Silent Majority Speaks
Rescuing Democracy in the United Kingdom from our current Elected Dictatorship
|
Spin,
not face-to-face confrontations with the voters, is the
Government's chosen method of communication. Ordinary people
are dangerous. Ordinary people might ask a question which
throws a politician 'off message'; the Cabinet member might
reveal himself or herself to be a human being like us, and
not a programmed android. Worse still, he or she might tell
the truth.
Ann Leslie - Daily Mail, September 16, 2004
Blair wants to leave his mark on
history - looks more like a stain to me.
Peter Thorndyke, Diss, Norfolk
- Daily Mail, May 23, 2005
I know I'm me - why do I need an
ID card?
"Sorry, officers, I don't have
an ID card. I never applied for one. It seemed a bit steep
at 300 quid. I do have my free passport, my driving licence
and my London freedom travel pass, each with my photograph.
I have my NHS medical card, with its lengthy number, given
me at birth, my RAF service book with my Armed Forces number,
and a chit authorising me to wear a few gongs -including
a General Service Medal with Malaya bar, for fighting communist
terrorists on behalf of my country, or so they told me.
"I've also got various credit cards and
store cards, all with my signature on the back, generally
good for buying the everyday requrements for life as well
as the odd luxury. If you decide to arrest me, I suppose
I'll have to be photographed and given another number, besides
my PINs.
"I'm afraid I haven't got a pension book;
it was taken away."
"By thieves, sir?"
"No ... well, not exactly. By the Government.
By the way, may I see your warrant cards please, gentlemen?"
Oh dear, they've disappeared. E. Harry Gumer,
Romford, ESSEX - Daily Mail, June 1, 2005
NO means NO
When does NO mean MAYBE?
When it's not the answer the EU wants. With the courageous French
NON resounding in their ears, shabby, undemocratic self-interested
leaders of Europe propose ignoring the part of their precious
constitution that requires ratification by all members and
continuing without one of the biggest founder members to
prevent derailing the gravy train.
As in Ireland, they refuse
to accept any NO votes, ignoring the will of the people,
and re-stage votes until they can engineer the 'correct'
answer. Sadly, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw dances to their
tune like a puppet on a string. With tactics such as these,
how can anyone really believe the EU has our interests at
heart. Letter from Steve Penny, Kingsnorth, Kent - Daily Mail, June1,
2005
Surely the French
result makes the £1million the EU recently spent on
a treaty signing ceremony seem a trifle premature and extravagant.
Letter from Keith Wiseman, Bury, Lancs. - Daily Mail, June1,
2005
|
Britain has traditionally
been one of the biggest net contributors to the EU because
we do not get as much money back from Brussels in farm
and regional subsidies as our rivals.
According to Treasury
figures, between 1995-2002, Britain's average contribution
taking the rebate into account, was £2.6billion,
or £43.55 per head of population.
The French - the biggest
recipient of farm subsidies - contributed £1billion
a year or £16.08 per head of their population.
|
|
Tony
Blair should know that respect comes by example - from the
top. If a country's leader has no respect for the rule of
international law and no respect for the truth, how can
he expect anyone to have respect. Letter
from P.J.Atkinson, Ashford, Kent - Daily Mail, January 12,
2006
The
Chancellor's single greatest act of vandalism in almost
nine years in office has been his wanton destruction of
Britain's private retirement industry. By slapping a massive
tax on pension funds, now worth
£7.3billion a year, he has helped to turn
the best private retirement industry in Europe into a basket-case
in perpetual crisis. Together with the adoption of European
accounting rules - which make it much riskier to operate
a company pension scheme - hundreds of firms have shut their
final salary plans to new employees and slashed benefits
to existing staff. From
Allister Heath: "I've seen the future and its grey"
in THE SPECTATOR - April 15, 2006
Nine
years ago the British people were sold a fantasy of clean
and competent government of principle and honesty. Its shiny
wrappings stripped away, the product now reveals its true
nature: Personal greed, arrogance, incompetence, shamelessness,
rash warmongering and an inability to accept - as is clear
to almost everyone else - that it is time to go. Editorial
- The Mail on Sunday, May 28, 2006
|
May
23, 2007 (1453 days since war ended)
Death
Toll: 3432 US - 149 UK - >1,000,000? civilians - 25 media
June
27, 2007 (1488 days since war ended)
Death
Toll: 3567 US - 153 UK - >1,000,000? civilians - 25 media
This
site has had 
visitors
Mass
immigration is radically changing the character of our nation.
So why has it taken a wet cleric to point out the truth both the
craven Tories and Labour dare not face?
BY
Max Hastings - Daily Mail, June 26, 2007
Leading
the Church of England demands moral gymnastics that would equip
archbishops for starring roles with Cirque du Soleil. On gays,
women priests, abortion, war and poverty, successive primates
have demonstrated a genius for contortionism.
There is scarcely a great issue of the day which our religious
leaders fail to dodge, swinging nimbly from trapeze to trapeze.
This helps to explain why the poor old C of E is in such a bad
shape.
If
a sect appears neither to hold nor to demand from its followers
clear beliefs, it is hardly surprising that trade falls off. As
Archbishop of Canterbury from 1991 to 2002, George Carey was the
embodiment of decency and ineffectuality, the wets' wet. Churchill
described prime minister Ramsy Macdonald as The Boneless Wonder.
He would have been lost for an epithet if confronted with George
Carey.
Yet,
suddenly, and as so often happens after a man retires, Lord Carey
has found a voice. Speaking on Radio 4's Sunday programme, he
urged Gordon Brown as Prime Minister to restrict immigration.
Sinner
"The
issue will not go away," he said. "I hope he will impose
stricter controls on those entering the United Kingdom."
AMEN,
most of his listeners will have muttered, after themselves sounding
the same alarm for years. Many, I suspect, also said to each other:
'Why couldn't he have said that while he was Archbishop?'
Why
not indeed? Yet we welcome the sinner that repenteth, and we know
the answer. Churchman want to be seen to adopt 'Christian' attitudes.
Forgetting all the bloodcurdling policy statements in the Bible,
they identify Christianity with reflex liberalism. The liberal
establishment thinks that it is a sin against God and man to close
Britain's doors in the face of outsiders, and especially against
the poor and oppressed.
Lord
Carey was at pains on Sunday to qualify his remarks about immigration
by calling for clemency towards asylum seekers. He want it both
ways: to reflect the views of most of his British flock, who know
that further curbs are essential; and to add a 'compassionate'
footnote to avoid falling out with his friends.
Yet
there is no case for weasel words. The reality facing this country
is simply stated. An almost unlimited number of people from poor
countries, and from societies where they are oppressed and threatened,
want to come to Britain.
Restriction
At
present they are arriving in numbers which threaten out social
stability and the capacity of communities to absorb them, and
indeed promise to change the character of this country.
By
the Government's own projections, immigrants will account for
83% of our future population growth, and will require us to build
more than 200 houses a day for the next 20 years to provide them
with roofs. Most native Britons fiercely resist and resent the
influx, and feel betrayed by the entire political class which
is allowing it to happen.
The
Government professes to believe in restricting entry, but refuses
to enforce effective controls. It is unnecessary to be a conspiracy
theorist to believe that many Labour ministers and MPs simply
do not mind.
They
told us in 1997 that they intended to bring about 'an irreversible
change in the nature of British society'. Wholesale immigration
contributes mightily to the process as few newcomers vote Tory.
As
Home Secretary, John Reid has belatedly talked and acted more
toughly. Reid realises that immense strains and passions generated
by immigration in Labour's urban heartlands, especially in the
North of England. But Reid is about to quit office. We have no
idea what his successor will do.
The
Government still rejects the only convincing means of checking
the flow: an absolute limit on numbers, which should be set not
only far below the current 300,000 a year, but also down from
the Government's future projection of 145,000.
After
a decade in which Britain's population has increased by 1.6million
according to official figures - many more if an unknown number
of illegals is added - the government has the effrontery to claim
that it now operates 'tight' rules. This causes Sir Andrew Green
of Migration Watch to say: "If the present system amounts
to 'tight controls', I dread to think what loose ones might mean."
Whitehall's
efforts to stem the huge traffic in arranged marriages, notably
from Pakistan, are feeble. The Government is least uncomfortable
when quoting our net population figure, because this deducts the
100,000 British people who quit this country every year. While
almost all emigrants are, of course, professed Christians, a huge
number of those who come in are Muslims.
And
there's the rub. Since so many have no desire to adopt the values
and customs of our society, their presence has drastically altered
the appearance and character of Britain's inner cities.
Lord
Carey said on Sunday that he hopes Gordon Brown 'will not forget
the importance of Christian identity at the heart of being a part
of the United Kingdom." It seems fanciful to suppose that
his wish will be fulfilled.
For
the new Prime Minister to act convincingly on immigration will
require a huge investment of political capital, and a row with
the liberal establishment which it is doubtful Brown has the stomach
for. He also needs to believe that failure
to act will cost him votes. This is unlikely, as long as the Conservative
Party maintains its current low profile on the issue.
Alarm
I
am an admirer of Tory leader David Cameron. But it seems extraordinary
that he scarcely opens his mouth about a subject which alarms
most British people vastly more than Iraq, the environment or
Europe.
Shadow
Home Secretary David Davis makes some fierce noises. The Conservatives
have produced policy documents calling for a much firmer line
on the entry of dependents, and for an overall limit. But the
leader himself, even in a big speech such as the one he made in
Tooting, South London, last week, seems determined to stay off
this dangerous turf.
Cameron
is scarred by the memory of the Tories' fate at the 2005 election,
after Michael Howard talked tough about immigration.
I do not believe that had anything to do with Howard's defeat,
but the Cameron camp think they did. They are bent upon shaking
off their old image as the 'nasty' party. They are surely correct:
a Right-wing Tory leader cannot win a General Election in today's
social democratic Britain.
But
immigration should not be an issue of Right versus Left. It is
about the future of this country, and everybody who care should
have a voice. Today, as a result of the Tories' near-silence,
more than a few of their natural supporters seep away to lunatic
fringe groups.
The
worst thing Enoch Powell did to British politics was to make it
so hard to argue rationally about immigration. Ever since Powell,
who was indeed pretty mad, it has been thought somehow unclean
and not for polite society to say that we do not need or want
millions of foreign migrants.
STIFLING
THIS DEBATE IS WRONG AND DANGEROUS. IT DENIES THE BRITISH PEOPLE
A POLITICAL VOICE ON SOMETHING THEY ARE DEEPLY ABOUT.
Lord
Carey's remarks on Sunday should achieve one important purpose.
They show that it is not extremist, or fascist, or even illiberal
to demand vastly more stringent immigration controls. It is vital
common sense.
It
will be welcome if David Cameron learns the lesson. And even more
so if Gordon Brown does.
If you have suggestions
for additional subjects, or material to include in the pages linked
to the subjects listed, please contact the webmaster.
|
