Category Archives: Division to Conquer

Things to do with social engineering and the Marxist state

GE2017: a manoeuvre to deliver Fake Brexit; Part One: the resurrected “wasted vote” meme

Not so long ago the Establishment would tell voters that their support for UKIP was wasted. Of course, this was at the same time that it was conceiving the Fixed Term Parliaments Act, which was for protecting minority governments and coalitions in the context of an extra-LibLabCon challenge. Moreover, for a long time before the 2015 General Election, the Establishment’s think tanks signalled each other in corporate-media about a Grand Coalition between the Tories and Labour as a response to expected UKIP progress. In the end the Establishment opted for another solution, one that was more of its form (it doesn’t matter how much high-falutin public thinking it does, nor what fancy titles, nor what airs and graces it awards itself, it’s still populated by the criminally minded) which was to cheat and to steal who-knows-how-many Parliamentary seats from the UKIP electorate.

The point is, the Establishment told you that a vote for UKIP was a wasted vote because it was frightened of you voting for UKIP.

And its fear was proven in the end; UKIP – and no organisation other than UKIP – forced the referendum in which Britons then voted to leave the EU. A wasted vote? Of course not.

And yet, with a snap General Election called for June 8th, the author has already noticed, in comments sections in various places on the internet, the old myth and lie being resurrected. Astonishingly, and indicating the perpetual and contemptible frightened-sheep mentality of the British (it shouldn’t keep surprising the author as it does), these bleating noises are emerging in to the collective consciousness even without prompting from the Establishment; it’s just as if a pathetic nomadic and elements-bedeviled prehistoric people are recalling the genetic memory of a sabre-tooth tiger, or a great crocodile that no longer exists – because, and this memory is abandoned with the onset of ever new self-conjured imagined fears so that any progress is not capitalised upon, a band of their own number took it on and slew it. People are saying things like this: “I would vote for UKIP, but only the Tories will deliver Brexit”.

The next article in this series will deal with this delusion; the notion that the Tories will deliver Brexit is nothing but a fantasy. Suffice to say for the time being, the election of June 8th is about finally shooting the UKIP fox on one level, and another it is about stuffing the Commons with no-principle conservatroids (a know-nothing-know-it-all tribally slavish automaton whose idiocy is politically useful) who will do what they are told, and will marginalise those elements already extant in the Tory Westminster Party that might be provoked to opposition by the British Government during a critical time in the Nation’s history – and the sheeple, as we can see from above, are more than ready and willing to oblige.

In the meantime, we’re going to look at how the British Government has evidently been planning this election for a long time – as part, the author suspects, of the long and sneaky game of Fake Brexit  – and we’re going to point out that the crucial issue for voters to consider regarding this election isn’t about who they give power to, but from whom do they deny it; thus we realise the vital importance of as many people voting for UKIP as possible.

To begin, then, the following is an extract from an FBEL article written in November of last year:

It is not guaranteed, and actually unlikely, that Parliament will legislate to open the way to Brexit before a General Election. As for that contest, a meme is emerging whereby the crisis is seen as being beneficial for the Tories, and it was expressed again by Rees-Mogg:

“The Conservative Party has nothing to fear from a general election. I think we would win it quite comfortably and the electorate would very likely carry out a purge of pro-Europeans.”

If we look at some facts on the ground. Parliament is overwhelmingly pro-EU. This means that most Tories must be pro-EU, and indeed they are. ConservativeHome reported that they thought 185 Tory MPs voted for Remain, and 128 for Leave. How could a purge of “pro-Europeans” (notice the choice of language) happen without mass de-selection first, which isn’t going to happen. The leadership of the Tory Party is pro-EU (see the ConservativeHome article). What Rees-Mogg reveals is probably the hoped-for outcome of a scheme to exploit the crisis and have the Tories sit in that insulated-from-constitution Parliament pretending to be anti-EU and leading the electorate by the nose until it’s too late.

Despite what the reader might think, the British Government still hasn’t legislated to “open the way to Brexit”. Article 50 is a decoy – this site alone has pages and pages on it describing why this is the case, please find one here. What matters – and it’s all that matters – in the goings-on and workings of Parliament in order for the UK to leave the EU is the repealing of the European Communities Act 1972. So, take note: the author remarked in November 2016 that it would be likely that there would be an election before any real significant progress on leaving the EU had been made. And it’s really important to appreciate what this means. With this General Election in June, the electorate are being asked to judge the pie in a pie-making contest before it is baked and they have tasted of it. Now, the sneaky thing that the Tories have managed to pull off is this: because of the Article 50 deception, the electorate now thinks that they know what the Tory pie tastes like. On the contrary, only a few who have seen the Tories roll the pastry know what their pie will taste like – too many sticky fingers. As for baking, the Tories have not been any where near an oven.

Now it has to be said that Rees-Mogg is quite well known for his “euroscepticism” – not that the author ever fully buys into the truth of Tory “euroscepticism”, as the reader might be able to tell. However, the official narrative has it that Rees-Mogg would be one of those Tories that might be provoked into opposition by Theresa May. His sayings, now and in the past, would reflect an understanding the public would have of him as a “eurosceptic” – hence he would say that an election would return a pro-Brexit Tory Party. This doesn’t make it true, and the author doubted it very much, for the reason that de-selection of pro-EU MPs just wouldn’t happen, not even so much because of who was revealing the information, although it wasn’t lost on the author that Rees-Mogg, as an inadvertent conduit through which the idea of the election as a good thing could be dripped to the public, would also serve the purpose of jogging the “wasted UKIP vote” memory.

The important thing is this: the author was made suspicious about the use of an election to scupper Brexit even in November of 2016. He did make one obvious error, however, for it appears that a Tory selection process has been underway for some time. Yes indeed, for it was on February 1st that the Guido Fawkes gossip column (it’s actually even worse than that) made itself useful and reported that the Tories had started candidate selection for 44 “urban constituencies”, or Labour strongholds. The writer at GF would have his or her readers believe “A fascinating move that will help prepare the Tories either for a snap election or for an unprecedented assault on Labour seats in 2020…” Of course it wasn’t for 2020.

In addition, on March 16th the author saw a tweeted report that read as follows:

What do you think of suggestions that snap election is now on the cards? Lynton Crosby spotted around Conservative Party HQ.

The author retweeted this with his own comment:

If faced with 20-30 by-elections, quite likely Conservative Party HQ would prefer GE instead.

Now, the whole Tory election fraud is either going to be a wild card, or it’s already dealt with by the British Government – whichever, it wasn’t the prime motivation for the Establishment in having an election. This quote is to show the reader that in March the conditions and the signs were such that we perhaps should only have expected an election.

Then there was the defection out of UKIP by Douglas Carswell at the end of March. It has been reported that Carswell was going to get ejected from UKIP, and that this was the reason for his timing. However, right up to the point he left, Carswell was saying this: “I am 100 per cent Ukip and will be staying with Ukip”.

Additionally, senior Tories were cited as sources in parts of the corporate-media, and apparently saying that Carswell would be more useful to his old party by staying put and being disruptive in UKIP. Carswell could have stayed and been at the centre of a big fight about his membership, and that would have been a feast for the corporate-media, and an upset for all the people in UKIP who worry about bad media coverage – and there are many. Well, we’ve seen that the Tories were manoeuvring for an election in February, and it was the end of that month when these sorts of headlines emerged:

Ukip’s only MP Douglas Carswell in secret talks to rejoin Tories

To the author, this episode appears to have been about the recalling of an operative to other duties. Carswell’s mission in UKIP was over. It was by no means a success – after all, the British people had won the EU Referendum in the face of agitation and disruption and propaganda thrown at them by the Establishment, of which Carswell had been but a small part. Even so, the act of taking Carswell out of UKIP showed us that the British Government was very confident about what it wanted to do next.

And what is it, exactly, that the British Government wants to do? The answer is to defy the will of the British people with regards the EU, and their taking their country beyond the grasp of one particular set of gangsters in Brussels (and therefore effect a disempowering of British collaborators and vassals). Why do we know this? Because the British Government operates by a philosophy whereby it knows better than the people. If you doubt this, review the many years of being sucked ever further into the EU despite the opposition that finally made its voice heard in 2016. The British Government doesn’t want the UK to be an independent country for independent people, and the latest scheme to prevent this is a plan to fudge Brexit with a General Election. Moreover, it has evidently been plotting this scheme for quite a little while now, so although this election may well be “snap” for the public,  who don’t get much time to get used to the idea, it is not a new thing for the British Government – which has everyone, therefore, at a major disadvantage.

The way to combat the Establishment at this election, and prevent the British Government getting what it wants, is to vote UKIP.  Of course, when the author was reading “UKIP wasted vote” comments (as referred to at top of the page), he also saw objections to voting for UKIP on principle. These were variously as follows: UKIP is disorganised, UKIP has no leader figure, UKIP doesn’t have policies etc etc. Very briefly the author would respond like this: UKIP’s national grassroots network won the referendum; UKIP isn’t like the other parties, and when you’ve been in the party for a while, you see that UKIP is pushed not pulled; it has the one most important policy of any: independence. Even if UKIP were in complete disarray, it is absolutely crucial that is should be the target for votes because that would mean those votes weren’t being given to the LibLabCon, and in support of a scheme to deliver a fake Brexit. UKIP should get votes without trying. For it doesn’t matter if a Tory gets in to Parliament ahead of a Labour MP. It makes not a blind bit of difference because it would be more likely than not that this Tory candidate had been hand-selected by pro-EU Conservative HQ (more on this in the next article). Which means that it doesn’t even matter if UKIP stand down candidates to have “eurosceptic” Tory MPs elected. If those Tories are marginalised in their own Party, then they won’t make the slightest bit of difference. In fact, any MP in that situation would have more impact if he were in a recognisably oppositional party, and how many Tory MPs are going to leave the Tory Party when push comes to shove? I’ll tell you. None.

It’s not nearly as simple as all this, but it’s not far off the mark either: 17 million people voted for Brexit. If they all voted for the real Brexit party, UKIP, they’d get it. If half of them voted for UKIP, when all the calculations were done, they’d very likely still get it. If less people vote for UKIP than they did in 2015 – just as the manipulation coming out of Westminster is requiring of them – then they’ll only get Fake Brexit instead. It should be very simple.

LibLabCon’s 2015 GE strategy: race-bait, stoke tension, blame immigration debate and UKIP?

Friday 28th November: David Cameron delivered yet another defining “big EU speech”. It was much anticipated – again – billed as a UKIP-busting game-changer – again. It was much criticised, as it turned out. But if people had learned the simple lessons by now, they would know that it doesn’t matter if David Cameron promises total impossibilities in return for electoral support. It doesn’t matter that he makes guarantees of controlling immigration – within the borderless EU, and on the back of a broken guarantee to reduce immigration. As much as this sort of thing deserves gob-smacked incredulity, and easy as it is to point to and declare it lies, people should also be well aware that none of this matters to Cameron at this late stage. As this site pointed out to its readership on one of the previous occasions Cameron was going to re-sculpt the political landscape and make the earth disappear from beneath UKIP, it’s not what Cameron declares to be policy that is important – rather it’s all about reaching beyond the rational to appeal to an emotional response. This time, the message was basically reasserting all the garbage that has lodged as a fact in the minds of those desiring a balkanised Progressive-Marxist corporately-governed Police State, which is this: if you were going to sign on to UKIP to fix the problem of immigration (Cameron can’t deny there is one) then you would be unleashing a racist force that would cause a whole world of trouble and usher in some kind of reign of terror.

And suggesting that this meme has been thought up by people higher-up in the echelons of the Establishment than Cameron for dissemination across the wider united LibLabCon front, recently the Labour MP, Diane Abbott, who is firmly on the record as not being above the odd bit of racism herself, has been using similar language in her own race-baiting attack on UKIP. Moreover, having made the 3000-miles-away race-relation trouble in Ferguson, Missouri, her business, Abbott has been referring to it with regards to what she characterises as black victimhood at the hands of the British Establishment. As the first black MP, Abbott is not an insignificant protagonist, but she has also given visibility to an activist movement that is agitating to divide people politically along racial lines – the appalling divide and conquer she accuses white people of. The possible danger, with Ferguson as the model, is all too apparent.

At the tip of the spear, and in his own speech, the greatest proportion of Cameron’s chutzpah lay not in his claims in the face of inevitable EU obstruction to the measures on immigration which he was proposing, but in the way he projected the LibLabCon’s misdeeds of an entire epoch onto the new boys and girls on the block:

 “We must anchor the debate [about immigration] in fact, not prejudice.

“We must have no truck with those who use immigration to foment division or as a surrogate for other agendas. We should distrust those who sell the snake-oil of simple solutions.”

This is clearly an instruction to reject UKIP – and what for? Because UKIP’s preoccupation with immigration is indicative of the closet racism which Cameron had already defined as being an attribute of the party of Fruit Cakes and Loonies. Given a chance, it will come out into the open, and then the British electorate would be sorry. Pure nonsense and fear-mongery of course. Controlling immigration, and making it fairer for people coming from Africa, for instance, is definitely not racist, nor of a racist agenda. The accusation of racism levelled at UKIP is a deliberate and knowing lie – this is why Cameron daren’t even say the word at this stage. He would get into so much new trouble if he did.

But to be absolutely precise, it is rich of Cameron to talk about how to debate immigration because the Establishment strategy up until now has expressly been not to talk about it. There has been no debate about immigration all the while it has been allowed to occur, since 1997, at an historically unprecedented rate. This is purely due to the fact that if there had been a grown up and informed debate with a vote to follow, then, considering all the pros and cons, the immigration would not have been allowed. Mass immigration, therefore, has been implemented as a subversive programme of political revolution undermining the sovereignty of the British people – this much is verifiable in word as much in deed; see Andrew Neather’s 2009 admission that immigration was for “rub[bing] the Right’s nose in diversity”. Let us be clear here – for Right read the unreconstructed occupants of the old cultural landscape; i.e. most Britons. For diversity read Equality and Diversity – the central plank of British Marxism. If we are going to talk about prejudice, we need to recognise the prejudice that is the prime cause of all the resultant problems that have been plaguing the UK since Neather’s Champagne Nu-Labour Party unleashed its vicious assault: the prejudice of the Establishment against indigenous Britons. This is the prejudice of a self-entitled elite that sees the country beneath it, whatever the colour of skin, as prey and stock to be used and abused as it sees fit.

As for using immigration to foment division – the British Establishment’s stock-in-trade is divide and conquest. The most immediately dangerous example of the phenomenon has been the importation and accommodation of Islam in order to demonise Muslims amongst the greater population as terrorists. It is also the case in point for immigration being used by the Establishment as a surrogate for other agendas – namely creating pretexts for the police state and otherwise illegal wars on Middle Eastern sovereign states. Cameron’s statement, in which he tries once again to associate his real political opposition as racist, is therefore as diabolically perverse as it could possibly be. Once again a man who must ne’er or rarely see or saw a black face in his privileged private life, and a man who is currently allied in a proxy war against Russia in Ukraine with, not neo-Nazis, but proper Nazis with inherited SS-derived insignia, and a man who oversaw the ethnic cleansing of black Africans from Tarwergha in Libya, gets away with repeating the slur that UKIP is motivated by racial hatred.

As this stage we must turn to Diane Abbott. There is no other way to describe her recent activity than using immigration to foment political division along racial lines; or race-baiting, as its exact equivalent in the USA is called. The following, which quotes an Abbott speech, is from an article with the headline: “Abbott: Ukip’s racist rhetoric will lead to violence”.

“Politicians and the media must wake up to the fact that some of the rhetoric peddled to improve poll ratings and sell copy actually fosters violence and abuse on the streets,” she said.

Of course, the most strikingly concerning element of Abbott’s language is the mention of the provocation of violence. In truth, this mention is probably to throw critics off the scent, although it should not be underestimated as an expression of a real threat – this will be returned to by and by. The best picture of what is being engineered with such language is better understood with further detail supplied by the article:

The MPs speech on combating racism in times of austerity was supported by the Muslim Student’s Association and Operation Black Vote (OBV).

OBV director Simon Woolley called for politicians to “realise their moral and political responsibility in articulating a political view that is more inclusive than divisive.”

And he revealed ambitious plans to stop racists claiming marginal seats at the general election by ensuring BME (black, minority, ethinic) voters turn out.

In other words, there is a plot afoot to organise the black and ethnic electorate to vote against UKIP in marginal seats at the 2015 election. Key to this plan is demonization of UKIP by the likes of Abbott who baselessly claim that that party is stoking racial tension to get elected. The startling irony should be obvious to anyone with a brain, for the truth is in fact upside down and the other way around. It is clearly here demonstrated that it is Abbott who is appealing to ethnic minorities to divide politically along racial lines. And it cannot be a coincidence that all this comes after Labour announced the creation of a special unit to deal with UKIP. It’s a good bet that its mode of operation has been revealed.

What with Cameron, and Abbott, and the fact that a meme has been started in corporate-media about how UKIP would treat the children of migrants married to Britons as migrants themselves – which is abject nonsense – there has to be a suspicion that the shadowy Establishment is the prime mover. Primarily through its Red Sock-puppet, the concern has to be that the Government is trying to introduce some American-style deep-level racially-based social division to Britain. It cannot be understated how very serious this is. As Ferguson, Missouri is demonstrating, this can only develop into irrevocable balkanisation and alienation of one community from another, notions of victimisation, protest and violence, which all provokes a level of police intervention that would never normally be tolerated or tolerable. In short, it is the way to the police state under permanent martial law.

As it happens, Abbott has evoked Ferguson as she has been going about her mission of divide and conquer, and its detail must be discussed briefly here. The officer thought to have illegally killed Michael Brown has been adjudged not to be indictable by a grand jury. The physical evidence confirms that there is no whitewash. But at the same time, as American alternative media has documented, the situation in terms of public reaction has been exacerbated into riot conditions by outside provocateurs – in one case these people were outed as working for the Department of Homeland Security. The theory is that the US Government would like a state of martial law to exist to pre-empt wider reaction to an imperial President and his treason by executive order, and would like to see the troubles in Ferguson blamed on Black Victimisation by White Establishment as a fuse for the same sort of turmoil in other cities. Conspiracy theories aside, the very least to be said about Ferguson is, as this article does, that at the root the trouble is the way that Americans have been manipulated by a ruling class for political ends.

Back to Diane Abbot again, for she has been co-opting this specific perceived victimisation of blacks by a white establishment for her own ends – an irresponsible thing to do given how close the situation is getting to full-on insurrection. On Wednesday 26th November there was a protest outside the US embassy to show solidarity with people struggling with the consequences of white Establishment racism in Ferguson. We know this because a spokesman, Sabby Dhalu, of the organising group, Stand Up To Racism, went on the record as saying: “The cheapness of black lives in the US is a reflection of racism that black communities face at the hands of the police that must be stopped.”

Ahead of the protest, Diane Abbott chipped in her own inflammatory two-penneth.

Labour MP Diane Abbott has added her voice to the group’s calls for justice.

“My deepest sympathies go out to the family of Mike Brown,” she said. “Not only have they lost a loved one but following the Grand Jury’s decision they no doubt feel the strongest sense of injustice, which can only make their pain worse.

“The anger and disruption that has already followed this decision extends beyond the killing of Mike right to the root of long standing issues with the criminal justice system. Just as in Britain, the black community in the US has a fraught history with the police. It is one of the reasons I have always been against the arming of police.”

Ferguson

Race-baiting by Georgia Democrats.

Clearly, then, Abbott is making an equivalence between British and American race-relations between a white Establishment and a black minority group. It’s an equivalence that cannot be taken seriously given any real consideration of actual history. But it has been useful to express a concern that universally armed British police would necessarily kill black people – and the construction from which this statement is built upon provides further sinister nuance: the police would do it because they are white, and they are racist. As Abbot then goes on to insist that she is politically opposed to this, the motivation is clearly to garner political support based on unjustifiable fear mongering.

Across the pond in other states, Abbott’s political kin are doing exactly the same. It has been roundly condemned as race-baiting. In a particular case during the November mid-term elections, Democrats in Georgia used an image of two black children on their political material. The message read: “If you want to prevent another Ferguson in their future…[vote Democrat]”. The reader should note the two hand palms printed on the placard with the caption “Don’t shoot”. This is a reference to the claim that Brown was surrendering when shot – a fiction according to the police officer and which really doesn’t do justice to how aggressive Brown was in the version of events vindicated by the grand jury. Rather disgustingly, given that their immense remoteness from the incident should have provided an opportunity for calm reflection and fair appraisal, the Stand Up To Racism group used this symbolism in their protest, as a picture of the event attests to. Appallingly, Diane Abbott retweeted this image, and so she proudly owns it in her own twitter stream.

feguson_abbot

Abbott’s retweet: Hands up! Don’t shoot! London outside of US Embassy right now. Justice for Michael Brown.

The behaviour demonstrates that Abbott and her fellow travellers are intent on insisting on a flawed narrative to sow seeds of discontent where otherwise there would not be any. Abbott depicts black anger against white rule that will even kill rather than act in a conciliatory way to assuage rage stemming from notions of injustice. This is nowhere near a true reflection. In fact the contemporary characteristic of the times is the Country against the Government to reinstate self-rule, not Country against itself. Indeed, the risk of the Country uniting to deal with Government is why the Establishment would always be anxious to introduce a schism in a power that opposes it – indeed, the British Establishment is currently very anxious to introduce one. Cameron’s stinking verbal droppings suggest the scheme involves creating political divides on racial lines over misrepresentations of UKIP’s position on immigration. Diane Abbott works for this agenda, and does so with unseemly relish – talking of violence as a result of UKIP rhetoric as she does.

Abbott’s infamous tweet  – the one that got her into trouble at the time – read “White people love playing ‘divide and rule’. We should not play their game.” But it is the Establishment’s game of divide and conquer that she is playing, and as such she does not work for the interests of black British people against a white British people who she would have everyone believe reject them. She is being utterly deceitful. With the mention of violence in mind, of course, of the utmost concern is the fact that the aspiring zeitgeist manifests itself in the language of the Prime Minister of the country; this is a man who is in all sorts of trouble himself with an electorate who have found him out as a liar. Given the rough treatment of Miliband, the Establishment apparently wants him in post after 2015. One really does wonder what lengths it will go to to keep him there.

Poland’s corporate-types point and laugh at the laughing-stock that is Britain

The influx of hundreds of thousands of Eastern Europeans into Britain in recent years is clearly understood, by those who can apprehend the global-fascist hand behind the phenomenon, as a weapon against Britain. The official number of Poles in the UK in 2010 was reckoned to be in the region of 500,000, but this is bound to be a gross underestimation – the real number of Eastern Europeans in total in the UK cannot be reckoned. Furthermore, with the prospect of hundreds and thousands of heinously impoverished Bulgarians and Romanians due to move to the UK in 2014, it might become realistic to talk about immigration from Eastern Europe in terms of millions. Therefore, Britons are undoubtedly faced with a mass invasion of the Biblical sort whereby whole populations moved into foreign territories based on the premise of offering some benefit (therefore without having to resort to armed struggle), and then took over by force of numbers.

However, the invasion into Britain is not for the purposes of enriching those people who make the incursion, but for the purpose of empowering all corporate-types within the Western sphere of influence, not just those in the society of Polish Business Leaders who awarded Tony Blair this week for ‘helping Poland’ by opening British borders to the Polish. The invasion is also for enriching Britain’s own big business leaders and banking giants; both groups move the hand of Anglo-American global fascism with varying degrees of pressure. Britain is a country with historical wealth, a tradition of political self-awareness, and a unified sense of national identity that is an obstacle to full domination by the crony, corrupt, anti-competition corporate-government that ‘business leaders’ require, and so must be totally undone. Britons have already accepted the disastrous social welfare system, and the physical invasion of space now represents a second phase of this total dismemberment – and in the following, (non-exhaustive), ways:

  1. The creation of a balkanised Britain where varied language-speaking groups remain separate from and fight each other. Eastern Europeans are notoriously prejudiced against different ethnic types in Britain whose families originally hail from oversees territories; it’s a good certainty that the globalists want to see ‘race war’ in the UK as much as they do in the USA.
  2. The forcing down of wages and living conditions, and the abolishment of good working conditions by the employment of peoples from ex-Communist countries who are unaware of and unfamiliar with the expression of common law rights.
  3. The implosion of the economy by:
  • The diversion of resources in public services to deal with non-English speakers and people whose families in previous generations did not pay into the pot.
  • The payment of in-work benefits to non-British who displace Britons into unemployment.
  • The payment of out of work benefits to non-British who never paid into the pot.
  • The repatriation to Eastern Europe of huge swathes of economically valuable wages and benefits.

The British Government desires an impoverished, dissolute and divided British people so that it is easier to subjugate them, and the evidence of the truth of this ambition is in full view to anyone who cares to notice: take for instance the fact that Tony Blair’s golden statuette to reward him for his treason was accepted by Robin Barnett, Britain’s serving ambassador in Poland. The message was clear: the invasion is not Blairite; instead it is a conspiracy between British Establishment and politicians past and present to create that which is desirable and beneficial for power-brokers whether they be from home or abroad.

Tony Blair’s award was savaged by Tory MP Philip Hollobone as ‘entirely appropriate’, and made inevitable references to the last time Britain was invaded and conquered:

Tony Blair presided over the biggest wave of immigration this country has seen since the Norman conquest, 2.5million net migrants came in to the UK while he was in charge and Britain will never be the same again.

However, any Tory MP would merely be attempting to score Westminster political points (a worthless currency in the world of real politics) by registering dissatisfaction about Tony Blair’s award, as the Coalition Government is about to become responsible for the grafting of Romania and Bulgaria onto the British economy (with effects that it dare not talk about) – in the same way that Tony Blair first grafted Poland onto it.

The truth of the matter is that all British Governments since the 1970s have been guilty of failing in their prime duty to protect their supposed sovereign masters – the people – from the imposition of bad government, and from foreign invasion to do the same; as such, the British Establishment is riddled with traitors and their facilitators.

Unaware of the plot from above, British people tend to be sympathetic to the invasion force that is displacing them, and ironically even view them as good replacements for their own country-men who, as the corporate-media tells them, are worthless types who don’t want to live in a socially-conducive fashion. These complaining Britons, victims of a vast propaganda campaign as they are, fail to see that everything has been engineered exactly by their criminal politicians: Eastern Europeans and British benefits scroungers are both taking advantage of how the British Government manipulates and steals from the British tax-payer.

Blair’s award should be a good indication to exploited Britons that Poland’s real ruling class – its corporate-types and Anglo-American-corporate-establishment-wannabees – see Britain as easy prey. However, this would be too much of a generalisation to apply to all Eastern Europeans in Britain – except that there is verifiable evidence (link available later) that many Eastern Europeans abandon children to come to the UK, signifying that Britain’s open borders do not attract the most desirable people. Then there is the phenomenon that can be witnessed in any British high street which is Eastern Europeans speaking with their young children, who are assumedly British by birth, in a language that is not English. Even this tell-tale sign suggests that those Eastern Europeans only see Britain as a place to exploit, rather than a place to contribute to.

There is great despair in the UK by those who realise the deep problems being caused by Eastern European immigration, with respect to how those problems can be solved; the answer, however, is simple, and it sails upon the ocean: to wit, a flotilla of ships. When Britain regains control of its borders, Eastern Europeans who aren’t married to Britons, and any foreign national, for that matter, who lives in the country with no real right to, should be given an opportunity to demonstrate a desire to be British, and an opportunity to take British citizenship (while renouncing all others – perhaps), or else be placed on board the convoy sailing from one of England’s major ports. The details are all open for debate, but unless there are some tough decisions made, the trouble stored up for Britain in these days of open treason by the Government will never be smoothed away.