How might things turn out if Britain continues on her present course? David Abbott addresses this question in the following, final excerpt from his book, Dark Albion.
Two reports into the 'Trojan Horse' Islamist plot to take over various schools in Birmingham have just been published. One was produced by Education Commissioner Peter Clarke, the other for...
In the aftermath of World War II the Labour government of Atlee and Bevin wreaked unspeakable damage on our nation and its empire. It sold out our legacy and heritage at the temples of...
I have been intrigued, but not surprised, by the performance of the mainstream media in recent days with regard to the various crises that are currently occurring around the world. The disparity...
Just how compatible is Islam with everyone who's not a Muslim? To answer this question we must look at the Koran, which according to Muslims is the perfect word of Allah.
With the topic of immigration becoming more widely discussed in the media we are frequently asked whether the immigrant communities living in our cities should be more fully integrated into the...
The following article by Michael Copeland concerns the incalculable dangers to which governments have exposed British citizens by allowing into our midst huge numbers of strangers, neither knowing nor (apparently) caring which are violent criminals or dangerous terrorists. The article is especially pertinent in light of today's atrocity in Woolwich.
Law and order, as we mostly assume, are achieved by legislation and law enforcement. It is not quite as simple as that, though. Observance of the law is not accomplished solely by those agencies: it is the product of consensus. We citizens are aware of the accepted norms and observe them by consensus for the sake of peaceful mutual coexistence. Most of our behaviour is governed by this understanding, by custom and practice, not by detailed knowledge of the law. It is this consensus, though, that has been destroyed – yes, not 'lost', but destroyed.
Governments in the West in recent years have encouraged and permitted the arrival of thousands and thousands and thousands of people from hugely different foreign cultures, including some cultures where carrying a weapon is normal. Some arrivals are of unknown criminal background, and most will, of course, be completely unfamiliar with our laws and customs. Quite a number speak no English. In addition considerable though unascertainable numbers of entrants have arrived unlawfully and are living 'under the radar'. By definition these are not law-abiding, nor are they citizens. As a result the consensus for observance of the law is eliminated. In effect governments in Europe have made the West into a sort of recreated Wild West. The level of law enforcement appropriate for the old consensus is not adequate for the new free-for-all.
We are less safe. Quality of life has been adversely affected. We know that. Perforce our response has been to adjust our behaviour to our own disadvantage, by reducing our expectations to a new lower standard. We do this and subconsciously adjust: the loss becomes normalised. Pensioners refrain from going out at night. Women are not safe on their own. Indigenous British refrain from setting foot in problem areas where they know they are likely to be assaulted. It is a loss of life quality.
When Enoch Powell made the speeches for which the Left have ever since continually vilified him the level of immigration giving him concern was 30,000. Later it grew. By 1978, when Mrs. Thatcher voiced her concern, it was half as much again and more. She said: "We must hold out the clear prospect of an end to immigration because at the moment it is about between 45,000 and 50,000 people coming in a year."
The clear prospect never came. The end never came. Instead, after Labour came to power in 1997 they sent immigration into overdrive. Powered behind the scenes by the EU, and quite possibly helped by petrodollars, this was Labour's social engineering for voter population replacement: the aim was to outnumber the Right and "rub their noses in diversity". The immigration figure for 2011 was 593,000. This is unsustainable. It is a surreal Mickey Mouse and the broomsticks.
This state of affairs has been inflicted on us, largely by the EU. We did not request it. We were never consulted. Our objections have not been heeded. The hideous irony is that we are paying for it, and paying dearly in numerous ways. We pay the government to govern and this is what we get. We pay into the EU but have no control over the unelected decision-drivers. We pay for these arrivals' welfare, housing, health, schooling, interpreters and social facilitators. We pay for bogus 'single mothers' who are, in fact, polygamous wives. We pay in the loss of whole neighbourhoods, whole towns even. We pay in crime. We pay police, expensive lawyers, judges, prisons, the whole apparatus. We are less safe, and, worse, we are bankrupt.
We need a halt to immigration. We need a referendum. There is more trouble ahead.
To see more articles by this author, search for Michael Copeland using the search box at top-right of the page.