Morning music
Wikipedia
Well worth reading. For me, Wikipedia is an invaluable resource, but there is no doubt that parts have been rendered both less accurate and (therefore) less useful because of tendentious “editing” by, especially, the Jew-Zionist element. Knowledge areas such as Second World War and 1930s political history, social-national groups’ histories, certain “theories”, or phenomena, such as the Coudenhove-Kalergi Plan etc.
A couple of years ago, the malicious UK-based Jewish/Zionist lobby and/or Israel-lobby group, “Campaign Against Antisemitism” [“CAA”] advertized online for any of its supporters with personal Wikipedia accounts to join in a programme of vandalistic “editing” of Wikipedia pages.
Look at the biased language in this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalergi_Plan. “Debunked“; “concocted“; “hoax“; “fabricated“; “racist” etc.
The “editing” is rather obvious; unsubtle. All the same, many readers probably do not realize that a form of vandalism has taken place.
Ultimately, truth overcomes untruth, but sometimes not for a very long time.
Yesterday was St. George’s Day. The image of the warrior saint overcoming the dragon and killing it is powerful in human history.
Tweets seen
Another reason for Blair to be put on trial one day.
Can’t argue with that…
Mass immigration, migration-invasion, and the Rwanda plan
https://www.mattgoodwin.org/p/why-we-need-rwanda
The problem is that, mainly as a down-the-line consequence of the disastrous, catastrophic Second World War and the way it ended (with the European empires unable or unwilling to continue to rule vast tracts of Africa —both sub-Saharan and North Africa—, Asia and elsewhere), the world fell, after 1945, into a downward spiral consisting of overpopulation, wars, civil wars, shambolic and corrupt native rule, environmental degradation etc.
This became Europe’s problem when the instability of much of the Middle East and South Asia, as well as Afghanistan and much of black Africa, sent millions and tens of millions of both “bogus” and “genuine” refugees westward and northward to Europe. Africa’s northern barriers— Libya, Tunisia and Morocco— were penetrated, the fall of Gaddafi being key.
At the same time, Africa and parts of South Asia (notably, Pakistan) and the Middle East were experiencing a population explosion (by births) not mirrored anywhere else.
The UK, for example, has suffered a huge population increase in the past 20-30 years, but almost all of that has been via immigration, and births to recent immigrants, not births to native white British people or even to those non-whites who entered the country decades ago.
It is largely a waste of time, effort and money trying to separate “genuine” from “bogus” refugees (economic migrants etc). The two groups are very similar in type or in most respects, and pose similar problems.
The fact is that the world is in such a state, and now has so many possibilities of long-distance travel, that in principle, on the basis of the post-WW2 legal framework, literally hundreds of millions (800M is a figure often quoted) could make their way to Europe, including the UK (for many a preferred destination).
Those vast hordes could all, or almost all, make a legally-arguable case to be considered as “genuine refugees”, a fact confirmed by the proportion presently allowed to stay in the UK once having set foot on British shores and after assessment— 80%.
Of course, few of the remaining 20% are deported either.
Most immigrants to the UK are not “asylum-seekers” and/or purported “refugees” anyway, but are “lawful migrants”, i.e. “students”, “family members”, supposed spouses or “fiancees”, “highly skilled workers” (Indians who can work a computer) and so on.
Let us take that 800 million figure as correct (it may even be an underestimate). Even if only 10% were to come to the UK (and it could be 90%), that would mean a doubling and more of the population; moreover, an influx of “refugees” most of whom would be unable even to speak basic English, few of whom have any marketable skills, and many of whom are actively hostile to white European culture and civilization, despite wanting to live in Europe.
UK society is under stress and strain already from mass immigration. It could not take 80M more immigrants, or even 8M more, without descending into either chaos or socio-political upheaval. At present, the overall immigrant influx (not just supposed “refugees”) numbers about a million a year; supposedly “only” about 700,000-800,000 “net” because there are a couple of hundred thousand leavers every year, but most of those leaving are real white Brits emigrating to what they think might be a better life, or a better retirement, in Australasia, Canada, or European countries such as France and Spain.
Very few of the ~1M immigrants each year are of any use to the UK. A few are, true, though mostly in unskilled or partly-skilled occupations that could be done either by Brits or, soon, by AI, robots etc.
The best that can be hoped for is that the bulk of those entering the UK every year are merely neutral or parasitic, rather than actively hostile and/or criminal.
The whole question of immigration is not some side-issue. It affects the income, life-chances, living standards, food, water, shelter and safety of every single person in the UK.
10 years from now, there might be as many as 10M more people in the UK by reason of immigration. A population of the size of a city such as London, albeit spread over the UK, and populated by alien hordes the majority of which will be, at best, parasitic. Is that possible, or sustainable? No.
As to the present UK government policy of deportation to Rwanda, I have several problems with it, the first of which is around numbers.
It seems that, if it becomes operational, the Rwanda flights will carry, at most, a few hundred failed “asylum-seekers” per week. In a situation where even the “small boat” invasion across the Channel amounts to several thousand per week, the Rwanda flights will only deal with about 10% of the “small boats” invasion problem. The Rwanda policy does not even touch the larger migration-invasion, the “legal” (lawful) sort. The “small boats” are, at most 20%, probably 10%, of the entire problem.
That is on the basis that the Rwanda flights will start, that they will continue, and that they will carry more than a handful of deportees.
Another question arising is the capacity of Rwanda, a small country (somewhat larger than Wales, but with 4x the population), to absorb deportees on a large scale, most of whom will not even be from Africa, or that part of Africa.
Rwanda was the scene of the Hutu-Tutsi genocide of 1994; it has a history of ethnic tension.
What happens, in such a country, one of 14M people, densely packed (the most densely-populated on mainland Africa, and the fifth most densely-packed in the world excepting city-states, small islands etc, at over 1,400 persons per square mile— the UK is about 722 per sq. mile, England about 1,100 p.s.m.) when thousands, tens of thousands of foreign deportees arrive? At some point, there may be a local backlash.
What happens if the Rwanda government changes, or changes policy? Are their words, or treaties, reliable? Have they ever been, in Africa or indeed anywhere?
In any case, the Rwanda plan will apply only to (some) deportees from the small percentage called “illegal” migrants; the vast majority of migrants to the UK are notionally “legal” or lawful, so will not be subject to deportation at all.
The Rwanda plan is little more than a public relations exercise in an election year. Cosmetic only. Even if “successful” (operational), it will deal with only, perhaps, 1% of the overall mass immigration problem.
Matt Goodwin (see tweet and blog article above) sees the Rwanda plan as at least being a statement of intent, but it is doubtful whether it can be scaled-up, expanded to other countries in Africa or elsewhere.
The main question remains: how to stop over a million non-Europeans entering the UK alone each year? How to reduce the proportion of non-Europeans in the UK (and in Europe as a whole), and how to, eventually, create an ethnostate with the idea of laying the ground for a much later “super-people”?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwanda
More tweets seen
https://twitter.com/Sprinterfactory/status/1783038525681574173
Not “dying“— being killed (by “them”).
That is somewhere around my own view of Penny Mordaunt. Her trump card, amid all the Jews and non-whites in the Conservative Party MP ranks, is that she is actually English. I cannot see much else to commend her as a potential Prime Minister, though there is nothing too damaging against her either.
In fact, though, if it turns out that the Conservative Party is reduced to about 50 MPs this year or by early 2025, it will not much matter whether she becomes leader of that little band or not.
In any case, her seat at Portsmouth North is a “bellwether”, i.e. usually votes the same way as the winning side in general elections (in the case of Portsmouth North, since 1966), so Ms. Mordaunt is quite likely to lose her seat in 2024/2025, though her high profile may enable her to avoid that fate. In 2019, her vote-share was 61.4%; the Labour vote a mere 27%. Labour has not exceeded 40% there since its win in 2005.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penny_Mordaunt;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portsmouth_North_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2020s
News from Ukraine
“Russian troops have reportedly pushed through Ukrainian lines to take the strategic town of Ocheretyne in Donetsk – the latest scoop for Vladimir Putin‘s forces amid a recent string of gains on the battlefield.
Videos shared on the Telegram messaging app by Russian military bloggers appeared to show the Russian tricolour flying atop a damaged building in the town that once was home to 30,000 Ukrainians.
The town was lost after Ukrainian units fled their positions under heavy fire, Msocow’s defence ministry claimed, as a Ukrainian army spokesperson said the invaders were ‘using the entire arsenal of weapons available… including chemical poisons,’ in their assault.
The capture of Ocheretyne, a local rail hub, is a key milestone on the way to the city of Pokrovsk some 20 miles further west – an intersection of important roads and a railway junction that forms the linchpin of Ukraine’s military operations in the region.
Elsewhere, Russian divisions are pummelling towns on the outskirts of Chasiv Yar, a strategically important hill town that would allow them to move toward Sloviansk and Kramatorsk, key cities Ukraine controls in the eastern region of Donetsk.
And missiles and drones continue to batter energy infrastructure and residential areas in Ukraine‘s second-largest city, Kharkiv, which is only about 20 miles from the Russian border.
Moscow‘s soldiers are pushing forward at several points along the 600-mile front – perhaps to maximise their gains over their depleted and war weary adversaries before new supplies of Western munitions arrive.“
[Daily Mail]
As I have predicted on the blog, there will probably be a stunning Russian advance across all of Eastern Ukraine in 2024-2025. It might even end the war, either by collapse of the Zelensky dictatorship or by a Russian victory (defined as quasi-permanent occupation of all of Eastern Ukraine and the coasts of the Black Sea and Sea of Azov).
Western arms and ammunition may delay that Russian victory, but the Kiev regime is running out of soldiers.
Late tweets
Were National Socialism not banned in Germany, its chosen party would be the most popular by far amongst the voters and especially younger voters.
Late music
Crowdfunder
Should anyone wish to support my crowdfunder, or share the link, it is here: https://www.givesendgo.com/GC14J
Ian Robert Millard 