Total Visits

Showing posts with label Mccrae. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mccrae. Show all posts

Wednesday, 21 September 2022

Will fighting-age migrants form a New Model Army for tyrannical governments?


 

Will fighting-age migrants form a New Model Army for our tyrannical governments?

A guest post by Niall McCrae:-

 

Why do they come, all these fit young men posing as refugees? Are they really economic migrants in search of a better standard of living for them and the families they left behind?  Conspiracy theorists see this as manifestation of the Kalergi Plan, an alleged strategy for demographic replacement of white Europeans. But there is another sinister explanation.

 

When citizen journalist James Harvey of Voice of Wales website went to the Copthorne Hotel in Cardiff to report on a mass arrival of immigrants sent by the Home Office, he was told by nervously officious staff not to come near the premises. However, he asked a few questions anyway, such as the origin of the incomers. When Italy was mentioned, Harvey concluded that these were not refugees but illegal aliens.

 

The video of this reportage was scrutinised by police, and Harvey received a telephone call warning him to delete it. This was because the term ‘illegal alien’ was likely to cause offence to someone, in which case police would be compelled to arrest him. As David Clews remarked in interview with Harvey on Unity News Network, this was applying the dystopian notion of ‘pre-crime’.

 

The steadily increasing flow of immigrants across the English Channel is troubling to a large proportion of society, while lauded by a noisy minority of woke activists with their slogan ‘refugees welcome here’. Under a Conservative government, with a Home Secretary who pledged a clampdown, the dinghy-loads continue to arrive daily.  Tens of thousands have been picked up by the navy and lifeboat service this year. But the topic is taboo, and anyone raising it in the workplace or social gathering risks being outcasted for ‘far-right’ xenophobia.

 

Silence is golden for the government. Useful idiots are even better. As a trade union rep I am often defending employees against disciplinary charges for ‘wrong-think’, and passing remarks on the dramatically changing demography of Britain or uncontrolled immigration can lead to dismissal. For example, one of our members was reported for complaining about the daily crossings of the English Channel by hundreds of Albanian men. A snitch told the management that he had remonstrated with the accused, saying that these people needed to move to be safe. In fact, the accuser is supporting law-breaking: these are illegal immigrants, and it is likely that some are involved in the hard drugs trade, known to be run by Albanian gangsters. Furthermore, did this virtue-signaller believe that France, or the EU, is too dangerous?

 

It is obvious that this illegal transit is not only being allowed, but facilitated by the powers-that-be. A clue to the motive is in the ending of the trucker’s protest against the Covid-19 mandates in Ottawa earlier this year. For 23 days the street outside the Canadian parliament was blocked by giant rigs that normally traverse the vast northern plains. Justin Trudeau was apoplectic, smearing the truckers and their thousands of supporters as racist, misogynist and fascist. These men and women showed great courage and commitment in the constantly freezing temperature, making a stand for civil rights.  The police did not have good reason to intervene, as it was a peaceful protest. The chief of Ottawa police resigned, probably because he refused to make a move. Eventually the national guard was sent in, and protestors were brutally arrested.

 

As they were threatened by batons and guns, protestors observed that many of the men in Robocop-style uniform did not appear to be Canadian. Indeed, a plane in United Nations livery had flown into North Shore in Ontario just before the militaristic attack. Trudeau, apparently, had used foreign mercenaries against his own citizens. This was as unprecedented as was his freezing of truckers’ bank accounts. The Canadian cabinet, as World Economic Forum leader Klaus Schwab boasts, is well and truly penetrated by his globalist organisation. 

 

Joe Biden’s administration recently announced a huge recruitment drive for tax collectors, with applicants prepared to use ‘lethal force’ when necessary. How would the 87 thousand positions be filled by the IRS? A ready source is the free-for-all entry at the Mexican border. Men from south and central America, many with experience in militia and drug gangs, are ideal for breaking into homes and battering the Trump-voting occupants.

 

The German government announced that the army will be on the streets from 1st October onwards, as civil unrest is expected due to fuel and food shortages (manufactured crises in pursuance of the Great Reset and Net Zero). Again, Germany can call upon a large supply of foreigners who will be less reluctant to violate the locals. This has already been seen in the rallies against the Covid-19 tyranny: the most aggressive and inhumane members of the riot police appeared to be from abroad (eastern Europe or beyond).

 

There is a strong sense among the awake that something big is about to happen. The Channel hoppers are almost exclusively fighting-age men; many have the hardened look of soldiers. The sensitivity of this deliberate influx from Albania and other counties of traditional machismo culture is not necessarily to maintain the dogma of multiculturalism, but because anyone like James Harvey asking too many questions could blow the lid off the real reason for their arrival.

 

My guess is that this vast young male influx is to populate a New Model Army, for which internal military action is planned in the near future. The migrant force could be used to deter and quash protests against government-induced poverty, and to remove dissidents to internment camps. Devoid of social bonds in the host culture, they will intimidate and bludgeon civilians without sympathy. The USSR used troops from other republics for the same reason. 

 

The inversion of D-Day is under way, and a beach head is already established.

 

 

 

 

 

Friday, 16 October 2020

Diet of Worms?

 


The Great Barrington conspiracy

Niall McCrae

 Dr Niall McCrae is a mental health researcher and social commentator, who writes regularly for Bruges Group, Politicalite, Salisbury Review and Gateway Pundit websites. He is the author (with Robert Oulds) of ‘Moralitis: a Cultural Virus’.

 

Hardly the Diet of Worms, you might think. (The picture is of Martin Luther before the Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V, at the Diet of Worms in 1521AD)

But amidst the global crisis of the Covid-19 pandemic, the Great Barrington Declaration has caused epic controversy.  This scientists’ petition, calling for a different strategy to manage the novel coronavirus, opposes the group-think that has led to a tightening ratchet on citizens’ liberties with consequent economic carnage.

 

Campaigners against lockdown are derided as cranks and conspiracy theorists, in contrast to ‘the science’ and compassion of the interventionists. But now the alliance of professional and political orthodoxy is presenting a conspiracy theory of its own: the resistance to Covid constraints is a right-wing putsch against a global consensus on climate science and social progress. 

 

Signed in a village in rural Massachusetts, the Great Barrington Declaration is a New England journey of medicine, sailing against a headwind of powerful opposition. It proposes shielding of the vulnerable, while allowing herd immunity to develop naturally among the majority who have low risk. The original signatories are no obscurantists: Martin Kulldorff of Harvard, Jay Bhattacharya of Stanford and Sunetra Gupta of Oxford University.

 

However, Gabriel Scally, a member of the British government’s SAGE committee, dismissed them as ‘fringe experts’. Furthermore, he referred to a minor left-wing website, which smeared the declaration as a scheme of misanthropic motives. The launch was hosted by the American Institute of Economic Research (AIER). Founded in 1933, this think-tank is supported by Charles Koch, one of the brothers whose wealth has kept American academic conservatism alive in a hostile environment. It has been very critical of the anti-capitalist climate change movement. 

 

Scally of SAGE tweeted: -

 

‘Let’s be clear where the ‘herd immunity’ let-it-rip nonsense that is the Great Barrington ‘big idea’ comes from. It is a product of the US libertarian right. The AIER’s goal is ‘promoting the ideas of pure freedom and private governance’. Covid-19 is their big chance.’

 

This ‘big chance’, according to the conspiracy theory, will be used to cull the population, and to enrich and empower libertarian extremists. Sounds like a new world order, doesn’t it? This is surely a classic case of projection and lack of insight by the lockdown zealots. The more that we hear from Great Barrington critics, the more it seems that Covid-19 is a tool of the climate alarmists’ agenda.

 

Political leaders around the world, including Boris Johnson and Democrat presidential challenger Joe Biden, are parroting the slogan ‘Build Back Better’. It’s no secret that this comes from the World Economic Forum, the masters of the universe who fuel eco-revolutionary and Marxist activism to undermine the nation state. In the ‘Great Reset’, democratic systems will be overridden by global decree (the ordinary people are too stupid to know what’s good for them). Health Secretary Matt Hancock recently promoted the ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution’, another WEF concept.

 

Absurdly, anyone mentioning the globalists’ design is mocked as a conspiracy theorist. Kevin O’Sullivan, a British TalkRadio station host, said ‘there is no Great Reset…it’s just so ridiculous’.  Yet Klaus Schwab, WEF leader, openly talks of exploiting chaos to create order, described as the ‘New Normal’. Much of what’s happening today was predicted by Event 201, the desktop exercise by the WEF in 2019. We are rapidly heading towards a technocracy run by an unelected elite, controlling access to banking, travel and employment, and reducing us to digital slaves.

 

The Great Barrington Declaration has been attacked for countering the medico-political hegemony on Covid-19. As signatures neared two hundred thousand (mostly concerned citizens but also fifteen thousand scientists), Google magically made it disappear. After an outcry it returned, but search results are dominated by scurrilous diatribes against the sponsor and signatories. Anyone relying on Wikipedia would learn from the likes of Scottish government advisor Devi Sridhar (a social anthropologist) that it is not worth any consideration. Reddit banned it from a discussion forum.

 

Such censorship is what the Nazis, Stalin and Mao did to suppress science and knowledge. Is herd immunity such a reckless goal? Matt Hancock thinks so. In the House of Commons this week he rejected a rethink on the Covid regime, arguing that the Great Barrington Declaration is based on false premises. So a chap with a politics degree knows more than esteemed epidemiologists.  Junior health minister Nadine Dorries, who previously practised as a nurse, tweeted ‘there is no such thing as herd immunity’.

 

In a measured response to Hancock’s scorn, Sunetra Gupta explained the complexity of herd immunity, which is more complex than portrayed by politicians and their scientific advisors. Kulldorff and Bhattacharya were more scathing, noting Hancock’s ignorance in using the example of malaria as evidence against herd immunity. This disease is not transmitted between human beings but by mosquito bite, and it is nothing like a virus. Oncologist Angus Dalgleish remarked: ‘it is shocking that the Health Secretary does not have a basic understanding of infectious disease epidemiology’. 

 

Yet mainstream scientists, politicians and media continue to disparage the Great Barrington Declaration, some resorting to puerile jibes about fake signatories, as if someone signing as ‘Doctor Doolittle’ negates the support of half a million including forty thousand medical practitioners and health scientists. Suppression of a rational scientific argument is justified by Big Tech and the medical authorities by the vague notion of harm. Why is this declaration regarded as so dangerous, and who is really endangered?