An immigration crisis made in Whitehall

Yet again illegal immigration is in the headlines, and yet again the British government seems unable to protect our borders.

Yet this time no-one can blame the European Union, indeed the blame lies in Whitehall (and to some extent indirectly in Washington).

The latest waves of immigrants heading across the English Channel are disproportionately Iranian. Why?

There is no human rights crisis in Iran and no war displacing ‘refugees’. The push and pull factors here are twofold.

Firstly there is an economic impulse. As part of his pro-Israeli and pro-Saudi foreign policy (so far undisturbed by the Saudi authorities’ brutal murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul last October), President Donald Trump has scrapped the nuclear deal previously welcomed by most western governments (including the UK) and reimposed economic sanctions on Iran.

Brutal Saudi godfather Prince Mohammad bin Salman remains a U.S. ally despite the murder of a Sudi journalist inside the country’s Istanbul consulate

In characteristic fashion the U.S. government has bullied its allies (including the UK) into collaborating with these sanctions. Inevitably this has had economic effects, so some Iranians have decided to become ‘refugees’ (i.e. economic migrants).

These migrants know also that for political reasons the British government automatically grants refugee status to Iranians the moment they arrive on our soil: there is no requirement to prove any well-founded fear of persecution. Iranians are never returned home by our immigration authorities, whatever the circumstances.

Thus the craziness multiplies: a poorly thought-out Trump policy is compounded by a propagandistic ‘human rights’ policy. The losers are long-suffering British taxpayers, as the present crisis effectively signals a green light not only to Iranians but to a wide range of potential economic migrants and ‘people smugglers’ who will be encouraged to take their chances across the English Channel.

U.S. Mid-Term Election Results Mixed, But Demographics Doom Republicans

(by James Knight for H&D)

The mid-term elections took place on November 6 in the United States. They were seen – correctly – as a referendum on President Donald Trump. In general, the results point to some trouble ahead for Trump. Despite a very strong economy, complete with low unemployment, Republicans lost control of the House of Representatives. They are now down by about 37 seats to the Democrats. On the other hand, the party increased its control of the Senate by one and now hold a two-seat lead in that chamber of Congress.

 

Most parties in power get defeated – often quite badly – in the mid-term elections. Trump’s losses are somewhat less that those suffered by Presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama in 1994, 2006 and 2010 respectively. Democrats had a significant advantage in fund raising as almost all of Hollywood and the ultra-rich US elite support “The Resistance” against Trump. And nearly every single close election recount had Democrats winning over Republicans, which was almost certainly due to election stealing/tampering (more common in the US than many suppose).

The demographics of the election show the usual breakdowns. Non-whites voted for Democrats with the following percentages:

Blacks – 90%

Asians – 77%

Hispanics – 69%

Actually, Trump did slightly better among non-whites in 2016 than previous Republicans such as Mitt Romney and John McCain.

Among whites, Republicans only won by a margin of 54% to 44%. White men broke 60% to 39% for Republicans while white women were split 49% to 49%. The fact that so many whites decided to vote for Democrats is a big warning sign for Republicans. For years, the Republican party has been drifting toward becoming the party of white people. With roughly 80% of non-whites voting Democrats, and with the electorate getting less and less white with every election, the writing is on the wall for the GOP. Unless Trump can get the white vote up to 60% Republican in 2020, he will likely lose reelection.

Donald Trump pursuing the white working class vote in West Virginia during his 2016 presidential campaign

Working class whites in states such as Ohio, Michigan and Pennsylvania gave the election to Trump in 2016. This was due to his stance on issues such as immigration and trade and his populist rhetoric on economic issues. This base has been slowly drifting away from Trump in the last two years.

Likewise, the Dissident Right, which also came out for Trump in 2016, has been disappointed with his performance in the last two year. Ann Coulter routinely calls out Trump on Twitter for his tough talk but inaction on a border wall, birthright citizenship and stopping caravans of illegal immigrants. Gregory Hood of American Renaissance is even more blunt:

“President Trump has governed like a moderate, while speaking like a hardliner—the worst possible combination. He has done so unnecessarily. One struggles to recapture the sense of the 2016 campaign. In retrospect, it seems like something out of Homeric times, with almost supernatural forces intervening in the affairs of men. Everything had to break Donald Trump’s way; Hillary Clinton had to make every possible mistake. Somehow, everything happened exactly the way it had to, leading to one of the most remarkable upsets in American political history.

During both the primary and general election, candidate Trump seemed to run as much against the Republican as the Democratic party. Some of his promises had cross-party appeal—notably his calls for a massive infrastructure program and his pledge to protect certain entitlements. His health care proposals were admittedly vague, as he simultaneously promised to repeal Obamacare and replace it with “something great.” However, because President Trump had directly attacked the policy preferences of Republicans such as Speaker Paul Ryan and free-market institutions such as the Club for Growth, it seemed reasonable to believe he could lead the GOP away from the unpopular, wonkish economic policies that had little appeal outside the Beltway Right. The victory of President Trump was a victory for right-wing critics of Conservatism Inc., as he showed that its support for a liberal immigration policy, an interventionist foreign policy, and slashing entitlements had no real support among the conservative grassroots, let alone the larger public.

Yet since taking office, with rare exceptions, President Trump has governed like just another Republican. The president’s first major legislative initiative was a disastrous attempt to replace Obamacare. It is not surprising that President Trump did not have a specific “great” plan regarding healthcare, yet the conservative establishment’s failure to provide a workable alternative to Obamacare is testament to its uselessness.”

Conservative columnist Ann Coulter, once a pro-Trump campaigner, is now a critic

Demographic Realities

Since the election, the press has been making much of how demographics are turning formerly red states (Republicans) into blue states (Democrats). This is entirely due to mass immigration. The US takes in over 1 million legal immigrants every year. About 90% of these people are non-white.

My own Congressional district in northern Virginia (VA-10) is indicative of this. It went for the Democrats for the first time in 40 years. Conservative Republican Frank Wolf won the seat in the Reagan landslide of 1980 and didn’t relinquish it until he retired in 2014. That year, moderate Republican Barbara Comstock (who favors high immigration) won the seat by 16 points (56% to 40%) over her Democratic challenger. In 2016, her margin of victory was only 5.5 points. This year she lost by a margin of 56% to 44% to liberal Democrat Jennifer Wexton.

While there are many reasons for her loss, the main one is this. In 2008, VA-10 was 80% white. It is now 65% white.

Virginia used to be a rural, Southern and conservative state. It is now less than 56% white. Republicans have not won a state-wide election since 2009. This same trend is about to turn once solidly red states such as Georgia, North Carolina, Florida, Arizona and even Texas blue. Orange County, California (outside Los Angeles) used to be perhaps the most reliably conservative district in the nation. It was the home of Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan. Yet it now has all Democrat representatives in Congress.

In terms of the 2020 elections, President Trump still has time to right the ship. Building his promised border wall with Mexico would be a great first step. He has also mentioned ending birthright citizenship (where children born in the US – even to illegals – are automatically given US citizenship) and affirmative action. If his actions can match his talking and threats, Trump can win reelection. But after 2020, demographics may permanently sweep the GOP away at the national level.

James Knight writes from increasingly vibrant northern Virginia.

Illegal immigrant ‘army’ arriving in UK every year

A new report reveals that the illegal immigrant population of the UK is rising by 70,000 each year – equivalent to the size of the British Army – and contributing to a steadily increasing total which has now reached more than a million.

More than 105,000 illegal immigrants turn up each year, with only about 35,000 leaving the country each year as our grossly overstretched border forces struggle to cope. This means a net annual increase of around 70,000.

Police forces have been heavily brainwashed by political correctness, and simultaneously suffer from inadequate training in how to enforce immigration law. Moreover the National Crime Agency reported in May this year that “corrupt public and private sector workers” were helping gangs to facilitate illegal immigration. Small seaports around our coastline are particularly vulnerable to exploitation by immigration racketeers.

Think tank Migration Watch urgently recommends that “funding for immigration enforcement should be boosted by around £100 million. There should also be a major boost in the amount of support and training provided to HO staff.” Migration Watch also warns that “attempts to ‘weaponise’ the Windrush issue in order to destroy sensible border controls should be firmly rejected”.

 

 

 

 

The real victims of Windrush

Sajid Javid, the UK's first Asian Home Secretary

Sajid Javid, the UK’s first Asian Home Secretary

The (Dis-)United Kingdom has its first Asian Home Secretary, after the appointment of Rochdale-born Pakistani Sajid Javid this morning.

This follows last night’s political drama, when Amber Rudd resigned – not because of the epidemic of knife crime. not because of the uncontrolled flood of illegal immigration, but because of the technical ‘offence’ of misleading parliament in the massively hyped Windrush ‘scandal’.

The true scandal of course is that (beginning with the arrival of the former troopship Empire Windrush in 1948) British towns and cities were transformed into multiracial environments – without British voters having any say in the matter.

Yet for the last few days British ministers have been falling over themselves to apologise, not to several generations of our own people whose interests were betrayed, but to a handful of Jamaican immigrants who couldn’t be bothered to obtain proper documentation (such as a UK passport) at any time in the last few decades, so now find themselves unable to prove their legal right of residence.

The technical issue that forced Amber Rudd’s resignation was her department’s ‘target’ for deportations.  Sensible Britons are baffled as to why there should be any question of delay in deporting illegal immigrants: but the media and Westminster insiders are constantly cringing before the pro-immigration lobby. Ms Rudd was questioned in front of a parliamentary committee last week and denied that the Home Office had any deportation target.  Then on Saturday a leaked letter from 2017 showed Ms Rudd informing the Prime Minister of her intention to increase the deportation target by 10%.

Aside from the historic betrayals over seventy years since the arrival of the Windrush, Theresa May’s government needs to get a grip over continuing immigration from outside the EU, presently totalling more than 200,000 each year, the equivalent of a city the size of York.

As immigration expert and former ambassador Lord Green wrote a few weeks ago, Home Secretary Amber Rudd “has shown no interest at all in concrete steps to reduce immigration. That may be because, as an economic liberal, she is sympathetic to the pre-emptive cries of alarm from industry. But employers’ claims that a reduction in immigration for lower-paid work would harm the economy are simply not supported by the evidence. Indeed, large inflows of cheap labour may have hindered productivity growth, while they have certainly disincentivised training of UK workers by employers. Meanwhile, in 2014/15, the working age benefit bill for EU migrants in the UK was over £4 billion or about £12 million per day – a huge sum.”

Will Sajid Javid – himself the son of a Pakistani immigrant – be likely to respond to the justified concerns of Lord Green, and the clearly expressed views of most British voters on immigration? H&D will be watching our new Home Secretary, but we shall not be holding our breath in anticipation of a new immigration policy, or even a serious implementation of existing policy!

Anti-immigration party’s new gains in German capital

afd-berlin

The anti-immigration party Alternative for Germany (AfD) – which has only existed since 2013 – has won seats for the first time in the regional parliament of the German capital Berlin, polling 14.2%.

This continues a remarkable run of gains for AfD, most notably earlier this month when it pushed Chancellor Angela Merkel’s CDU into third place in the north-eastern region of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern.

Berlin was always going to be much tougher territory for AfD, so 14.2% here is a very great achievement, even though the party is in fifth place behind the socialist SPD, the CDU, Greens and far-left Die Linke (Left Party). Western Europe’s capital cities are all more left-wing than the rest of their countries, with higher ethnic minority populations: Berlin in particular has a strong left-wing element dating back to the early 20th century.

In the long term perhaps the most significant aspect is that the so-called “grand coalition” – a deal between SPD and CDU (similar to a Labour-Tory pact) – lost so many votes that it will no longer be able to govern the Berlin region.

The SPD (who remained in first place with a reduced vote of 21.6%) will probably now seek a new alliance in Berlin’s regional parliament with the Greens and the Left Party.  In the long term this is very good news for AfD, as it heralds a more honest politics that could undermine Merkel’s coalition with the SPD at national level.

For the first time, a window of opportunity is visible for AfD to achieve some share of power next year: for many conservatives within Merkel’s party will begin asking – if the SPD can form coalitions with the neo-communists in Die Linke, why shouldn’t conservatives look for a coalition with the anti-immigration AfD?

 

One-third of asylum claims come from illegal immigrants or visa overstayers

longtermmigration

The Home Office has officially admitted that one-third of all claims for political asylum are made by illegal immigrants or those who have stayed in the UK beyond their legal visa limit.

Rather than applying for asylum at the earliest opportunity – as one would expect from a genuine refugee – these people only raise the question of asylum when they have been apprehended by immigration officers, often while working illegally.

During the decade from 2004 to 2014, 231,100 asylum applications were received: of these, 83,912 were from people who had been apprehended by immigration staff, either as illegal entrants or as overstayers.

Surprisingly, almost one-quarter of these were nevertheless granted either asylum or an extended leave to remain.

Even Labour MP Keith Vaz, chairman of the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee, admitted to The Times:

“The very principle of seeking asylum is that you feel persecuted at the time you arrive, not saying you feel persecuted after arriving illegally or for different reasons and then remaining in the country until you are apprehended.”

entryvisas

Official figures for 2015-2016 show that the largest number of UK entry visas granted during 2015-2016 were to visitors from China and India/Pakistan.  There were 92,715 visas granted to Chinese visitors, and 92,327 to India and Pakistan combined.  While there would be many legitimate Chinese tourists, students or business visitors among their total (which was a 22% increase on the previous year), one wonders about the 14,231 visas granted to Nigerians (though this was a 25% decrease on the previous year, partly because of a crackdown on illegals).

By contrast far smaller numbers of visas (whether for tourism, study or work) were granted to travellers from White countries: 21,605 to Australians; 34,276 to visitors from the USA;

In 2014 an undercover BBC investigation revealed widespread abuse of the student visa system.

National Front victory in Dover

Around 200 nationalists attended a very well organised National Front demonstration in Dover against the tide of immigration, which has already created a crisis across Europe and yet again threatens our shores.

NF demonstrators defeated the red rabble in Dover yesterday

NF demonstrators defeated the red rabble in Dover yesterday

Anti-fascist thugs attempted their usual tactics of violent disruption, but this time the forces of red reaction were decisively defeated on the streets of Dover by the NF and allied nationalists from various groups.

Kent Police failed to secure the streets of Dover, so NF activists did the job themselves – very effectively!!!

Congratulations to the National Front and all brave patriots who turned out in Dover yesterday.

Richard Edmonds addresses the NF's anti-immigration demo in Dover yesterday

Richard Edmonds addresses the NF’s anti-immigration demo in Dover yesterday

kent nf banner

 

One of the defeated “anti-fascists” posted this report to an anarchist forum:

We can’t kid around or attempt to save face, or obscure the truth for propaganda purposes, AFN (Anti-Fascist Network) were destroyed in Dover today. Six Comrades went to hospital, and if wasn’t for the police it would have been a lot more. We were outnumbered and outgunned by the Fascists, who were up for a fight from moment one, and had the sufficient mix of booze and steroids to be essentially unstoppable.

I did not think it had to be impressed on people the importance of opposing genuine white nationalists making a demonstration at an immigration detention centre, but as 3 half empty coaches left from London it was clear I was wrong.

Today was a massive victory for the far right, for the ones on the street and the ones off it. Those who were there today felt the rush of victory for the first time in years, and for those on the far right that have been convinced that there is no point to street demonstrations, today will have changed this for many of them.

I am afraid today, that within the context of the ”migrant crisis”, Dover will mark a real resurgence in far right street politics. A street filled with fascists will never be one that is safe for anyone, especially those without white skin.

From this moment on we all must take all fascist demonstrations extremely seriously, and we need everyone that is physically able to attend all future demonstrations. If you are truly in ”Solidarity with Refugees” then you need to be stopping fascists from going to immigrant detention centres, not walking around London. Fascism, never again!”

I got fucking pelted with bricks in a carpark by Nazis as a 100,000 smug liberals marched through London, fucking disgusting.

UK border controls in chaos

New data obtained by the Sunday Telegraph from the Home Office under the Freedom of Information Act shows that thousands of illegal immigrants are disappearing through the UK’s inadequate border control system every year.

Particular weak points in the system include the Eurostar train service from Lille, and UK ports handling coach loads of visitors.

During the past year, the newly released official figures confirm that 3,527 immigrants absconded after failing border checks: of these only 846 were later found.  This of course means that almost 2,700 illegal immigrants remained at large even after having once been caught!

The above figures clearly do not include those illegal immigrants who managed to slip through the net without being caught at all, nor does it include asylum seekers, bogus or otherwise.

With the system in such chaos, the UK’s borders remain vulnerable to potential terrorists, though in any case such cases are usually recruited from within ‘British’ ethnic minority groups.

While large ethnic minorities remain in Britain’s towns and cities, illegal immigrants will easily find a pool of similar types among whom to hide, and with whom to find work.  A multi-ethnic Britain is inevitably a haven for illegal immigrants, including terrorists.

Marxist “slave” cult carried out “anti-fascist” assault

Prof. Hans Eysenck (above) was violently attacked in 1973 by an “anti-fascist” mob, one of whose leaders has now been accused of keeping “slaves” in his London home.

Earlier today London newspapers caught up with the news first revealed shortly after midnight last night on this website: naming the chief suspects in the sensational London “slavery” case as Marxist cult leader Aravindan Balakrishnan (known on the 1970s far left scene as “Comrade Bala”) and his wife (known as “Comrade Chanda”).

Police spokesmen had earlier stated only that Scotland Yard detectives’ rescue of three women – allegedly kept as slaves for thirty years – was linked to a political organisation.  Late on Sunday evening the Telegraph website gave certain details (though without naming the group concerned). This enabled H&D to identify the case as relating to a Maoist commune in Brixton known as the Workers’ Institute, which broke away from the Communist Party of England (Marxist-Leninist) in 1974. We were therefore able to break the story in the early hours of this morning.

Once the news had broken on our website, Scotland Yard’s press department confirmed to London journalists that the suspects were indeed Comrades Bala and Chanda, who had been living with their remaining Marxist cult members in “social housing” provided by Lambeth Council for more than three decades. The London Evening Standard labelled its story about the couple as an ‘Exclusive’, though in fact we had been the first to publish it here at H&D the previous night. The Daily Mail then published an online version, much of it blatantly lifted from our article.

Click here to read our original story about the Marxist “slave” cult.

Police and social services are now facing many questions about their knowledge of Balakrishnan and his gang since the 1970s.

In particular, Heritage and Destiny is interested in a violent attack on Prof. Hans Eysenck, while he was giving a lecture on “Current Theories of Intelligence” at the London School of Economics, on 8th May 1973.  This attack was carried out by about two dozen members of the CPE (M-L), including Balakrishnan who was then a leading activist in this Maoist group. (He split from them a year later.)

Prof. Eysenck, then 57, was widely demonised by the left and “anti-fascist” groups because of his views on the genetic role in intelligence.  Similar demonisation has been practiced against organisations such as American Renaissance and writers such as Jared Taylor and Dr Roger Pearson.

“Comrade Bala” and his fellow hoodlums pulled Prof. Eysenck to the floor, where he was punched, kicked and spat upon.  He was left with broken spectacles and cuts to his face, and was later treated at the Maudsley Hospital, Denmark Hill.

The Maoist gang, who included several bussed in from Birmingham, went on to attack some of their fellow leftists. One of the leaders of the Birmingham gang was Paul Rowe.

Loyalist commandos from the UVF identified INLA terrorist links to Balakrishnan’s fellow Maoists.

The CPE (M-L) – both during Balakrishnan’s involvement and after the 1974 split – did not confine its violent proclivities to punching middle-aged academics.  In July 1975 they were exposed by the Ulster loyalist journal Combat as the “most violent Communist organisation in the UK”. In March of that year members of the Ulster Volunteer Force had discovered letters from Paul Rowe and other members of the group to Michael Adamson, a terrorist from the Irish National Liberation Army (INLA), whom they had just shot dead at his home in Clifton Road, North Belfast.

Ironically Adamson had been identified following a tip-off from his former comrades in the so-called “Official IRA” after a split in the Marxist wing of Irish republicanism the previous year. The INLA and its political wing (the Irish Republican Socialist Party) went on to develop very close ties to violent “anti-fascists” in England and Scotland, which have been documented in several Heritage and Destiny articles.

All of this goes to show that Balakrishnan and his ilk should have been very well known to the British authorities. So if the latest police charges concerning “slavery” prove accurate, why was he allowed to get away with it for so long? Did it suit the British state to indulge violent “anti-fascists” with Irish republican links?

And why on earth was Balakrishnan effectively subsidised for so long by the hard-pressed ratepayers of Lambeth?

UPDATE: One of the CPE (M-L) recruits at the London School of Economics, where the attack on Prof. Eysenck took place, was a young Welsh law student called Sian Davies, whose daughter is the youngest of the alleged “slaves” in the current criminal investigation. After the 1974 split Sian Davies followed Balakrishnan and his faction into the Brixton commune, where she remained until her mysterious death after falling from an upstairs window on Christmas Eve, 1996.  The Daily Telegraph, ITN News and the Daily Mail have just posted reports about Sian Davies and these will doubtless appear in the print editions of Tuesday’s papers, though like other mainstream media sources they are (so far) too shy to mention the British Maoist cult’s involvement with violent anti-fascism and Irish republican terrorism.

By the way, the latest Telegraph report, in suggesting that Balakrishnan had joined “the Communist Party” in the 1960s before forming his cult, reveals a pretty basic ignorance of the British political fringe, and the Daily Mail is equally wrong to suggest that he was part of “an English branch of the Communist Party”.

What he joined was not the long-established pro-Moscow Communist Party (CPGB) or anything to do with it, but a pro-Chinese (and hence anti-Moscow) group founded by an Indian Maoist called Hardial Bains. The London wing of the international movement founded by Bains was called the Communist Party of England (Marxist-Leninist), and as we have explained Balakrishnan was one of the leaders of the CPE (M-L) until breaking away in 1974 to form his Brixton-based Workers’ Institute commune.

The fundamental enmity between the CPGB and the CPE (M-L) was reflected in their relationship to Irish republican terrorism.  While the Maoists (as explained above) were for a time close to the Irish National Liberation Army (INLA), the pro-Moscow Communist Party would have backed the group from which INLA broke away – the ‘Official IRA’ (commonly known as the “Stickies” because of the stick-on Easter Lilies they sold to commemorate the 1916 Easter Rising).

UK immigration backlog ‘tops 500,000’

The latest report from the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee reveals that the UK’s backlog of unresolved immigration cases is now more than 500,000 – at the present rate it would take more than 37 years to clear!

This new scandal comes just four months after the scrapping of the UK Border Agency, which was officially responsible for handling immigration cases.  Home Secretary Theresa May has created two new departments to replace the UKBA, one dealing with visa and immigration applications, the other with enforcement action against illegal immigrants.

The Committee questioned why the UKBA had paid more than £500,000 to outside consultants during the last three months of 2012.

We suspect that our readers could tell the Home Office much more quickly and cheaply what has gone wrong with immigration policy during the 65 years that have transformed our country since the arrival of the Empire Windrush.

They could start by taking (belated) notice of what their own official experts were saying – right from the start of the UK’s fatal multiracial experiment.

Prof. Sir Hubert Henderson, chairman of the 1949 Royal Commission on Population

In 1949 the Royal Commission on Population, appointed by Clement Attlee’s Labour government, reported:
“Immigrants on a large scale into a fully established society like ours could only be welcomed without reserve if the immigrants were of good human stock and were not prevented by their religion or race from intermarrying with the local population and becoming merged with it.”

Four years earlier another Labour linked team of experts had spelled it out in a Fabian Society pamphlet, Population and the People:
“Men and women of European stock, between the ages of 20 and 30, are the immigrants best suited to assist population policy.  …The utmost care should, of course, be taken to admit only those physically and mentally sound, and free from criminal records, who will introduce a sound stock into the country.  The eugenics of immigration cannot be overstressed.”

In 1952 Home Office civil servant J.A. Tannahill, in an official review of refugee policy, commented:
“Apart from offering occasional hospitality to comparatively small groups of refugees (of whom the best-known are perhaps the Flemish weavers of the fourteenth and the French Huguenots of the seventeenth centuries) Britain is not by tradition a country of immigration.”

It’s time for a return to that tradition!

 

Next Page »

  • Find By Category

  • Latest News

  • Follow us on Twitter