Catch them Young... And Teach them Wrong

Every month in Britain a farmer commits suicide. And every 2 weeks a soldier commits suicide. But, never mind, Brownies are taught to oppose the "patriarchy" (Lucy Porter on BBC TV "Mastermind", 28 December). Cry, the (once-upon-a-time) Beloved Country!... "Everyone's right to life shall be protected by law," states Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights. But it doesn't, or maybe can't. Instead, the Convention is used to enable foreigners occupy the UK. Even though there is nothing in the Convention about immigration control. So it shouldn't.

Justice requires Balance

Lawyers intervene in immigration cases when they think an immigration officer's decision might be wrong. But they only intervene when someone wants to stay in the UK. Decisions might equally be wrong the other way, by allowing someone to stay. But then lawyers never ever intervene. This is unjust. Justice requires balance..... Allowing lawyers to intervene in immigration cases isn't God-given. It's a choice by politicians; as in other countries. Until control is back in the hands of immigration officers there should be no more legal aid for immigration. Funding our own occupation is nonsensical.

Britain: And the Case of Contradictory Policies Working to Opposite Purposes

Britain's Prime Minister,Boris Johnson, has announced an increase in Defence spending. Defence is to prevent these islands being occupied by foreigners. But taxpayers' money is also provided for legal aid for immigration cases. This litigation contests immigration decisions, and, often successful, enables foreigners to live here. These decisions are often based on the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees andon Human Rights. Both set up during the Cold War and with the Second World War in everyone's minds. Now clearly outdated in their intent when considering immigration. The contradiction between spending money on warfare while spending money to bring about occupation is very stark. And absurd. And should be ended. Forthwith. If not sooner!

Equality reinforces Inequality

Britain's obsession with "equality" leads to more inequality. Same sex marriage and immigration laws mean that foreign men who are wives and foreign women who are husbands can live here.So every day native British men become strangers in their own land.

It's not the Distant Past, it's the Recent Past... that needs Rectifying

It's not the 19th century and earlier that America and Britain should be self-flagellating about. It's more recent history that has caused huge demographic changes about which we should be self-critical. In 1965 President Johnson relaxed the USA's strict immigration laws. And in 1979 Mrs Thatcher broke her promise to stop foreign men using marriage to live in the UK. Since about 10,000 men a year exploit this loophole that has resulted in some 400,000 men (and their children) living in these islands.

The 1960s... when the Future began

It's a truism that the future began years ago. Decades ago, in fact. In Britain's case back in 1962. Conscription had just ended, so young foreign men wanted to come here to avoid call-up in their own countries. The Commonwealth Immigration Act came into force in June of that year, having been deliberately delayed to enable as many people to come here who wanted to. The result was a rush of young men. After June 1962 they sought loopholes, lawyers and marriage.And brought in relatives..... In the case of the USA the future began in 1965 when Presidetn Johnson relaxed the country's strict immigration laws. Conscription ended in 1975, which was an added attraction for young men from other countries who wanted to avoid the draft.

Will no taker of silk see the Light?

The President of the Supreme Court, Lord Reid, defends the independence of the judiciary (BBC Radio 4 "Today"). Activist lawyers prevent deportations. Surely one of the obligations of Government is to defend the realm.... Britain's borders are clearly porous. So surely there is at least one judge who can see the light and prosecute the Government for failing to defend the realm. Justice shouldn't be one-sided: it requires balance. Which is, indeed, its symbol.

The Welfare of Britain and the British People

Italy's former Interior Minister Mr. Salvini goes to court today. He is being prosecuted for not allowing illegal aliens to land in Italy. His defence is that he did it "for Italy and the Italian people". So, conversely, why isn't Britain's Home Secretary prosecuted for allowing illegal aliens to land in Britain contrary to the welfare of Britain and the British people? (Over 7,000 have crossed the English Channel in small boats so far this year). And it begs the questions: Who brought this case against Mr. Salvini and who pays for it?

Funding our own Occupation

Britain's flourishing immigration industry, funded by the poor British taxpayer, comprises two barmy armies in confrontation with each other. Lawyers, NGOs, Advisors, the Council of Europe and politicians v. immigration officers, judges & Tribunals, court officials, and consular officials...and politicians.... Politicians are in both camps because as well as being responsible for laws the single biggest issue politicians help their constituents with is immigration - i.e. helping foreigners to live in these small, stressed, and divided overcrowded islands.

Flannel and Waffle on the "Titanic"

Labour Party Leader Sir Kier Starmer's themes for his first Party Conference speech were said to be pro-Britain and pro-family. If he's truly pro-Britain he'd oppose allowing illegals to take up permanent residecnce here. And he'd oppose foreign men being allowed to use marriage to live in the UK. If they want to raise families they can do that in their own countries. By ignoring these problems Sir Kier's speech was just flannel and waffle. And Britain continues to rush headlong into disaster while politicians re-arrange the deckchairs on our very own "Titanic".

The Whampanogs have it!

"I certainly regret it!" - said a Whampanog referring to the arrival of the "Mayflower" in 1620. (BBC Radio 4 "Today".) The Pilgrim Fathers crossed the Atlantic because of persecution, which is the reason for refugee status today. They numbered about 100. The number of illegals claiming refugee status who have crossed the English Channel in small boats and been allowed into England this year is over 5,000. We'll certainly regret it.

Lunatic House

The Immigration Offices in Croydon are appropriately in Lunar House. "Welcome to the Asylum" was published by Centre for Policy Studies back in 2001. There's a separate section for asylum seekers. These mostly young men don't come here because of our climate or our once beautiful countryside that's being rapidly built over. They come because they have found a way to get around the constraints on normal travellers who have passports and (if necessary) visas. And they get permanent residence. Many do it to join their compatriots already here who encourage them to come. Having friends/relatives living in the UK is no qualification for refugee status, but it works!.... When the new invaders who land on our shores daily (in calm seas) learn that Britain once had slave traders will they turn around and go back home? Or will they come to accept that they too are guilty? Or, more likely, are they just here for what they can get?..... Opposition to porous borders is natural. Yet it provokes intense hostility! Why? Bitain, like other countries, has armed forces (including nuclear weapons in Britain's case). Immigration controls perform the same function, but without killing people. So why is it that those who want stricter, but fair and just immigration control are subjected to such hostility? It's unbalanced, irrational and barmy.

Stop Digging!

Half a century is a fair chunk of modern times. Britain's comprehensive immigration system has been going on for about 50 years funded by the taxpayer: lawyers, judges, tribunals, NGOs, translators, advisors, immigration officers and civil servants. And in addition the poor bloody British taxpayer pays for state benefits, since asylum seekers aren't allowed to work. Time to stop digging!....Just have immigration officers and a few civil servants. Like other countries. Get rid of the rest..... And since we've left the European Union we ought to be able to leave the UN Convention on Refugees with far less difficulty.....Another hole: foreign men have been allowed to use marriage to live in the UK since 1975. About 10,000 men a year exploit this loophole. That's been said to be "not many". But cumulatively that's some 400,000 men and their children who are living in these islands. Which is many. Mrs Thatcher promised in her 1979 election manifesto to close this concession. But she didn't. The 1975 Sex Discrimination Act established the Equal Opportunities Commission which campaigned vigorously and successfully to oppose the Conservatives' election policy. The EOC, of course, was funded by the taxpayer. As are politicians. With all this bureacracy it's a wonder there's any money left in the Treasury!

Illegal and Immoral

The asylum industry has 2 arrows to its bow: Legal and Moral. Leaving the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees would change refugee status from a right to a concession. Which is what it should be. Bogus asylum seekers exploiting the present system is immoral. Using the present system to avoid normal immigration controls is also immoral. Particularly since some cannot be returned to their own countries (Iran, Vietnam, China) because they don't take back their illegals..... Legal aid is given for immigration cases, which means the British taxpayer funds the occupation of his own country by other people. It needn't be; the USA doesn't. And it's highly immoral......21 people traffickers are in jail (BBC Radio 4). We weren't told where. And we weren't told why. Surely it's not a crime to buy and sell small boats. But if it is then the Home Secretary can also be considered a people trafficker for ordering the UK Border Force to bring illegal aliens to England (over 5,000 this year alone)- and should be in jail.

Adapt or Die

The UK famously doesn't have a written Constitution because times change and we don't want to be legally bound by words that have ceased to be appropriate.... So it is strange that we signed up to the 1948 UN Convention on Refugees and the 1951 European Convention on Human Rights..... We have, after much prolonged argument, left the European Union; and we have, overnight with no argument, suspended the Hong Kong Extradition Treaty..... So it's about time we left or suspended the UN Convention on Refugees..... Nearly 5,000 illegal aliens have claimed refugee status in Britain so far this year by crossing the English Channel in small boats, even though they could have claimed asylum in France..... Furthermore, we are told that millions of people from all over the world are legally entitled to live in these small islands because they would qualify for refugee status..... So, better late than never: Adapt (leave/suspend) or die (suicide).

Inciting Crime

What a country!... We Leave the European Union to "Take back control of our borders!" and plainly don't control them. We have a UK Border Force to keep out illegals which helps illegals come here. And a Government that, instead of deterring criminal activity, knowingly incites it by rendering assistance to illegals entering the UK and then not deporting them. Britain deserves all it gets!

When is a Crime not a Crime?

Rear-Admiral Parry says that asylum seekers should apply in the first safe country.wants the Royal Navy to help illegals cross the English Channel to England. (BBC Radio 4 "Today".) Why? Because it saved 18,000 lives in the Mediterranean. The Admiral didn't say where those 18,000 people are now..... 21 people traffickers have been jailed. (Radio 4 "Any Questions?") We weren't told where. Nor what for. It's not clear to me that they have committed a crime. Being in a country illegally is a serious crime. But presumably that doesn't apply to people traffickers..... The Dublin Convention, we were told, says that asylum seekers should apply in the first safe country. France is obviously a safe country. So if they enter Britain from France they shouldn't be given asylum here.It's against the law! Anyone who grants them asylum here should be prosecuted. By the Crown Prosecution Service. That is what the CPS is for..... Previous reference to the CPS was on 19 March 2019 of this blog.

When and when not to Defend the Realm

4 August 1914: Britain declares war on Germany. Germany didn't want it. Why would they? Germany was already at war with Russia and France.... 4 August 2020: England is being invaded by small boats crossing the Channel with illegals (mostly young men who were in France illegally where they could have claimed asylum). But the British Goverment does nothing to prevent it. When we weren't being invaded we react and when we are we don't.

Adapt or Die

The UK famously doesn't have a written constitution. This is because circumstance and conditions change over time. So it is strange that we signed up to the 1948 UN Convention on Refugees and the 1951 European Convention on Human Rights. And that we are still bound by them, even though they were drawn up during the Cold War and with the Second World War fresh in everyone's memories.... But we have now left the European Union and have suspended an Extradition Treaty with Hong Kong.... So we could just as easily leave or suspend our commitments on refugees and human rights.

Funding Immigration

Britain's Members of Parliament are on holiday. But they're not idle. They're always busy helping with constituents' problems. The most common one is immigration. MPs' salaries are paid by the British taxpayer. As are the salaries of immigration lawyers, the Equality and Human Rights Commission, etc. Brits spend time, money and effort on enabling other people to occupy these unfortunate islands! What a barmy country, working for its own demise! No wonder foreigners target Britain as the place to come to....

3 Wise Monkeys .. or .. Second-class Citizens in our own Country

Tokugawa Ieyasu became Shogun in Japan in 1603. He united the country and gave it stability until America's Commodore Perry forced the country to open its doors in 1853. The Tokugawa Shrine in Nikko has a carving of the 3 wise monkeys..... They could have something to say about present-day Britain: Britain allows foreigners to live here even if Brits can't live in their countries - See no evil; Britain has "equality" laws that entitle these foreigners to deprive Brits of work, promotion, etc - Hear no evil; "positive action" laws allow organisations like the BBC, British Transport Police, etc. to recruit native British men last - Speak no evil.

Be Careful of what you Want... Because you might get it

Boris Johnson contacts President Macron of France regularly. Johnson wants trade deals. Macron wants rid of illegals. Britain voted Brexit (52%) mainly because of "Immigration" and "Control our borders!" We had trade deals with the European Union. Now we don't. Instead we've got illegals crossing the English Channel in small boats (over 3,000 so far this year). What a country! What a mess! We are reduced to kneeling! In humility...

Institutional Inequality of 14 July Continued

Parliament is paramount. The Extradition Treaty with Hong Kong has been suspended indefinitely. So any legal constraints about illegals entering Britain can also be suspended. Besides, Boris Johnson said soon after winning the 2019 election he won't change Britain's (chaotic/unjust) asylum system. He didn't say he can't. "Won't"means he doesn't want to. "Can't" wouldn't be true.

End the Gravy Train!

Lawyers have long been involved in immigration. It's an endless gravy train. It's also undemocratic that lawyers over-rule elected politicians. They justify it by jealousy guarding judicial independence. But former senior Supreme Court judge Neuberger said "We're only doing what politicians want us to." So politicians can over-rule judges. If they have the will to... When peasants controlled London during the Peasants' Revolt in 1381 they didn't hang the lords. They hanged the judges...... "Power to Judges..." is on this blog on 8 November 2016, while "Power to Parliament" is (appropriately) on 5 November 2016.

"There's one law for the poor..." And it unjustly favours them

Shamima Begum, the jihadi who went to Syria and had her British nationality revoked, has won a second appeal to restore it..... It's a bit rich the Appeal Court judges determining that she needs to be in the UK to argue her case, because thousands of people are turned back at UK borders every year. (Chris Huhne MP said 30,000/year in 2010.) Some are refused entry unjustly,in my opinion. The reason immigration officers take this hard line is because they know that once in the UK the system is wide open for abuse and they will never leave..... For a country obsessed with equality there's a glaring inequality that's overlooked. Legal aid. Shamima Begum of course gets legal aid. Someone with legal aid has a whip hand, as far as litigation is concerned, over someone who doesn't. They can't lose. Legal aid is given for immigration (unlike in the USA). But no one gets it to oppose immigration. I know; I've tried. Legal aid is, of course, taxpayers' money. So we fund our own demographic displacement. What a country! What a mess! What injustice! Why doesn't anyone bend the knee about this?

Mrs Thatcher's Discord

Edward Colston's statue in Bristol was replaced by a statue of an Afro-Caribbean woman with a raised fist. A deliberately confrontational gesture (of both fist and statue). It's a fair bet that woman can live in a Caribbean or African country which I (and most Brits) can't. She is very privileged if she can live in two different non-EU countries..... On 4 May 1979 Mrs Thatcher said outside 10 Downing Street "Where there is discord let there be harmony." She had just been elected Prime Minister with a promise to restrict immigration. But within days she allowed Vietnamese to settle here, and within weeks Iranians. And in October it was announced she had broken her promise to stop foreign men using marriage to live in the UK. Since some 10,000 men a year exploit this loophole there are now around 400,000 foreign men and their children living in these islands. Where there was harmony there is now discord.

Institutional Inequality

Most nations control their borders on a reciprocal basis. Britain has to be different. The Government talks of three million Hong Kong citizens being allowed to settle here. (When Hong Kong was handed back to China in 1997 50,000 Hong Kongers and their dependents were allowed to settle in the UK.) Brits can't live in Hong Kong. Not unless they are Chinese Brits, of course. Being allowed to live in two non-EU countries is the great privilege of the age. (See this blog of 25 March 2020.) It is also denied to most people. Britain, obsessed with equality, is peculiarly unequal.

If any Statue is to be pulled down it should be Mrs Thatcher's

Mrs Thatcher was elected on 3 May 1979 with a promise to cut immigration to the UK. But within days she allowed Vietnamese to settle here, and within weeks Iranians. Within months she had broken her promise to stop foreign men using marriage to live in the UK. So why has she got a statue?!.... Britain is perceived as weak and divided. In the 1970s Vietnamese boat people sailed past Chinese ports and Portuguese Macao to get to Hong Kong. In the Summer of 1979 Iranians on the wrong side of the Revolution knew where to go - Heathrow..... Illegals from Vietnam and Iran are now encouraged to come here by their compatriots already here..... And Vietnam and Iran want hard currency, so they don't take back their illegals who other countries want to deport..... Yesterday a record number of illegals crossed the English Channel - 180 in 15 small boats - and were escorted into Dover by the UK Border Force. This ridiculous situation of the UK Border Force doing the exact opposite of what it was established to do was, of course, on the orders of Britain's Home Secretary, Priti Patel. More boats arrived today. Priti Patel today unveiled Britain's POST-BREXIT POINTS-BASED IMMIGRATION SYSTEM. This "offers equality of access to people of all countries." It's not equality if Brits can live in EU countries but can't live in, say, Asian countries. Reciprocity between countries is equality.

"Control our Borders!"

"Control our borders!" was the mantra that won the Brexit Referendum in 2016. Some borders! Some control! Non-EU immigration to the UK is unjust, unequal and unfair. But it's deliberate. Muslims are allowed to bring 4 "wives" and their children to live in the UK. That's deliberate. So is the chain migration of relatives. Deliberate = Control. Just ineffective control..... It's said failed asylum seekers can't be deported to their own country if it's at war. But no country is at war. Wars have to be declared. There are plenty of conflicts in the world. But no wars. So they can be deported. Failure to deport illegals is to surrender to invasion and occupation.

A Double Triple Whammy

Foreigners can live in the UK though Brits can't live in their countries. "Equality" laws entitle them to "equality" with Brits. "Positive action" entitles the BBC, British Transport Police, etc. to recruit native British men last. .... A triple whammy. .... Foreigners know this. British MPs know that. Black Lives Matter know it. Another triple whammy. So British men are second-class citizens in their own country, (David) Lammy.

"Who controls the past controls the future. And who controls the present controls the past" - George Orwell, "1984"

If I were a Jamaican walking the streets of Bristol I think I would feel a secret sense of pleasure at seeing the philanthropist Edward Colston's statue. Knowing that the slave trader was long gone while I was walking where he had once walked.... The tail of agitators wags the dog of British culture, history and tradition..... It's daft a country apologising for its past. But if Britain should apologise it should apologise for declaring war on Germanin 1914 and 1939, and for bombinhg German cities.

Free Speech Matters

Last Saturday, a week ago today, 3 men were killed (and 3 others badly injured) by a Libyan with refugee status in Reading's Forbury Park. This was just after a Black Lives Matter demo had taken place in the Park... The next day a football match was held between Manchester City and Burnley. The players "took the knee" in support of the Black Lives Matter movement - insultingly overlooking the Reading tragedies as if they had never happened. And then a small plane flew overhead trailing the banner "White Lives Matter Burnley". The chap who did this got the sack from his job. ... This was illegal, because Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights says "Everyone has the right to freedom of expression."..... Article 3 of the Convention says "No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment." So, back on 10 June 1977, citing Art. 3, I complained to the European Commission of Human Rights that the British Government allows foreign and Commonwealth men to live in the UK through marriage even though I (and other British men) often can't live in their countries through marriage. My complaint was rejected on the grounds that I hadn't been subject to a decision that applied to me personnally..... The chap responsible for flying that banner over Manchester was subject to a decision that applied to him personnally.... I rest my case.

A Patriotic Task for Goalkeepers

Footballers campaign against racism. They're now all wearing "Black Lives Matter" on the back of their shirts. The worst racism is having porous borders. Which must ineluctably lead to the end of the British race. Except that there's no such thing as the British race. Border controls relate to people with other nationalities. So wanting strict (but fair) border controls is Nationalism. Or, since it is defensive, it can be described as Patriotism. So why don't footballers campaign against Britain's porous borders?

Cash, Crash... and Change

Britain's economy has crashed, but that doesn't stop workers in the Equality and Diversity industry being paid for by the British taxpayer. So if we're all going down at least we all go down equally. Except that it's not equal. Because the taxpayer also funds legal aid in immigration cases. So we pay for the loss of territory, money, and jobs, and so for more "Equality" workers and immigration lawyers, etc..... It's widely said - in response to the Black Lives Matter movement - Britain needs to change. It most surely does. Foreign women are entitled, because of "equality" laws, to deprive British men of work and promotion both because they're foreign and women..... It's hard to imagine there's another country in this whole, wide world that, in addition to having "equality" laws that state everyone must be treated equally, has "positive action", that legally entitles native British men to be put last on a recruitment list.

Lord Peter Hain

Lord Peter Hain says (BBC Radio 4, 30 May) he is "anti-racism and supports gender equality and gay marriage". In which case he should oppose foreign men being able to use marriage to live in the UK. Because British men often can't live in their countries through marriage, and even if they could, these countries don't have "equality" laws enabling British men to deprive citizens of work, promotion, etc. And same-sex marriages that involve foreigners (from outside the EU) result in even more foreigners exploiting these inequalities - occupation of territory, work, etc...... Lord Hain, being an African and who therefore sees Britain as an outsider or foreigner does, is doubtless well aware of these injustices. You would think he would be more concerned with the Chinese takeover of Africa than with exacerbating the status of native British men. (Though for all I know he does oppose foreign men using marriage to live in the UK.)

35 Years of Wrong "Rights"

Some Leavers voted for the UK to leave the European Union in the 2016 Referendum because they don't like human rights interventions in immigration cases. But European human rights are nothing to do with the EU. They are the province of the Council of Europe, set up in Strasbourg in 1951 in response to Second World War atrocities. Therefore the last thing human rights should do is to enable minorities to establish themselves in Europe..... In 1977 I knew that the European Convention on Human Rights would be used to challenge Mrs Thatcher's intended policy to stop foreign men using marriage to live in the UK. So on 10 June 1977 I complained to the European Commission of Human Rights that the British Government allows foreign men to live in the UK through marriage even though I (and other British men) cannot live in their countries through marriage.... This, surely, is what human rights were meant to prevent. I cited Article 3 of the Convention: "cruel and inhuman treatment". But the Commission rejected my complaint on the grounds I hadn't been subject to a decision by a Government body. So I complained to the Equal Opportunities Commission, which I knew was campaigning against Conservative Party policy to end this concession. Its response was that my complaint was outside its ambit. So I complained to the European Commission about the EOC. Its response (eventually) was that I should challenge the EOC in the UK courts. To this end I applied for legal aid for which I was financially eligible. But the Law Society rejected my request.... 35 years ago today the European Court of Human Rights determined in favour of 3 (non-British) women whose husbands weren't allowed to live in the UK. This was the final nail in the coffin of Mrs Thatcher's 1979 election manifesto promise. The British Government's response was to make it harder for foreign wives to live in the UK. ("The Times" 29 May 1985, page 1.) Which is a cause of much hardship, as described in this blog of 22 February 2017.

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck - it must be a wife

Lawyers are deeply involved in immigration, often at public expense. Muslims can bring 4 "wives" to live in the UK. So it's about time lawyers prosecuted the Home Secretary and/or Prime Minister for allowing bigamists to live here..... Doubtless the 4 wives Muslims are allowed to bring to the UK aren't called "wives" for the purpose of conforming to British law. Because bigamy is illegal. But if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck - it must be a wife.

The Rule of Law

It's normal to think people who enter a country illegally are breaking the law. But they're not if the intention is to claim asylum. People in Northern France scheming to cross the English Channel to England and who haven't claimed asylum in France are breaking the law by being in France. The Rule of Law is one of the pillars of the European Union. So they should be deported. But they aren't, which enables them to cross the Channel legally...... Asylum seekers are entitled to 3 appeals. That's 4 cracks of the whip! It's like having a referendum, not liking the result, and having 3 more. If native Brits don't like the first decision they don't have any appeals to contest it. Justice requires balance. And that's a serious imbalance..... There's a huge backlog of immigration cases. Allowing appeals takes time, and time enables newcomers to form friendships, put down roots, and devise a means of disappearing underground if the last appeal fails. This situation is a failure of governance, incompetence and a dereliction of duty for failing to protect our borders. It has also been going on a long time.

Past Caring; Present Injustice

The coronavirus has focussed on care homes and their disjuncture with the NHS. But what is neglected in these media reports is that people have to sell their homes in order to pay for going into a care home. Which means their children are losing their expected inheritance which these parents have worked long and hard for. By contrast, the immigration industry (legal aid lawyers, Advisors, NGOs, Tribunals) is largely funded by the British taxpayer. The Government can find money to enable foreigners to occupy these islands, but it can't make care homes as free for elderly patients just as the NHS is free for all and sundry. (In fairness, Prime Minister Boris Johnson has said he intends to end this discrepancy.)

Moral, Morals (For "High Moral Ground" please see this blog of 29 July 2019) and Power

Dominic Raab, before deputising as Prime Minister, expressed opposition to "positive discrimination" (also called "positive action"). Mrs May criticised him in the House of Commons for calling feminists "obnoxious bigots". (BBC Radio 4 "Profile")……… It's obvious feminism and immigration are closely linked because the 1975 Sex Discrimination Act was modelled on the 1965 Race Relations Act (which applied to "nationality", not just race). And the vigorous campaign by feminists in 1979 that enables foreign men to live in the UK through marriage..... Moral: Britain's problems are self-inflicted... .. Power controls language and language controls power. Britain's power is a shadow of its former self. But... the Government's leaflet on the coronavirus (sent with a letter from the Prime Minister) uses "herself" to describe an anonymous individual instead of the usual "himself". There is more on this theme on this blog at "Language Traduces Thought" on 18 April 2017.

When is a Pillar not a Pillar?

BBC News yesterday at 6 p.m.showed thousands of young men in Calais trying to get to England. Most will, on past experience. There was no social distancing (which is imposed, quite rightly in my opinion, more strictly in France than in the UK) to prevent the spread of coronavirus. No one asked why they didn't claim asylum in France. Someone said they had done nothing illegal. But being in a country illegally is a serious crime. And if they hadn't claimed asylum in France there were there illegally. The Rule of Law is one of the three Pillars (together with Democracy and Human Rights) of the European Union. Which clearly France doesn't abide by when in comes to sans papiers wanting to go somewhere else.

What is the Great Privilege of our Times?

It is at times like this (a devastating world-wide pandemic) that an extraordinary privilege becomes apparent. This is the ability to live in two different countries (excepting the UK's 4 countries & the EU). People in transnational marriages have this privilege. Women always; men sometimes. This makes miscegenation very attractive. The UK is obsessed about equality but foreign men can live here through marriage. This rank privilege is (partly) because the Equal Opportunities Commission campaigned vigorously to defeat Mrs Thatcher's 1979 election promise to end it. Immigration was later determined by the House of Lords on 7 July 1983 to be outside the ambit of the 1975 Sex Discrimination Act. The EOC was legally required to support complaints by men as well as women, but its response to my complaint about this in 1977 was that it was outside its ambit. Nevertheless, the EOC - as stated above - spent public money campaigning hard and successfully to defeat Government policy. Public money spent to enable foreigners live in the UK....

Mrs Humphry Ward (1852-1920), "the greatest woman of her time"

When the novelist Mrs Humphry Ward died 100 years ago on 24 March 1920 she was called "the greatest woman of her time". In 1908 she founded the Women's National Anti-Suffrage League. Also in 1908 she founded the Passmore Edwards Settlement for orphans in London's Tavistock Square. It is now called the Mary Ward Centre. In 1916 she went closer to the British front line than any other woman gathering material for a book that was intended to encourage the Americans to join in the War. The horrors she described probably had the opposite effect. In the 1970s I requested the Greater London Council to put up a plaque to Mrs Ward on the Mary Ward Centre. This was refused on the grounds she hadn't lived there.

The Abuse of Power

Patricia Hewitt called her part in the campaign to stop Mrs Thatcher from implementing her 1979 election promise to stop foreign men from using marriage to live in the UK her "most satisfying achievement". Her 1982 book was called "The Abuse of Power". But she herself held power in Tony Blair's Government as Equality Minister. And allowing foreign men to live in the UK through marriage gives British (and British resident) women a great privilege, because they can live in their husband's country as well as the UK. Protecting and sustaining privilege is clearly an abuse of power. Now, in addition to "equality" laws that entitle foreigners to deprive Brits of work & promotion there is the "inequality" law known as "positive action" that puts native British men last when it comes to recruitment. The BBC has adopted this unjust policy. Which is ironic because George Orwell, who worked at the BBC, famously wrote "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." Modern detective dramas invariably have women in dominant roles. So messing with the classics in this way is a tyranny and an abuse of power. The latest instance, in the news, is that a minor female character in H.G. Wells' "The War of the Worlds" is now the main character in a new BBC version. For more on this theme please see this blog of 26 July 2018 and 10 March 2019. Thanks!

A Serious Cause for Impeachment

President Trump's impeachment should be dismissed as "frivolous". But there is a serious matter for which he should be impeached. The President allows foreigners permanent residence in the USA even though Americans can't have permanent residence in their countries. In Britain, legal aid is given for immigration. So in 1980, having been granted legal aid for my divorce, I then applied for legal aid to bring a case of Treason against Mrs Thatcher for allowing foreigners to live in the UK while I and other Brits can't live in their countries. But the Law Society rejected my request. … How unctuous and oft have we heard the mantra: No one is above the law. But access to the law is not available to all. Foreigners can and do go to law to enable them to live in a country. But the native inhabitants have no such access to prevent them. This is a systemic imbalance. Besides, people eligible for legal aid have a risk-free access to the law, while others don't. This gives them an unfair advantage and is another serious systemic imbalance.