migration horrors engulfing America. Along with untold thousands of known terrorists and fighting age Chinese and Muslims 'migrants' now dispersed like sleeper cells all across the country, consider the horrifying prospect of satanic South American drug cartels eventually wending their way to Europe and Britain.

In America's case they 'migrate' up from Venezuela with untold millions of people, smuggling many (even while raping and molesting them) through the Darian Gap, the perilous 60-mile jungle path that connects South America with Central America.

Once waved across the U.S. border they avail of the money, food and hotel accommodation doled out UK-style to illegals while homeless American citizens in the same vicinity live in unimaginable squalor.

They then stake out their turf, sometimes taking over entire apartment complexes and running them as criminal dens. Recently driven out by the gangs and told not to return, Denver apartment owners were left high and dry by their politicians and law enforcement (after the treacherous fashion of politically correct PMs and UK police chiefs pushing multi-culti "inclusion" and "diversity" for all but the fed up and excluded white-Anglo majority).

I won't go on. The point is that far more information and data, revealing a far worse predicament than I have had room to convey, is available online for those who want to know, and have the time, patience and stomach to research.

Regardless, like patriots everywhere, Brits don't need to know every last detail about the population replacement operation to find it unacceptable and unsustainable. Their lived experience on their own patch cries out against the sinister agenda: ever more division, conflict, unease and fear in neighbourhoods which, if not paradise, were not hell.

Epic hypocrisy and self-serving

As for the reaction of the new PM to the eruption of righteous public resentment fuelled by having multi-culturalism and migration invasions stuffed down our throats, it broadcasts above all his implacable commitment to shutting down all opposition to the panoply of divisive communistic agendas aimed at finishing off the few foundations of Christian civilisation that remain, upon which the common good of sovereign nations once securely rested.

In effect, he has laid down in no uncertain terms his commitment to "fundamentally change" the United Kingdom along the same devastating lines as his partners in neo-Marxism Tony Blair and Barack Obama.

The latter, who was raised by card-carrying Communists before being trained as a Marxist (Alinskyite) "community organiser", finally proclaimed his intent to "fundamentally change America"; a programme he duly set in train on behalf of his socialist sponsors and handlers, and which his Democratic Party has since taken to the next suicidal level. (See The Obama Transition – Parts 1 & 2, June-July & Aug-Sept, 2009).

Whether Keir Starmer himself can survive very long at his current Blairite-level of sleaze and scandal remains to be seen. Certainly, headlines and opinion polls indicate the end is already nigh. Whatever the case, as long as he does survive, in true New Labour fashion he promises to be the very opposite of his promise: viz., to be a "force for good." For that would surely include orchestrating national unity, which he split asunder at the outset of his premiership; flaunting in the process his Olympian-level hypocrisy when measured against his support for the rampant Marxist Black Lives Matter mobs in American and Britain several years ago.

Back then, in 2020, despite perpetrating crimes infinitely more shocking and violent than our recent unrest, Starmer first praised the "BLM movement" for highlighting "anti-black racism," then literally bowed to said "movement" as he 'took the knee' during George Floyd's funeral. All the while, pillaging BLM hoards were committing arson, rapes, murders, bashings in all 50 states and Washington DC, leaving cities aflame and 19 dead in just 14 days of protests alone, wreaking more death and carnage over the ensuing months and causing billions of dollars of damage.

When the local arm of BLM wreaked simultaneous havoc around Britain only two people received light sentences, despite 135 arrests in 200 BLM violent riots nationwide (labelled "protests" by the media) that injured 27 police officers. Typically, four people were cleared of criminal damage after rolling an Edward Colston statue in Bristol into a canal (said statue being later replaced with a statue of a BLM activist with a raised fist).

As with the extreme American violence, Starmer stood shoulder to shoulder with the out-of-control "protesters," issuing a mealy-mouthed condemnation of violence while oozing empathy for "the movement," much like far-left London Mayor Saddiq Kahn, who said: "Violence is unacceptable but I stand with you and share your anger and pain. This vital cause was let down by a tiny minority who turned violent." A response at total odds with the hysterical condemnation and brutal treatment of those who attended or supported the recent righteous protests that were light-hearted romps in comparison.

The double-standards are off the chart because Starmer has abandoned his country. After all, as a member of the cosseted ruling class — a member of the NWO's Trilateral Commission, no less —  he has publicly stated his preference for attending the World Economic Forum in Davos over participating in parliamentary proceedings at Westminster, viewed as "too constrained," "closed," without "meaning," a "tribal, shouting place" where nothing gets done. Whereas, Davos offers him a platform for "engaging with people" and building relationships with influential figures (viz., transnational elites pushing globalist agendas). This places his already scandal-ridden tenure, involving lucrative/compromising perks and donations from wealthy sponsors, in broader self-serving perspective.

In any other rational era, when the desire for national self-preservation through national independence imbued national life, his Westminster put down alone, made in Davos itself on 18 January 2023, would have disqualified him from holding any political office, never mind the highest in the land.

For such a man the choice between a select transnational body and a less exciting sovereign one is obvious. Rubbing shoulders with the super-elite is so much easier than the hard democratic work of building relationships with a sorely tried British electorate by "engaging" with those who, unlike Keir and his privileged ilk, live at the sharp end of unsustainable immigration quotas and the criminal migration invasion.

And so, with Davos pushing open borders one can understand his dictatorial "far-right" demonisation of the "tribal, shouting," Westminster-like hordes: the hoi polloi who dared to decry the intolerable outcome of destructive policies amenable to his wealthy friends and associates. Ditto his failure simply to differentiate between reasonable protests and regrettable riots.

The flagrant insincerity and self-serving all bespeaks a man sure in the knowledge that a lucrative post-government sinecure (à la Blair) awaits — as long as he stays on globalist message.

In the meantime, besieged on all sides, we do well to turn to Sacred Scripture, where God's view and handling of rampant sin and injustice is directly related by His prophets. By recalling His constant presence, vigilance and protection in every age, we will maintain our hope and resolve amid the relentless and furious war being waged against us in our age.

For, while we find summary jackboot justice dished out liberally and brutally in the Old Testament, the jackbooters have their day, but always feel the providential pain of God's boot in the end! Oremus!

 

FOOTNOTES:

(1) Full discussion at: https://www.infowars.com/posts/witness-to-massive-child-smuggling-breaks-down-on-air

 

Back to Top