Majorityrights News > Category: Immigration

“Why Amber Rudd Quit”

ITVNews, 29 April 2018:

Rudd has chosen to resign because she felt she could not defend herself against the charge that she took her eye off the immigration ball.

Her excuse, to herself, was that her priority - for obvious reasons - was combating terrorism and improving domestic security.

But of course all ministers are supposed to multi-task, and she knew that excuse would not fly in public.

So she decided to stand down this afternoon, even before the Guardian published a leaked letter from her to the PM from January 2017 - which seemingly showed that far from being unaware there are targets for the expulsion of illegal immigrants, she actually set such a target.

  Letters exchanged between Amber Rudd and Theresa May

  Amber Rudd’s resignation letter to Theresa May

Amber Rudd signs off her letter say she will continue to work for her constituents of Hastings and Rye.

  Theresa May’s response to Amber Rudd’s resignation

Theresa May told Amber Rudd she should be proud of the way she led the Home Office.

My sources tell me that there were other such official papers about targets knocking around. And therefore she decided to quit - because she felt that MPs would simply never give her the benefit of the doubt.

Potential replacements: Hunt, Gove & Javid.

In a way she has been hung out to dry by her own department.

It is extraordinary that her officials told her, before that fateful select committee hearing last week, that there were no targets for the removal of illegal immigrants.

And perhaps less extraordinary is that other officials leaked and briefed against her - since much of Whitehall is detached from ministers.

For the avoidance of doubt, she jumped: “I am told there was no pressure from the PM.”

The point is that Rudd’s exit is arguably the most serious resignation May has suffered in her almost two years as PM. For one thing the Home Secretary is one of the great offices of state.

More damagingly for May, the policy which underlay Rudd’s doom - the hostile environment for immigration which has caused so much unpleasantness for the Windrush migrants - was May’s not Rudd’s.

In other words, Rudd’s departure strips May of her human shield.

Last updated Mon 30 Apr 2018

Mortifying:

With cheerful taken-for-grantedness of the ‘unassailable’ virtue of their motives, this panel at CFR discusses the prospect of “democratization” of “illiberal democracies” by having them accept non-White migrants and integration; i.e., cheerful acceptance of the destruction of our European genome. Primarily with the targeted “problem” of Eastern European countries Not accepting immigrants.

Published on Apr 23, 2018 by Council on Foreign Relations -

Speakers discuss the growing trend toward populism around the world and the current global state of democracy.

Speakers
Michael Abramowitz

President, Freedom House; Former White House Correspondent, Washington Post

Nicole M. Bibbins Sedaca

Chair, Global Politics and Security Concentration and Professor in the Practice of International Affairs, Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown U; Former Senior Advisor to the Undersecretary of State for Democracy and Global Affairs, US Department of State

Timothy Snyder

Richard C. Levin Professor of History, Yale University; Author, The Road to Unfreedom: Russia, Europe, America

Presider
Kati I. Marton

Author and Human Rights Activist

Kati I. Marton (15:56): We haven’t yet mentioned one of the most powerful motives for the rise of populism, which is the fear of refugees - migrants.  Most graphically on display in Hungary where you can’t go a block without seeing a billboard showing George Soros’s smiling face, and the headline over that face is, ‘don’t let him have the last laugh.’

Six months ago George Soros was known to a very small handful of Budapest literati. Now he is probably the second best known person in Hungary after Victor Orban. And this manipulation of the fear of migrants, of which by the way, there are virtually none in Hungary and very few in Poland, as opposed to over a million in Germany, where this problem doesn’t exist…is something that uh, that we haven’t really dealt with sufficiently.

We seem to step-by-step, accept that his is the way of the world now. I frequently ask myself what didn’t my Hungarian grandparents, whose lives didn’t end well, what didn’t they do in the 30’s? that we should be doing today? Rather than sleepwalking thought this rather dangerous passage.

So, the migration problem and how it relates to the rise of populism - AdF (eg) is entirely about fear of outsiders.

When an audience member suggest the problem of Eastern European countries having a bad track record with regard to democracy, Snyder draws comparisons -

Snyder: (36:00): When the Supreme Court decides in 2013 that racism is no longer a problem, twenty two states then pass voter suppression laws - that’s not democratization, whatever you think of the legality of it.

...its been very hard for the West European countries to extend democracy over second class citizens (empire/subject relation)...asking about the things that make democracy possible….which for me precisely have to do with integration - the European Union, whatever its chances are, is the hope for democracy.

Kati I. Marton (38:00) ...these countries are not destined to be undemocratic, there are a whole bunch of other factors and one of them, frankly, is the luck of leaders (Merkel!)

NPR, “An Anti-Immigration Speech Divided Britain 50 Years Ago. It Still Echoes Today”, 20 April 2018:

Heard on Morning Edition

Britain’s Conservative Party politician Enoch Powell, right, listens to two demonstrators in Canada in April 1968, reading a petition that describes him as a “racist.“AP

The woman who never was? Dr Burgess said, “boiling down the 200 names that we arrived at and managed to find one individual who matches most of the essential points in the letter. And I can actually put a name to the face by saying that she was Drucilla Cotterill.” Just like the pensioner Powell quoted, Drucilla Cotterill owned her own home, lost her husband in the Second World War and stopped letting out her rooms to lodgers when immigration increased. Other former residents of the street, which is now Brighton Mews, have confirmed to Document that excrement was pushed through a letterbox in this street and that nearly all those living here were black in the late 1960s.

Mr Powell said the woman lived in his Wolverhampton constituency. By 1968 it was almost entirely populated by immigrant families, except for a 61-year-old white woman living at number 4.

How we got here: Millennial Woes goes over the history of Powell’s speech from a native nationalist position.

Related: London Street Scenes 1967

Related: BBC, “The woman who never was?”, 22 Jan 2007

Ibid. In April 1968, the United States was grieving. The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated by a white nationalist. Cities burned with riots.

Across the Atlantic, Britain was debating the Race Relations Act, which made it illegal to deny a person employment, housing or public services based on race or national origin.

The law was intended to protect immigrants from Commonwealth nations, especially former colonies in the Caribbean, India and Pakistan. The first of these immigrants, 492 Jamaicans, had arrived 20 years earlier. Hundreds of thousands followed.

“The immigrants were called over,” says Sathnam Sanghera, an author whose Sikh parents emigrated from India during that time. “There was a labor shortage. There weren’t enough people to run the factories after the war.” Sathnam Sanghera’s Sikh parents emigrated from India. “There came the idea that white people would be crushed by the rights that black and Asian people demanded,” he says.

The immigrants were granted British citizenship and helped rebuild Britain after World War II. But they faced racism. Landlords wouldn’t rent to them. Some employers turned them away.

Tarsem Singh Sandhu, then a 23-year-old bus driver, lost his job when he refused to remove the turban he wore as part of his Sikh religion.

The Race Relations Act was intended to protect immigrants like him.

“But there came the idea that white people would be crushed by the rights that black and Asian people demanded,” Sanghera recalls.

The tension was especially obvious in Sanghera’s hometown, Wolverhampton, in England’s West Midlands, which he calls “one of the first cities in Britain to experience mass immigration.”

“A match onto gunpowder”

Enoch Powell, who represented Wolverhampton in Parliament, feared a race war coming because of mass immigration.

On April 20, 1968, he took the stage at a Conservative Party event at the Midlands Hotel in Birmingham and gave an incendiary speech that would come to define him — and divide his country.

Even now, 50 years later, there was outcry in the U.K. when BBC Radio 4 decided to broadcast an actor’s reading of the speech last weekend.

In the speech, Powell warned, “That tragic and intractable phenomenon which we watch with horror on the other side of the Atlantic ... is coming upon us here by our own volition and our own neglect.”

He attacked the bill that outlawed discrimination. He said it was whites who were facing deprivation and that Britain “must be mad, literally mad, as a nation to be permitting” large numbers of immigrants to enter.

“The discrimination and the deprivation, the sense of alarm and of resentment, lies not with the immigrant population but with those among whom they have come and are still coming,” he said. “This is why to enact legislation of the kind before Parliament at this moment is to risk throwing a match onto gunpowder.”

Smithfield meat porters march to Parliament to hand in a petition backing British politician Enoch Powell, on April 25, 1968, five days after Powell’s “Rivers of Blood” speech.

He quoted a constituent — “a middle-aged, quite ordinary working man employed in one of our nationalized industries” — who was encouraging his children to leave England.

“In this country,” Powell quoted the man as saying, “in 15 or 20 years, the black man will have the whip hand over the white man.”

“I can already hear the chorus of execration,” Powell continued. “How dare I say such a horrible thing? How dare I stir up trouble and inflame feelings by repeating such a conversation? My answer is that I do not have the right not to do so.”

Powell said inviting mass immigration was akin to “watching a nation busily engaged in heaping up its own funeral pyre.”

An “evil speech” with repercussions

A classics scholar, Powell also quoted Virgil’s Aeneid. “As I look ahead,” he said, “I am filled with foreboding; like the Roman, I seem to see ‘the River Tiber foaming with much blood.’ “

Powell’s address became known as the “Rivers of Blood” speech.

The Times of London immediately labeled it an “evil speech.” Conservative Party leader Edward Heath dismissed Powell from the party leadership.

“I consider the speech he made in Birmingham yesterday to have been racialist in tone and liable to exacerbate racial tensions,” Heath said.

But polls showed a majority of Britons supported Powell. Many protested, saying, “Enoch was right.” The speech emboldened racists.

READ MORE...

Forza Nuova USA, “‘EU laws forced Italy to pick up migrants and forbade them to send them back”, 20 Mar 2018:

French writer and political journalist, Eric Zemmour, talks about Europe’s East-West divide and the effects of World War II in an interview with French newspaper Le Figaro.

Later in the interview Zemmour explains how the European Union has prevented Italy from defending itself during the migrant crisis. According to him Italy (its natives and their land) wasn’t abandoned (by Italian coast guard), but European jurisprudence forced the country to take migrants and forbade them to send them back:

Zsolt Bayer

READ MORE...

...and not the right-wing, of course.

Luke Ford: “You agree that the left is bad, right?”

The Rebbe: “I actually think it’s worse than bad…it’s basically demonic.”

“The Rebbe” explains how “the left” was a Satanist plot devised by Jacob Frank to oppose the Talmud.

These Jews who left orthodoxy “weren’t really Jewish anymore” ..‘how would you define yourself?”...“so a lot if them took to ‘Frankism’....and Frankism tended to infiltrate” ..“so you wound up having it being the radical subversive left of Jewry was drawn to these Frankist ideas…so you tend to see a relationship between the leftists of 1850 and 1950 in Frank.

...

If you’re a fan of Marx you’ll say that Marx was a good guy, he just screwed up by not writing that final book explaining how communism would actually work. But my point of view is that’s not a bug, its a feature.

The reason that Marx didn’t like capitalism is because capitalism worked….that this is not necessarily a good person. His intentions were not necessarily good.

...same thing with a lot of these people like Freud or going to the Frankfurt school. Two of the Frankfurt School guys actually studied under Shabbat Hazivi [Shabbat Hasivi? - “Sabbatian” ...don’t know the exact terms he’s using]..

So did, uh, Israel Zangwill who is the main guy ...and that actually ties into the story - Zangwill is the main guy who came up with the idea of Islamic immigration to the West. He did the ‘melting pot.’

So, basically what I’m doing is a paradigm analysis of the left.

Where on earth do these crazy ideas come from - transexuals invading Marx’s ideas, Frued’s ideas… Horest Kahelen who is the guy who invented multiculturalism, he had a bizarre obsession with defiling the Sabbath ...they are rebel Jews.

So, the left came out of Frankism - you have these wild ideas of homosexuality…Muslims, the whole nine yards, and that’s how you get a movement that is so radical. You even had a Frankist on the Supreme Court with Frankfurter and Brandeis.

...

(As opposed to) “the underlying narrative driven by the Alt-Right’s (MacDonald), if you look at it from the narrative that The United States was driven left by Steven Samuel Wise and Reform Judaism, what it suggests is that demographic and the weight of that demographic, because Reform Jews don’t have babies, Orthodox Jews do have babies…its also getting a long time since Rabbi Steven Wise was around, he died in around 1947… it means that the prognosis is very positive.

The prognosis is very positive. It means that the Jews are going to swing right-wing instead of continuing this unrelenting war against gentile culture. And this shows up in the statistics.

When you look at the numbers of Jews, the breakdown of Jews under 30, they’re actually - this is pretty shocking - they’re more right-wing than, uhm, than Whites.

There are a lot of this stuff you know, on college campuses, the Jewish frats are just fully right-wing.

What happens, young Jewish men are swinging right-wing and part of this is intersectionality - the left is now so taken with this cause of bringing-in Muslims, Hispanics, that effectively they’ve made it hostile to Jews.

...

Luke Ford: “You agree that the left is bad, right?”

The Rebbe: “I actually think it’s worse than bad…it’s basically demonic.”

...to give you a perfect example. I worked for a few years for these high-powered lawyers; and they would run these litigations where they would sue a given company ..and the litigation would be billions of dollars. ...and its just absurd that these trial lawyers, who were at the time the number one doners to the Democratic party, could run these rackets and make hundreds of millions of dollars in profit.

So the whole system is completely perverse with public sector unions - so that every goverment worker, who’s a member of a public sector union, kicks back money to the Democratic party. Then they volunteer for the Democratic party.”

“The big problem is with immigration and the problem with that” [is not that Jews and right wing sell-outs have brought a bunch of non-White scabs in] but that they have brought in voters to reconstruct the left, the democratic party.’  “The problem with naturalization law where if you can bring someone into the country and five years later, they’re a voter.”

“And basically what that does is create a massive incentive to bring in voters. So basically democracy has been hacked because you can just flood the country. And if the immigrants are stupid, if they’re not capable, then they go into social services - so now they’re feeding back more clients for social services, so kicking more back to goverment unions, they get locked into social services, they’re perpetual left wing voters.”

Get it? The problem is “the left” not what kind (i.e., what demographic) of left that social unionization and responsibility is acting upon. Then he adds, after playing the card that ‘the left is the problem’...“the actual non-White immigrants vote at about 82% + Democrat, Muslims vote at about 93% Democrat; so, that’s the simple narrative to explain why the West is being flooded with all these people - because the Democrats, The Left, needs voters”

Not so much that ‘exaggerated’ Kevin MacDonald ‘Jews as a group evolutionary strategy stuff.’

The Rebbe suggests that the problem with immigration is basically the democratic party seeking voters (not that the Republicans seek cheap scab labor as well)...and not so much Jews generally being indifferent where not antagonistic to White organization/unionization ...

Where immigration policy was advanced by Jews, it would be “the bad Jews” ...“the Leftists” ..but like all “bad things”, homosexuality, abortion, “the left wing Jews only advanced these agendas by about ten years.”

“The Jews actually preserved 1950s culture in an America, at the time, too war-weary to fight a cultural war.”