How the Home Office Gaslights the British Public about Islam and Mass Immigration
This Week In Media | 19th - 25th August, 2024
Yesterday, we awake to news that “a man” has struck again: killing three, and wounding six, at a "diversity festival" in Solingen, Germany.
A manhunt is on, but no details, photos, or footage of the subject have been released. Hence, some speculate his identity is inconvenient to the multicultural narrative.
Earlier this week, another "Man" was jailed for thirteen years and five years extended licence for rape, attempted rape, actual bodily harm, and perverting the course of justice.
While the BBC reported that Woundoson Gabre hails from Saltash Road, Rodbourne, local news has reported that the “Swindon predator” is a Somalian asylum seeker.
Investigating officer DC Emma Rossiter said, “It has been a complex and lengthy investigation since the first incident as Gabre has continually lied to officers, giving false statements about incidents and obfuscating facts in attempts to cover his tracks."
These endless examples have many across Europe asking the same questions.
Why are these people not being deported?
Why are we importing foreign criminals?
Why can normal people see what is happening, and yet the media do not report this?
Why do the government and civil service continue to do nothing?
Remember: every crime committed by a foreign perpetrator is an avoidable atrocity, tacitly endorsed by a political establishment that continues to increase immigration.
That same political establishment dedicates millions in taxpayer cash, manpower, and resources to PR campaigns extolling the benefits of Diversity, multiculturalism, and an increase in the Muslim population in the aftermath of horrific crimes like the Manchester Arena Bombing.
The Immigration Debate Is Over
We do not need to debate the merits of immigration anymore.
We have a wealth of evidence that mass immigration from the Middle East, South Asia, and Africa comes with great economic and cultural costs.
In Denmark, immigrants from the Middle East, South Asia, Africa, Pakistan, and Turkey, and their descendents, are 13% of the population but commit 25% of violent crime, and comprise almost 50% of the prison population. They are 2.5 times more likely to commit violent crimes than native Danes.
Immigrants also commit different kinds of crime to native Brits. Outside Europe, East Asia, and the Anglosphere, the worth of a woman or child is purely instrumental to the power or pleasure of the most violent man. Hence why Islamic honour-based violence has risen by 60% in two years and by 193% since 2016. When Britain sees a 75% annual rise in acid attacks on women, which formerly only occurred in the Middle East, south Asia, and Africa, we might be forgiven for supposing that we are dealing here with an imported pastime.
It increases violent crime, lowers social trust, and leads the native host population to feel unsafe, exploited, and like strangers in their own homeland.
The point being made is that every one of these criminals does not need to be here. Every one of their victims would be alive, unmolested, if not for government policy. Every crime committed by an immigrant is both an avoidable tragedy, and a result of choices made by politicians, civil servants, lawyers, and NGOs.
We do not need to debate this anymore. We have the facts. We must act.
My comprehensive article on the crimes, costs, and dire cultural consequences of mass immigration, is now available on The European Conservative’s website.
The immediate deportation of any illegal entrant or foreign criminal to their country of origin is palatable to public sensibilities. It is both the safe and correct thing to do, as is lowering overall numbers of migrants, applying a higher means-test for foreign entrants, and blacklisting countries with barbaric cultural practices and high crime rates. We can withdraw from immigrants any ability to access social housing, unemployment benefits, and other state subsidies. Those who cannot support themselves, their families, and be of benefit to Britain will return home of their own accord without causing a fuss. If not, any subsequent fraud or criminality will become a pretext for deportation.
To continue with this culture-blind mass immigration policy is a cruelty to those with nowhere else to go. The harms are so evident at this point, there is nothing left to debate. Those seeking to tie you up in conversation are just trying to delay the day that action is taken. We can no longer afford to put that off, if we want to recover a livable country from the rubble of decades of government mismanagement.
Isabel Oakeshott has written in the Telegraph today, 'Such is the scale of the illegal immigration crisis that nothing less than a programme of mass deportation is now required.'
'Liberals will wince at such words, and the ugly spectre of rounding up hundreds of thousands of downtrodden individuals to be sent home is not a nice thought.'
But the number of illegal migrants is now in the millions.
I join Isabel in demanding the mass deportation of all illegal migrants and foreign criminals in Britain.
Migrant Crime and Britain’s Two-Tier Justice System
Every day there is a new headline about how "a man" of "no fixed abode" has stabbed a woman or child in Britain. We shouldn't have to live like this.
The Guardian ran an article this week, distraught that Sweden has recognised they can choose not to import foreign criminals.
Sweden’s Moderate-led government, which is supported by the far-right Sweden Democrats, has pursued increasingly restrictive asylum policies, including plans for a “snitch law” that would legally require public sector workers to report undocumented people.
[…]
The prospect of tightening restrictions – including on visas, citizenship and bringing relatives to the country – made Sweden unappealing, [Tobias Hübinette, a senior lecturer in intercultural studies at Karlstad University,] said, particularly among highly educated people from countries including Somalia, Iraq and Syria.
As I show in the above segment, there is no economic or cultural benefit to have migrants (illegal or legal) from Syria, Iraq, Somalia, or Afghanistan en masse in English-speaking and European nations.
In the UK, 72% of Somalians are in taxpayer-funded social housing:
What benefit is it to native Britons to battery-farm foreign nationals at their expense?
Worse still: 12 percent (>10,000 inmates) of our prison population are foreign criminals. We are 1st in Western Europe, and 2nd in all Europe, for crimes committed by foreign nationals. Each costs the taxpayer £47,000 a year — £500 million in total.
Prisons are so full to bursting, that one of the country’s senior judges issued a “listing direction” to the managers of magistrates’ courts in England and Wales instructing them to postpone the sentencing hearings of offenders on bail and likely to be jailed to at least September 10th.
This means violent offenders will remain on Britain’s streets; while those held without remand for social media posts concerning the civil unrest after the Southport stabbings will remain in prison without trial, and could be encouraged to prematurely plead guilty with the presumption that their sentence will be expedited and shortened.
The Labour government is also releasing 2,000 prisoners on September 10th, and another 1,700 by October 22nd — eventually hoping to vacate 5,500 prison places in total.
These include accomplices to murder, like Lawson Natty: sentenced to two years and eight months for manslaughter and unlawful wounding after Gordon Gault, 14, died in hospital six days after he was attacked with a blade by Carlos Neto in Elswick, Newcastle, in November 2022.
Others have been spared prison time — including ten child sex offenders — to make space for those participating in the post-Southport protests.
Given the Home Office may have already prejudiced the trials of over 1,000 arrested by calling them ‘criminals’ before their court proceedings have occurred, it’s clear that Keir Starmer is operating a two-tier justice system in Britain.
I covered all of this and more in the below segment.
How the Home Office Wages Psychological Warfare on the British Public
This week’s Tomlinson Talks stunned my followers on X, as I meticulously documented the tangled web of relationships woven by the Home Office’s Research, Information and Communications Unit (RICU).
RICU manipulates public opinion in the aftermath of terror attacks. Their anti-extremism programme, Prevent, has designated Douglas Murray a Far Right extremist for writing The Strange Death of Europe, while PR experts designed that campaign which told the grieving parents of Manchester Arena victims "Don't Look Back in Anger".
A 700-strong Islamic network in the Home Office continues to set policy, working to "promote the recruitment, retention and progression of Muslim staff in the Home Office" and “influence policymakers so that policy is more inclusive of Muslim needs”. Could this have influenced RICU’s response to Islamic terror attacks? Could it be why Douglas Murray was put on a Prevent watchlist, while an Independent Review last year found efforts to monitor Islamic extremism disproportionately lax?
RICU was established under the Blair government in 2007, and revamped by the Cameron government in 2011.
In Theresa May’s Home Office, Richard Chalk was appointed head of RICU, and chief of staff to then-Conservative Party Chair, now Baroness Sayeeda Warsi. During the Iraq War, Chalk worked in Baghdad for Bell Pottinger, a British PR firm. Some of his work remains classified.
Alastair Campbell, who recently sought to have Douglas Murray arrested for writing The Strange Death of Europe, was succeeded as Blair’s Director of Communications from 2003 to 2007 by David Hill — who then went on to work for Bell Pottinger while Chalk was there.
This psychological warfare operation has its wheels greased by a parasitic network of activist groups: beneficiaries of charitable status, despite violating the requirement to be non-political.
Groups such as HOPE Not Hate and the Paul Hamlyn Foundation received hundreds of thousands in taxpayer subsidies to compile dossiers on the liberal establishment’s political opponents, and manufacture consents for the surveillance state to fight an omnipresent “Far Right”.
Until recently, HOPE Not Hate had a Labour Barronness and former MP on their board of directors.
After amplifying an acid-attack hoax, which caused armed Muslim militias to take to the streets, HOPE Not Hate was invited to Parliament by Labour MPs.
Any insurgent political force seeking to disrupt the liberal consensus must ensure they have a day-one proposal to disestablish all these departments, transparently investigate everyone who has worked for them for the last two decades, and proscribe organisations like HOPE Not Hate as a violent left-wing extremist group.
You can watch the full investigative report, and access all sources, only on LotusEaters.com.
Will Any Politician Do This?
This week on Deprogrammed, my cohost Harrison Pitt and I were joined by our friend, political consultant Joseph Robertson, to discuss what practical considerations Reform must make to have a viable shot at becoming the governing party in 2029.
For those in Reform taking notes: that means not only professionalising one’s infrastructure, but ensuring that messaging resonates with the disenfranchised, native British “sofa voter”.
This means promising sensible policies, such as:
The equal application of the law to ethnic minorities, Muslims, and left-wing activists
The mass deportation of more-than-a-million illegal migrants and foreign criminals
Rescinding benefits, social housing, socialised healthcare, and taxpayer subsidies from foreign nationals who cannot support themselves
The disestablishment of government departments designed to wage psychological warfare on the native population
All of these measures will resonate with voters who feel the two main parties have failed to represent their interests.