Is Whitehall planning to replace Britain’s native population ?

Muslims believe that secular rule is blasphemy which is why imams must have the final say over our laws, not the Queen or Parliament

Once again the Foreign Office without the consent of the people, is planning on repatriating large numbers of enemy combatants and their dependents to Britain.

Sixty orphaned children, the dependents of dead parents of whom a number may well have run murderous ISIL camps in Syria, have now arrived in Britain. To soften us up to this we were treated to touching scenes of toddlers being led to safety by caring, white, hands. Many, many more refugees will follow, few of whom will fit the charitable criteria of the sixty children.

The scheme to bring them here is another Trojan horse in what appears to be a relentless population replacement operation overseen by Whitehall. There is now talk of letting in families of terrorists, mothers and children, followed by their dependents and eventually the terrorists themselves under amnesty? As I write Sir Mark Sedwill Britain’s National Security Advisor and ex head of the Civil Service has said such fighters could be repatriated if proper measures could be set up to dealt with them. One suspects such measures will probably not involve trials. The courts will be too busy trying our own troops.

Why? There appears to exist an assumption among our betters that brown is better than white, Islam better than Christian, and that foreign soldiers and terrorists who have waged war on us are to be given amnesty for their awful crimes. This is in contrast to the treatment of our own troops who are to be thrown to the legal wolves at every opportunity.

In 2016 under the guise of rescuing abandoned children from refugee camps in Calais the Home Office managed to import twenty to thirty year old men along with them. At first it was thought to be an administrative blunder, but it soon became clear that a cover up operation was in progress. Among the real child refugees were ‘children’ aged from nineteen to thirty five who were rushed past reporters draped in blankets to conceal what in less tragic circumstances would be an hilarious political pantomime.

Things became even more comic when the same ‘children’ demanded razors and shaving gear on arriving at their adoptive parents’ homes. Act three of this pantomime saw the same ‘children’ seated in school among eight to ten year olds and now three years later it is still going on.

What is behind this madness ? Class war. Those in power have never been happy with ordinary people being given the vote, but as long as the latter voted Labour, they did not object. Labour is as much part of the establishment – those who dine on that ever tasty dish, political power – as the most gouty old hanging judge on the Queen’s Bench.

When the working class deserted Labour in the eighties for grocer’s daughter Mrs Thatcher the gloves came off. She offered the lowly property rights and a means of climbing the political ladder to power and influence. They had to be kept out. Enter ‘New Labour’s’ Mr Blair and mass immigration

Hundreds of thousands of Somalis, Pakistanis, Indians, Arabs, South Americans and Chinese began to arrive subject to only the most cursory immigration checks, if at all. Millions are now here. It became illegal to object to this population change just as when the Germans invaded France it was dangerous to as much as raise an eyebrow on passing a German sentry in Paris. Fear has entered our minds.

Brexit was a last attempt by the common people to regain their sovereignty It is not an argument about a 4% tariffs on Belgium vegetables, 5% on German Pilsner, or 2% on BMW tyres it is about who should rule, those we elect through the ballot box or a self appointed self serving, self enriching oligarchy. We now have rulers who are out to destroy us. The seeds of revolution have been planted.

Liked this Blog ? Why not post it to a friend ?

Subscribe To Quarterly Traditional Print Magazine (delivered to your door)

31 Comments on Is Whitehall planning to replace Britain’s native population ?

  1. If these orphaned children or young adults really are to be given the chance to flourish and become decent citizens then everything about their background must be disregarded. Adoptive parents must be chosen for proven moral and intellectual quality, not on ethnic or religious grounds.

    As to the adults who are as unlikely to changed their stripes as zebras are, indefinite internment is the only answer: they declared the war and must pay for defeat.

  2. Far too complicated. The Corbyn Party has promised in one of its utterances to build 100,000 houses a year, needing a large number of builders, possibly 100,000, to carry out the building work. When they, and their families have been housed, the chances are that the net increase in housing stock will not have increased by much.

  3. I agree but the seeds of revolution were sown many years ago in the sixties and have grown, like Japanese Knotweed, into the very fabric of our country. If a proper Brexit fails, the winning referendum vote to leave the E.U. will be the last hurrah of the English people.

  4. “It became illegal to object to this population change”.

    Really Myles? When was that exactly?

    Do you have any evidence at all for any of the other extraordinary assertions in this piece of hopeless oppression porn, particularly the ludicrous paragraphs 3 and 4?

    I guess not. If you genuinely believe all this I think you need to seek help. Either that or get off your arse and do something instead of writing this shit.

    • I like the bit about help. After Stalin’s bloodbath , 70 million killed, the left has kept so quiet about this hero of theirs, those who came after him tried to medicalise dissent. I recall visiting the psychiatric hospitals in Moscow after the collapse of socialism I was a reporter and the horrific things I heard. We are going the same way, To object to Islam is a disease, Islamophobia, Transphobia, homophobia etc . Like a dog to its vomit, socialists invariably return to oppressing those who oppose them, by jail, torture or drugs and worse

    • Are you unaware of the number of people who have been dismissed or silenced for expressing views that are deemed hate speech because they criticise a protected social or religious group? Compare those cases to those reported almost every day on Guido Fawkes and nowhere else (yes, every day) of Labour councillors and prospective MPs who make outrageous statements about Tories or Jews, especially Jews, and with impunity.

      ‘Oh, shush, you can’t say that’ is something you hear too often these days in perfectly reasonable discussions about crime, sexual abuse, attacks on women, ancient hatreds or religious stupidity.

      Freedom is like the earth’s atmosphere. No one notices how much they depend upon it till it’s gone.

    • Over 3,000 people are arrested each year in the UK for ‘offensive’ comments posted online. Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 criminalizes online speech that can be deemed ‘grossly offensive’ by the courts (without any requirement for a prosecutor to prove that there was any intention to cause offence). Many of these people were merely arrested for expressing, one might say, negative feelings towards immigrants and immigration.

      And then there are those prosecuted for the ‘crime’ of inciting religious or racial hatred, but which again is most typically used against people who have done nothing more than voice their opposition to immigration and the way it can impact on the communities in which they live. For example: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-49853039

  5. Dee Kedd

    Your subtle choice of nomenclature goes right over out heads of course.
    That last sentence reveals your true self in all its “glory”.
    Should a Banter Merchant such as yourself really be on this site?

  6. Dear Myles, you write a good but deeply saddening piece, the truth of which we can all see.
    The recent kerfuffle over the film Blues Story, directed by Andrew ‘Rapman’ Onwubolu, and lest we forget, produced by the BBC, is an indication of how the new-establishment view white Britons, in that what started as a riot in a cinema involving machetes, soon became a story about that (in the eyes of the new-establishment) much greater crime of ‘institutional racism’ by the owners of the cinema. In another example of modern madness the BBC when interviewing Sajid Javid accused the Tories of fielding ‘Islamaphobic’ candidates, because Anjana Patel the PPC for Brent North had suggested that Islamists didn’t treat Hindu girls well. In other indications of the lunacy of relativism, rap/grime/hip hop performers and other modern poets are interviewed with reverence on Radio4 arts programmes as if they were the very reincarnation of W B. Yeats,Philip Larkin, or John Clare. I sometimes see a smartly dressed Indian man taking his two happy looking children to the local church service, and wonder what he thinks about all this.
    I sometimes feel like Chingachgook in ‘The Last of The Mohicans.

    • Do you happen to know what this film is about or why children would attend it with weapons? Does it make out stabbers are really victims or what?

      • As an outsider, suffice to say that England is the ideological platform of the world. For better or worse, the debates held here have influenced pretty much the entire world. It was true in the centuries past. And, it is true now. The issues of this election have salience in many other countries major and minor. Hope the voters realise that.

        • No, sorry, a lot of the voters are thick and believe any old lie they’re told about scary foreigners.

          Worse still, they’re utterly selfish and don’t give a shit how much inconvenience they cause to others.

          Sorry.

          • Berry

            You may have a position but it’s not necessarily correct, or even moral. Suffice to say only in those constituencies of opinion which are heavily politicised is there a heavy inclination towards vindictive anti-Englishness, disguised as anti-colonialism or anti-racism. Or one particular religious ideology. “This is payback for colonialism” is an argument (empty) often heard amongst those who have least to do with the England of today. The reason why England takes the rhetorical heat from such ideologies more than other societies is simply because the English are the most free thinking people in the world. Take England, and you have little by way of ideological opposition from the rest of the world.

            The voter in England must understand this.

            From way out here, the salient question seems to be “Do the English have a privileged right over their country?” Your answer is your political position explained. I seem to think they do. Like everyone does over their own.

        • Dear Krishnan,
          You make a very good point debates in the US, UK, Canada, and Australia, effect the philosophical and ideological stance of the world (particularly the English speaking world). A loss of confidence, or perceived loss of confidence(from what now passes as the leadership class), in values that have held good for many years, does not look like thoughtfulness, and insight but like weakness, and self doubt. Kipling, as ever, recognised the danger: “We have no heart for the fishing – we have no hand for the oar –
          All that our fathers taught us of old pleases us no more.”
          Best Regards
          R

  7. Dear Michael, from what I understand, it is about the friendship between two men with a background in (black) gang violence, here is the trailer for it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5askXpPvUeA . I suspect as ever, that any implicit warning message about the consequences of such a lifestyle, will be lost on those, like the young men who rioted in Birmingham, who will see only the potential riches of being a gangster, and, as they will see it, the easy power that comes from carrying a pistol.
    Regards
    R

  8. Whitehall and our selected political leaders receive their orders from the EU, which is the Western regional office of the UN. The UN is the globalists’ politburo.

    It seems appropriate to quote Clive James: ‘Is this the end of (Western) civilisation, or the thing that will replace it?’

  9. I am so glad that someone publicly speaks out what is actually on my mind and I believe, on minds of many others. Thank you Salisbury Review.

  10. Our beloved editor writes:

    “What is behind this madness? Class war. Those in power have never been happy with ordinary people being given the vote, but as long as the latter voted Labour, they did not object. Labour is as much part of the establishment – those who dine on that ever tasty dish, political power – as the most gouty old hanging judge on the Queen’s Bench.”

    I think you’re mistaken in your implicit identification of “ordinary people” with the lower classes. Most middle-class and upper-class people are also ordinary enough to be victims of the Parasitical New Élite. (The upper classes have been perpetual victims since the notorious Lloyd George Budget a century ago.)

    And if you think there’s anything comparable to “gouty old hanging judges” on the Queen’s Bench today, you’ve failed to notice the cultural-marxist conquest of our ancient and mildly benevolent legal system.

    There is indeed a kind of “class war” in Britain, but it’s a war between a new class (the Parasitical New Élite) and ALL the traditional classes.

    • Amen to that! And, in a way, our freedom of action in society has been usurped by the institutions that were set up to serve the public but who are now our masters.

      • Another Peter Simple comment from 1973 in The Stretchford Chronicles.

        ——————————————————- O ———————————————–

        UP TO DATE

        “The principle defect of the industrial way of life, with its ethos of expansion, is that it is not sustainable. Its termination within the lifetime of someone born today is inevitable”. This is the basic message of “Blueprint for Survival”, published by The Ecologist’ magazine, organ of what must, I’m afraid, itself be called the “ecology industry”.

        Readers of this column will know that it has been the basic message of the column from time immemorial. It is amusing in a way, to find that it has now passed from the hands of cranks, misfits, reactionaries, and hand-loom weavers and become the property – and since we live in an expanding industrial society, the quite valuable property – of perfectly serious, respectable people.

        Since these people are mainly scientists, they believe that every “problem” has a “solution”; even this one. So they propose various remedial measures – a deliberate slowing down of “growth”; decentralisation; population control and so on.

        There are two objections to this view. One: with the nature of mankind as it is now, these measures could not be possibly be put into effect. Two: an attempt to put them into effect, though doomed to failure, would involve the imposition of a universal tyranny more merciless than any yet imagined. We should have the worst of both worlds.

        What then is the “solution”? Is it not possible that within the terms of what scientists think of as reality there is no solution?

  11. >…now talk of letting in families of terrorists, mothers and children, followed by their dependents and eventually the terrorists themselves…Sir Mark Sedwill Britain’s National Security Advisor and ex head of the Civil Service has said such fighters could be repatriated if proper measures could be set up to dealt with them.

    If so, they should be settled in camps set up next to Sir Mark Sedwill’s house. And in refugee camps in Worth Matravers, as near to Nick Phillips’ house as possible, and in Canterbury, as near to the Cathedral and Welby’s house as possible

  12. I think the core problem here is that ISIS fighters who originated from this country haven’t actually committed any type of crime under UK law. In fact, the only group of Britons who can be lawfully tried in this country in respect of ‘crimes’ committed on foreign soil are … British service men and women, as I think Myles has pointed out a number of times.

    Of course, the right way to deal with captured ISIS fighters in Syria is to hand them over to the brilliant eye surgeon President Bashar al’Assad and who can arrange for their execution.

    Anyone going to a foreign country should reasonably expect to subject themselves to the law of that country.

1 Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. Is Whitehall Planning to Replace Britain’s Native Population? - Technical Politics

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.