Good news for English patriots and bad news for the British Political Establishment!

Good news for English patriots and bad news for the British Political Establishment!

For those interested in the future of the United Kingdom, the rising support in England for independence should be front and centre of their consideration.  As William Hague said, way back on the 9^th January 2000, when he was Leader of the Conservative Party “English nationalism is the most dangerous of all forms of nationalism that can arise within the United Kingdom because England is five-sixths of the population of the UK”. 

Well the good news for English patriots and the bad news for the British Political Establishment is that English nationalism is on the rise!  This is despite the fact that it is only the English Democrats that have been campaigning for English independence with our very limited resources and almost no access to the mass media. 

Nevertheless we have now reached the point where, as can be seen from a recent opinion poll, by the highly respected pollsters YouGov, that 35% of the electorate (and interestingly almost half of the supporters of the Conservative Party!) support full independence for England and thus a full dissolution of the United Kingdom. 

Many of the others no doubt want an English Parliament and thus relatively few want what Boris Johnson and the Conservative Party elite want, which is to maintain the current arrangements.

If there were to be a fully resourced English independence campaign, spearheaded by a fully resourced English nationalist party, then it might well be that in the 2024 General Election we could achieve what was achieved in Canada where the Globalist Liberals of the old Canadian conservative party were swept in just one election.  They went all the way from being in office straight into oblivion!  Who could deny that might not happen here in the 2024 General Election if there were sufficient resources to take on the British Establishment with equal resources?

In terms of the rapid turnaround that could occur, in the effectiveness of English nationalism with sufficient resources, it is worth noting that Labour, outside the metropolitan areas, is equally vulnerable.  So it would be possible, with sufficient resources, to change not only the political situation between the United Kingdom, but also its very existence. 

In this respect it is worth bearing in mind that if the United Kingdom ceased to exist it is a fundamental principle of international law that all its treaty obligations and rights could also be disclaimed.  Even the UK’s Security Council’s seat at the UN would change hands, just as the Soviet Unions’ Security Council seat changed hands, when that Union was dissolved. It is now held by Russia alone. 

There would therefore be a very significant realignment, not only in our politics, but also in world politics, sweeping away the currently entrenched Globalists of the British Political Establishment. 

For those who would say that none of this could happen on the basis of 35% support, it is worth bearing in mind that in our electoral system 35% of the electorate is more than enough to have control of the House of Commons. 

Tony Blair in the 2005 General Election with the votes of just 21.6% of the electorate (36% of the vote), won a landslide majority in the House of Commons which enabled him to change the constitution at will.  Also this 35% (in the opinion poll) is when there has been no well-funded campaign to bring the issues to peoples’ attention and to build electoral support. 

Given the level of English National Identity already e.g. the results of the 2011 Census poll (which showed that over 60% of people in England regarded themselves as English-only and not British), it would be surprising if a well-funded campaign did not have a huge impact recruiting almost all of those English identifiers to support English independence. 

All that English people get for the vast subsidies which we give every year out of our taxes for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is the “bill and the blame”!

Here is what the Yes Cymru Campaign say on their website.  You can find a link here >>>https://www.yes.cymru/english_independence_poll

Also they have provided a link to the opinion data itself which you can find here >>>https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/yescymru/mailings/1494/attachments/original/YesCymru_Results_200618_EnglandPoll-full.pdf?1593508134

Letter challenging the Neo-Maoist cultural revolutionaries!

Letter challenging the Neo-Maoist cultural revolutionaries!

Having read with disgust articles about the spineless cowardness of the current Trustees of St Botolph’s Church of Aldgate in the City of London and of the Sir John Cass Foundation, I wrote to the main newspaper which was reporting this story. 

I reproduce my letter below.  What do you think?

Here is the letter:-

Dear Sir

 

Re:  Your article published on the 18^th June:- “Now St Botolph’s Church in Aldgate removes the bust of John Cass following George Floyd killing in US” by Mike Brook

 

Letter for publication

 

I write with regard to the above report, in which your reporter writes about what, I think, is the disgraceful cowardice of the vicar and Parochial Church Council of St Botolph’s and of the Trustees of the Sir John Cass Foundation, not only in their treatment of their institutions’ charitable benefactor, but also in abject and, I dare say it, slavish, conformity to the neo-Maoist agenda of “Black Lives Matter” in seeking to smash England’s “Four Olds” (“Old customs, old culture, old habits and old ideas”) in their new “Cultural Revolution”. 

 

The Trustees of England’s institutions should not behave in such an abject way.  If they are not prepared to stand up for our culture, institutions and heritage, they should resign and/or be prosecuted.  I have started the ball rolling in terms of getting the Vicar and Parochial Church Council prosecuted for, in effect, Breach of Planning Permission and Vandalism in damaging an ancient monument.  I intend to report the Trustees of the Sir John Cass Foundation to the Charity Commission for sanctions to be applied to them if they persist.

 

Your article did not explain that Sir John Cass was not personally a slave trader, but was a merchant trading in the City.  To say that he was a slave trader is rather similar to saying that a Director of BP is guilty of polluting the ocean, which I respectfully suggest that any sensible person would consider to be manifestly absurd, but then, of course, cultural Marxists do not care about historical truths. 

 

Another historical truth is that it was the English that for the first time ever in all human history banned slavery.  The initial and decisive step was taken in 1807 with the Slave Trade Act of Parliament.  This banned anyone from shipping slaves to, in particular, the Americas.  From then on our Royal Navy vigorously enforced the ban at the cost of many of our sailors lives and also of great expense.   In 1833 slavery, as a condition itself, was banned throughout the British Empire by the Slavery Abolition Act and that also was the first ban on slavery ever anywhere. 

 

Whilst English Christian culture resolved to get rid of slavery it is notable that the African and Islamic Kingdoms, that had been so involved in it for the previous thousand years, did not ban slavery until they were either overthrown in order to suppress slavery (i.e. Lugard in Nigeria or Gordon in Khartoum), or as a result of intense diplomatic pressure by our Government e.g. on the Sultan of Turkey. 

 

If you are in favour of Liberty then you and the world owes the English Nation and the English People a great debt of gratitude for this (and indeed many other reasons as we more or less single handedly created the modern world!).

 

I invite your readers to write in to say what they think.

 

Yours faithfully

Robin Tilbrook

Chairman,

The English Democrats

Here is the offending article:-

 Now St Botolph’s Church in Aldgate removes bust of John Cass following George Floyd killing in US

A bust of the 17th century slave trader John Cass has been removed from St Botolph parish church at Aldgate in the wake of global protests following the killing of black activist George Floyd in America.  

The removal carried out this-morning which was given the go-ahead by the Archdeacon of London after a vote at an emergency meeting of St Botolph’s parochial church council.

The church decision to distance itself from historic links to its benefactor’s involvement in the slave trade follows Sir John Cass secondary school in Stepney pledging to change its name and the Cass Foundation in the City removing a similar bust.

“We voted unanimously to seek permission to remove the bust,” St Botolph’s rector Laura Jørgensen said in a statement to the East London Advertiser. 

“Permission was given and the bust was removed this morning."
 
"We apologise for the years spent celebrating the legacy of a man without understanding the origin of his wealth gained through slavery and human exploitation"  

“Removing the bust is an important step in acknowledging that history, but it’s not the end of our journey. We are a diverse congregation and promise to do all we can to eradicate racism, discrimination and inequality.”

John Cass was born near Aldgate in 1661 and served as a City alderman and sheriff before being elected an MP in 1712. He had set up a school in 1710 in Aldgate for 50 boys and 40 girls and rented buildings in St Botolph’s churchyard.

The name Cass appears on many institutions in the East End and the City. His foundation set up in 1748 gives grants to promote education in inner London including the secondary school in Stepney Way and a primary school in Aldgate both named after him.

The secondary school now wants to change its name and is looking for suitable proposals.

Two universities also adopted the name Cass for centres of learning with funding from the foundation.

The Metropolitan’s Cass School of Arts was embroiled in controversy three years ago when the Aldgate and Whitechapel campuses were occupied by students to stop them being closed down, drawing support from the mayor of Tower Hamlets.

The occupation protest stopped the arts school being transferred to the university’s main campus in Holloway. The school also changed its name after the mass protest.

City University’s business school in Clerkenwell adopted the name Cass in 2002 following a donation from the foundation to promote education for those from disadvantaged backgrounds. It has now begun a review of all its historic funding sources to find out if there are any other links with slavery. 

The foundation commissioned an independent academic in February to look into links to the slave trade. It reaffirmed its “abhorrence of racism and discrimination” in an initial statement following George Floyd’s death and subsequent protests around the world.

Here is a link to the original article >>>  https://www.eastlondonadvertiser.co.uk/news/heritage/john-cass-bust-removal-1-6707538

What the multi-culturalist British Establishment don’t want you to know about the Reading Jihadi attack

What the multi-culturalist British Establishment don’t want you to know about the Reading Jihadi attack

On the evening of Saturday, 20^th June shortly before 7.00 p.m. reports started to come out that there had been a stabbing attack at the end of a “Black Lives Matter” demonstration in Forbury Gardens in Reading, Berkshire - in the heart of England. 

Sure enough the usual “Coulter’s Law” (“the longer it takes the news media to identify a mass shooter (in the United States) the less likely it is to be a white male”) applied to the reporting.  We were told nothing about the ethnicity, nor the religion of the attacker, nor about what he was shouting as he cut the throats of his victims. 

So far as I could see all the Mainstream Media were initially claiming that there was no “terror” motive.  For the BBC at least this denial continued until about midday on Sunday. 

Curiously in between we had had a flurry of calls by Leftists including the Leader and the Deputy Leader of the Labour Party, Angela Rayner, not to share any videos or information about what had happened.

Whilst we are used to the Left telling us that Islamist Jihadi attacks are now “part and parcel of living in a modern city” (Sadiq Khan), what we are not so used to is the Left trying to dampen down the story. 

So it looked as if there might be more to this story than usual. 

One thing that occurred to me that it might be that the Left were worried that this attack might take the media focus of their neo-Maoists “Black Lives Matter” Cultural Revolution and that they were trying to minimise the impact on that campaign. 

But the sheer extent, of the effort to dampen down social media reporting of what had happened, suggested that there might be a further motive.  More of that later.

In the meanwhile it came out that just as Coulter’s Law would have expected the perpetrator was a young, male, Muslim, Libyan “refugee” with, so far as one could tell, little education or skill that would be likely to be of any use in the job market in a developed country, like England.  He also has too much of a violent and criminal history.

Here is what the Independent said about him:- 

“Libyan national Khairi Saadallah named as suspect

The suspect arrested over a terror attack that left three victims dead in Reading is a Libyan national called Khairi Saadallah, The Independent understands.

Saadallah, 25, was jailed last year for assaulting an emergency worker and has a lengthy criminal history, our home affairs correspondent Lizzie Dearden reports.

In court proceedings last August, over the assault of a judge who was sentencing him for previous offences, his address was given as Basingstoke Road in Reading.

That is the address of the suspect’s home, which was searched by heavily-armed counter terror officers on Saturday night.

Neighbours at the flat block in Whitley, just under two miles from the scene of the mass stabbing, believed he had been recently released from prison”.

Evidently he has all too much Islamism in his world view too!

The questions that arise for both Labour and for the Conservative British Establishment parties is of course why they have been allowing unskilled, illegal immigrants from war torn Muslim countries to come here, to live off our benefits, and to be housed in our social housing, whilst our own peoples' benefits and social housing opportunities are being cut?  Also why wasn't such an undesirable violent offender not deported after serving his sentence for his first conviction?   

Then of course we have had another display of the, now all too familiar, selective, dishonest and biased reporting by the “Main Stream Media”.

In this particular case we also have an explanation, in the identity of the victims, for why Labour and the Left (and their enablers) became so unusually hysterical about trying to close down reporting. 

It turns out that there had been a “Black Lives Matter” demonstration in that park which had recently finished and that the group that were attacked had, not only been in attendance at that demonstration, but were leading Leftists within Labour’s multi-culturalist Rainbow Alliance, in this case for the LGBTQ+ falange. 

Indeed the first victim’s identity which was disclosed was that of a local politics teacher, Mr James Furlong who had also been a local leading campaigner for 'Refugees Welcome'. 

So it seems as if a representative of Labour's refugee “community”, who is also a member of their “Muslim Community” had been repeatedly plunging his knife into leading representatives of the gay “community” who had been active within the “Black Lives Matter” neo-Maoist group! 

No wonder when they are trying to smash our “Four Olds” (“Old customs, old culture, old habits and old ideas”), that the Neo-Maoist’s should be so alarmed over part of the Rainbow Alliance attacking another part and of diverting attention away from them and on to a real problem of multi-culuralism!

Also I do wonder what all the Establishment figures meant by saying that they will learn lessons from this incident.  Any ideas?  Any suggestions? (Even facetious ones!).