Dear Editor –
I wish to express a few comments to you, your readers and UKIP on the subject of my interpretation of “false news” which has almost reached epidemic levels.
I am referring to the number of instances where an event of magnitude is given big licks in documentary form on television, discussed in great depth, and relevant authorities chastised for their apparent collective failure to identify the wrong-doing over a long period. Often it is blamed on their not wanting to disturb race relations or even offend PC in any way.
I have been watching an apparently well documented and well presented case of the Rochdale “Betrayed Girls” on BBC One TV, which is in fact another “Go” at one I saw a month or so ago. The main difference appeared to be to show now the intervention and influence of the BNP and EDL and to slam them for making it into a racial issue. It was also presented as an apologia for police inaction. But whatever way it was presented, they could not disguise that in the main it had been the illegal abuse by Pakistani men of underage white girls in similar fashion in many towns throughout the UK, as distinct from “Asians”, which they had to admit when it was apparent there were few whites involved.
The way I understood it was that the BNP and EDL had been pointing out that this was part of the the general Islamic “culture”, i.e what I have been saying for a long time: their attitude to their own women, never mind the “apostate” outsiders, presumably backed up by their religious doctrine – the usual “they’re thugs (substitute for terrorists) but they are absolutely nothing to do with the pure “us” of the peaceful Islam”.
Oh well – I`ve news for them! A few years ago I sat in the car on a Sunday evening listening to a “File on 4” broadcast in which the BBC reporter investigated what home life was like for women in Muslim families and how they were treated by their menfolk.
Strangely it was very much like the way the white girls were being treated out on the streets in many Northern towns. In essence these women have no rights – period, and those of no faith, even less.
Strange how this was absent from the present BBC programmes …
… and then there is the case of the Grenfell Tower – apparently the Enquiry is going to be limited to “Whatdunnit”, no hope of apportioning blame to the motley crew of local government and even less of national government officials – that could be dangerous, someone from the elite could actually end up being found responsible and … punished …
… and then there was Hillsborough …
… and then there was Jimmy Saville …
… and now there is the Jersey childrens` abuse cases
There’s something rotten still in our ship of state.
But – overall there is one gigantic “evasion” that always never gets a mention, whether it`s a discussion on the latest crisis in the A & E departments of the NHS, whether it is the shortage of GPs, whether it is the shocking underpayment of all public service workers in the guise of “austerity” limitations or the attitude of elitist neighbours to their “Pleb” counterparts, or the 20,000 shortage of policemen in counteracting terrorism and crime generally.
Of course the financial crash of 2008 is a base cause and a general drawing in of our horns was and still is necessary, but in every discussion of these difficulties, I have yet to hear one word about another root cause – “Bulk Immigration”!
For far too many years this country has endured the figurative addition of cities the size of Coventry or Leicester into the services and space of our infrastructure. Yes, many have contributed to our economy – yet: what conscious effort has been made to expand our service base to accommodate the requirements of such numbers?
Housing shortage scandals and overcrowding of schools are indicators, although not the only ones, of the problem of this imposition on a system that was already coping with being “Full up”.
There are “cuts” due to the necessity for austerity, but it should be mentioned the effect of these are compounded with the real, “unmentioned/deliberately (?) ignored “ problem: that of sheer numbers of immigration which is then again compounded by another “unmentionable”: the characteristics of a section of these immigrants whose religion is at odds with the law of our country. The basis and teachings of its attitude to its own and indeed all women is at best uncivilised or non-PC and at worst illegal.
Just as those responsible for the Grenfell Tower block disaster should be identified and held to account, so should the dissemblers in our MSM and political class (I mean all parties!) be required to put policies into effect that at least lead to a cessation of “digging the hole”.
We cannot begin to effectively deal with any of the past wrongs or indeed the present situation until the totality of population numbers is brought to a manageable level. The first of these measures must be to limit substantially immigration numbers.
Sincerely yours
Roger Turner
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
An Appeal on our own behalf:
Would all you kind and interested readers and comment posters on UKIP Daily, who are doing so much to make a success of this site, put pen-to-paper or indeed fingers to keyboards and write an article or two?
You can write – your comment posts document that fact! What interests you interests other UKIP Daily readers. one comment post of 400 words equals half an article.
Please take the plunge – it’s easy, and we editors are here to help!
Warm regards,
Viv Evans, E-i-C
Coudenhove-Kalergi.
There, I’ve said it.
And I’m not Michael Shrimpton.
Are these comments too obvious? Toby asks, “Immigrants contribute activity but do they contribute profit?” I would say that the answer has to be ‘no’. If the father of an immigrant family works, say, as a taxi driver, he’s certainly contributing – but showing a profit? He enters the UK with a wife and 3 children(variable)in tow, gets his driving job but his contribution is far outstripped by the support that the state has to provide for his family of 4 who aren’t contributing. That’s an economic argument that I can understand.
The sly standard argument is to suggest that they are ‘contributing’ if they pay any tax at all which they will even if just VAT – while ignoring how much they take out. You need to be earning a lot to be a net contributor.
When I read your article, Roger, earlier today, I had watched only the first 20 minutes of a recording of the BBC’s ‘Betrayed Girls’. I was reluctant to view the whole thing because the whole situation is so blood-freezingly dreadful that it’s hard to engage with. Since then, I’ve watched more of it and I’m thoroughly sickened, not only because of the way those girls were treated by the racist paedophile muslims and their colluders – the police, the social workers, the media, the politicians – but by the sheer, unadulterated hypocrisy of all concerned.
Labour MP Ann Cryer admitted that she had been ignored or called ‘racist’ by her fellow-MPs when she tried to enlist their help, yet she still blamed the BNP for ‘EXPLOITING’ the situation. Oh, no, they weren’t trying to draw the exploitation of young girls by muslim scum to everyone’s attention when the authorities didn’t want to know – no, the BNP were the ones doing the exploitation by telling the truth and being charged with inciting racial hatred for their pains. Unbelievable.
A weaselly, mealy-mouthed journalist who had the story and should have exposed the scandal waited SEVEN YEARS before getting round to publishing it. WHY? Because the ‘liberal media’ were too squeamish to stop the racist abuse of white girls in case it damaged race relations and played into the hands of the unspeakable BNP and the beyond-the-liberal-pale EDL. Yes, those dreadful ‘far-right’ people who had committed no crimes, but tried to expose the filthy abuse of children were the ones who had to be demonised, not the disgusting abusers themselves.
Such skewed morality and cowardice should be punished with public disgrace and imprisonment for all. Leftard morons and racist anti-British dregs of society – how dare they even try to defend themselves?
It’s definitely the ‘elephant in the room’; nobody wants to be branded ‘raaaaycist’.
Evasion of issues would end with AMW as leader. Her leadership launch speech impressed me. Most of the issues mentioned in these comments were covered in AMWs speech.
Dear Roger (Turner),
Thank you for a good article.
You say “many have contributed to our economy”.
This is charming and welcoming and should be said. But….
Of course immigrants contribute activity, but do they contribute profit?
I imagine a group of companies, such as Unilever. It has some profitable companies and some loss-makers.
Similarly our society contains people.
Some people will contribute more to the tax coffers over their lives that they take out. They are profitable.
Other people will take out more than they put in. They are loss-makers.
If we have, or take in, too many loss-makers, the state tends to go bankrupt.
Regards,
Toby, 01932-873557
Nicely put Toby, particularly understandable in a business context.
I think I can extend this by likening it to what I believe describes a non-performing company (or at least one standing still consuming capital and all attendant services, but making little or no progress and in effect making a neutral contribution to the national effort)
I believe such an enterprise (or lack of it) is said to be a “Zomby” company..
In the past I have likened the present UKIP as Zomby
It is the rate of change of demand which cannot be afforded. Much of the infrastructure, housing stock etc has been built up over decades and centuries.
If it is affordable at all then the accommodation for “refugees” should be really basic – caravans, pre-fab huts, or tents. If they are genuine refugees they will be grateful to come to a country which offers political asylum, and more or less law and order.
We have the situation where ex-servicemen are homeless begging on the streets, while economic migrants, a proportion of whom hate our kuffar society, are given priority housing.
Zero Muslim immigration – we cannot accept any more as we cannot cope with the ones already here. Repatriation when possible, and for even minor illegal acts.
Roger
Of course mass immigration is the biggest disaster to hit our country in modern times.
It reflects two related and fundamental things – the hypocrisy of the British establishment, and the utter incompetence of British governments.
Your hero Nigel was however quite weak on your concerns – and he comes from Anthony’s school of libertarian economics, the excesses of which caused the 08 crash and continue to blight our prosperity now.
We are in an existential battle for national survival. We need the focus, judgement and determination of a wartime footing if we are to succeed, not more of Anthony’s economics. Only the state can win wars.
@Q – Yr right about Farage’s limitations, he barely uttered a word about the Square Mile’s de facto ongoing looting of H.M. Treasury’s vaults since 2008 to keep its out of control gambling game going backed by tax receipts, & he never appeared to intellectually understand the failure of the Neo-Liberal school of Predatorial Capitalism economics that occurred with that event either; & his paddling around in the Cultural Marxist piranhaed waters of the foreign immigration invasion that’s now openly underway, overtly being overseen by the Liblabcon political order now, was tentative & unenthusiastic to say the least. Strange coming from a man who was thought of as a being a Powellite.
As Godfrey Bloom said a while back, F. was always at heart a single issue campaigner, & that issue was the eu.
What UKIP requires is someone wanting to take on these other threats who has the same stone determination to defeat them as F. had for the eu, … but I don’t see any1 currently in the UKIP captaincy’s orbit who meets that description unfortunately.
Ajax.
I am persuaded that AMW has the necessary willingness and determination.
It seems to me that AMW understands the wider and long term impact of immigration on this nation and will over time lead the debate to address this issue.
As AMW was formerly a member of the labour party with I believe a left wing outlook I would guess she will share your outlook on Capitalism & the City of London.
AMW has the vision of a party leader and does not seem a single issue person to me. I would suggest at least 1 of the candidates for UKIP leadership meets your description.
@Max – I see where you’re coming from but having scouted Ms. Waters out now I’m convinced she’s like Farage in that she’s a single issue activist, but whereas his issue was the eu & had large-scale political impact because of its nature, hers is Anti-Mohammedanism (she’s an obsessive on the issue & talks about v. little else) which electorally has none whatsoever with the average voter who couldn’t care less about it either way.
There’s no need to conjecture what her leadership of UKIP would be like as we already have previous to go on in this regard with ‘Pegida UK’, which was an initially sizeable movement that she set up & jointly led at the end of 2015. After a few events, with lots of speeches about “What we don’t like about Islam’, it’s collapsed & effectively disappeared as an organization now. This is what she would do to UKIP in quick order if she was put in charge of it.
I think she’s an asset to UKIP as an activist member, pressing her issue (which is quite legitimate) in its concourses to impact on policy, but as a leader she’d be an electoral disaster – & UKIP needs votes if it is to survive & challenge the Liblabcon’s ongoing governmental attacks upon the English & Welsh peoples.
Ajax.
Currently I intend to vote for AMW. But I am open-minded and happy to consider all the other candidates.
I am disregarding all ‘strawmans’ and ‘ad hominems’ and what so many others have said about her such as the ‘single issue’thing.
I have not looked into AMWs involvement with Pegida. Is that movement making much progress in Germany etc ?
I have listened to some of her earlier speeches prior to her getting involved with running for UKIP leadership.
I have based my view on AMWs statements and videos since she started talking about running for leadership.
She has announced policies on many issues – not much evidence of a single issue approach as far as I can see.
I will look into submitting an article to be published on here that details my understanding of AMWs policies and political approach.
The contributors to this online newspaper have much expertise and a discussion on the AMW candidature would be of great benefit to me at least.
I want to make as informed a decision as possible re the next leader for UKIP. It is so important for UKIP and the nation that we get this right.
Hi Maximus – Being young and clued up you will easily find a utube video which I think is an outstanding assessment of AMW’s Leadership Bid from a really great not long started man called Simon Harris – perhaps you’ve come across him already? He’s very passionate, having recently realized what’s happening. Anyway, I wish I could link, so that everyone could watch it, but just search Simon Harris on utube, and it’s the second one in, Anne Marie Waters UKIP Leadership Bid. Enjoy!
Hi Dee. Unfortunately I am no longer young. But new to being politically active. I have found the Simon Harris video on utube. At the moment my gut feeling is vote AMW. I have pledged my vote on her website. But I will listen to & read the manifesto’s of the other candidates.
AMW has recently launched her leadership campaign and has already started talking about many of issues raised in the above article and following comments. This is leadership. Identifying the major issues facing the nation, starting the debate and taking positions. This is the sort of leadership that pushes people to decide – they either inspired or turned off.
AMW = deliberate tackling of the wider issues the other party leaders prefer to avoid.
Roger – I agree with this. I remember years ago, living in London and being harassed by assorted junkies and crackheads from some of the local council estates. I always used to wonder what we were going to do with such people. Same in some of the Northern towns, industry had gone and unemployed people walked around in a hopeless daze.
A very difficult problem and now we’ve mad it a thousand times worse, economic migrants are arriving from all corners of the Earth, expecting a free house, healthcare and benefits. All this at a time, when we just don’t have much of a demand for unskilled labour(unless it’s dirt cheap), we already had enough unemployed to contend with.
As Antony says below, our economy was already in the red, we were having to borrow money to keep our welfare system going, what is happening now just can’t work, an impossibility.
I can’t believe that successive governments don’t realise that they’ve set us on a road to perdition, it makes me wonder what the end-game is?
Whatever the end-game, it won’t be good, I think our government knows this and have deliberately set out to destroy us. Our politicians are beneath contempt and people need to realise this before it’s too late.
The above just about sums up my attitude these days, I’ve just stopped listening to politicians (except Nigel), I’ve just learnt, that if you want to predict our political and economic future: expect the worst and you won’t be far wrong.
Anthony’s solution looks just right to me.
Ted
Roger. I have to take issue with one part of your article. Many people have been lied to as to the cause of the present austerity. During the years that Gordon Brown was Chancellor he ran the economy on an almost constant deficit (overspend) of £32b per annum.
When he became PM and Alistair Darling took over, a year later the financial crash occurred. The government pumped a total of £20b into propping up the banks but in addition over two years Alistair Darling increased the overspend on public services by £100b taking it to an eye watering £158b per annum.
Unfortunately there is a ratchet effect that once money has been granted to the public services it can never be reduced because it would be political suicide. The only way to get the public expenditure back to a reasonable proportion of gross national income (GNI) is to allow the economy to expand but not raise expenditure in line with that expansion.
So during the last few years the increase of GDP and GNI has increased by about 2.5% per annum, public sector pay has been capped at 1%. This gradually reduces the public sector expenditure towards an affordable level.
The public sector workers have been living in fantasy land for so long they don’t realise how much better off they are than everyone else in terms of pay, pension, working conditions, leave, job security and so on.
Everyone else does work just as important in its own way to support themselves and to work in industries that generate wealth instead of just consuming it.
When Tony Blair came to power the NHS was consuming 14% of GNI. After Alistair Darling it had risen to between 21 & 22% of GNI. You realise that is half as much again being thrown at it. Did we get a half as much again increase in NHS performance? Of course not, they quickly managed to waste the extra on more management and more IT and then of course on PFI.
Public services are a bottomless pit. You will never get value for money from organisations that do not have to generate money or have to care how it is spent. They will continue to do what they have always done, to annually overspend well knowing that the government has no choice but to pick up the tab the following year.
There are only two solutions to the problem of public service expenditure. Either fix the spending at a proportion of GNI to force the services to live within their means or to otherwise change NI to NHI as now a proportion of every workers income. then if the people demand more be spent then they must agree to an increase in their NHI contribution. This is instead of constantly demanding more be spent as long as someone else pays for it.
Anthony, as I have said before, I am hopeless at economics, but would your suggestion of changing to NHI mean that the poor old worker/taxpayer would continue to subsidise, at even greater cost, those that are not prepared to put anything back into our society themselves? I’m not talking about those for whom the Benefit system was actually intended, but others that choose, for one reason or another, to make living on benefits is a lifestyle choice?
Excellent piece of work Roger. I agree entirely that it’s deliberate evasion by the establishment, etc.
I usually start swearing and shaking my fist at the TV when they tell us that the NHS crisis is due to an ageing population. Well, it isn’t…it’s due to there being too many people in the country as a result of mass immigration.
Kind regards.
I’ve been watching ‘Question Time’ for the last couple of years now, probably started in the run up to the 2015 election, and I regularly try to tune in to election debates when they’re on.
One thing I have always noticed is how as soon as any debate turns to the subject of immigration, any one of the ‘leftist’ panelists will just start shouting over whoever is talking, and the discussion then miraculously turns into a debate about the NHS.
We’ll never be able to have a truly frank, open discussion on this subject, not while we have people who clearly have their heads buried in the sand, refusing to listen, and just shouting over whatever is being said.
‘QT’ is clear evidence of BBC bias, and I think Dimbleby gets some stick for being ‘impartial’, but you can often see him getting frustrated himself now with the panelists.
Same applies to the subject of radical Islamism; anyone who has the balls to openly try to speak the truth immediately gets shouted over, branded a racist, “Religion Of Peace” etc.
I too find myself swearing at the TV, Brenda. Far too often now!
Stuart j, I gave up Question Time some time ago! My life, getting towards bedtime on Thursdays is a great deal calmer now. Even the lure of the wonderful Jacob Rees- Mogg ( sixth child born a couple of days ago and called, with wonderful Moggishness, Sextus!) cannot tempt me to sit through Caroline Lucas and the even more ghastly Boniface screamer.
I did stand through it,( I did the ironing which I had left for at least the last 5 weeks)
I didn`t know Rees – Mogg was on, but he was as usual super, why oh why isn`t he down for the leadership of UKIP?
Scrap HS2
Re-examine overseas aid – just fund calamities.
Didn`t everynody realise the interest on the debt/deficit was more than……..
It is all about not having the ECJ writing our laws or overseeing our justice system after Brexit……….
He is pure UKIP and unflustered and charming with it – an object lesson to a few others on the panel.
Sorry you missed out Dee!
What`s the next to be – Septimus?
StuartJ, yes that’s a recognisable pattern on QT, the Leftard morons shouting the odds to drown out anyone else (they don’t believe in free speech, naturally – no one is allowed to disagree with them without being compared to Hitler) and then ‘our NHS’ being dragged in by its scruff. Like Pavlov’s dogs, the three-quarter-loaded leftard audience start salivating, before clapping loudly in a good imitation of trained sea-lions at a zoo.
Dimblebore, meanwhile, feeds lines to the panellists he most favours and interrupts the ones he doesn’t like. The whole thing is a false debate because it is organised and engineered by the BBC, but it would be the same rot whichever branch of the ‘liberal media’ presented it.
Having said that, I’m going to watch the latest one for the sake of listening to Jacob Rees-Mogg. There’s a drive on at the moment to present him as the next Tory Prime Minister, with online petitions, a flurry of social media, newspaper articles and appearances on TV. As a 100% Brexiteer, patriot, and scourge of the PC leftie loonies, he’s certainly the only Tory I would like to see as PM.
Btw, I believe his 6th child has been named ‘Sixtus’ rather than Sextus’. His parents have given him a few other names to choose from if he doesn’t like that one, as with the other five.