REVIEW OF THE RT HON NADINE DORRIES’ BOOK ‘THE PLOT: THE POLITICAL ASSASSINATION OF BORIS JOHNSON’

 

 REVIEW OF THE RT HON NADINE DORRIES’ BOOK ‘THE PLOT: THE POLITICAL ASSASSINATION OF BORIS JOHNSON’

 

This book is one that the British Political Establishment does not want you to read.  It is damning, not only about the way in which the Conservative Party works, but also damning about the media collusion.  When you have read it you will have an insight just how far the corruption goes. 

 

Her book is called ‘The Plot:  The Political Assassination of Boris Johnson’.  I do seriously recommend it for anybody interested in British politics.  There are a huge number of revelations about just how appalling the internal politics of the “Conservative” Party at Westminster has become.  Here are just two quotations from her book which give you a flavour of what you see if you read her book:-

 

EXTRACT FROM ‘THE PLOT: THE POLITICAL ASSASSINATION OF BORIS JOHNSON’ BY THE RT HON MRS NADINE DORRIES

 

“It is extraordinary how much happened going right back to the days of Portillo.  How many people lived together, slept together, did business together.  The gay network has always been strong throughout the Party and as I was obviously a big supporter of gay marriage, I am not passing judgment in any way.  But because it was a network thrown together by the necessity for secrecy, away from the prying eyes of journalists and cameras, that network certainly functioned behind closed doors, and it was unhealthy and dominant.  The promiscuity was legendary and the sex parties, well you know about them.  Emma Sayle, who I think took them over from Dougie, said they were just orgies with lots of people just squirming on beds.  I can tell you every one of them was one of us, a Tory.  Decisions about the Conservative Party were not even taken at dinner parties, but in beds and in relationship networks.”

 

 

EXTRACT NADINE DORRIES TALKS TO ANONYMOUS CONSERVATIVE PARTY WHIP IN 2023

 

“The public think MPs just get drunk all night on cheap booze or in subsidised bars.  How easy the Whips’ job would be if that were all we had to deal with.  It is all broken.  Like all the parameters that kept things in place, respect, values, public service, it is all gone.  I feel like these guys are trying to rot the Party from within when you were talking in there it dawned on me this Party today isn’t what I signed up to.”

 

Nadine asked:-

 

“Is the sex on the billiard table as bad as it gets?”

 

“Sadly, no.  Look, the thing that disturbed me more than anything was a serious rape that was reported and no action was taken by the Party.  An MP gave a young female a date rape drug; the next thing she knew was she woke up in a country hotel the following morning.  He wanted her out of the room because, he told her, he had visitors coming for breakfast.  She staggered for miles before she could find a taxi and help.  She was a long way from home.  She was very young.  She was encouraged to go to the police, but she didn’t, I think because she was scared of him and scared of it coming out, embarrassed that she had found herself in that position.  She came to us.  No action was taken by the Party against the MP.  He wasn’t even reprimanded by anyone, his Whip removed or the complaint reported further up the line.  It never reached Boris’ ears.  That MP went on to repeatedly sexually assault and rape, even though the Party knew about him, he retained his Whip and remained undisciplined.  He was also quite a nasty piece of work in the Chamber and in Westminster generally…    If action had been taken when that first rape had been reported, those other women would have been saved from their life trauma.  You could say the men who get into fixes with prostitutes and rent boys and other behaviour, they do serve their own free will.  They have agency and choice.  But those poor women… and sadly, he isn’t the only one who preys on vulnerable women and has sex with them.  It does tend to be vulnerable women they target.  I have a list if you like, which includes one MP who took advantage of a young women on the night before his wife gave birth to their child.  The next day, he was showing people the delivery photographs on his phone.  …The thing is, it has never been good in Westminster, but it has never before been as bad as it is right now!”

 

Here is a link to the book >>> https://www.amazon.co.uk/Plot-Political-Assassination-Boris-Johnson/dp/0008623422

Nick Timothy, Theresa May’s Chief of Staff, exposes Boris’ real policy of increasing mass immigration!

 

Nick Timothy, Theresa May’s Chief of Staff, exposes Boris’ real policy of increasing mass immigration!

 

In the article below in the Telegraph, which is explosive, Nick Timothy explains just what Boris and his Government have been up to in trying to dramatically increase the amount of immigration into the country.

 

It seems that without any democratic mandate to do so and without any publicity or any honesty, Boris and his circle have been working on trying to undermine the real Will of the People, of not only of England, but also of the United Kingdom, to restrict mass immigration. 

 

Read the article.  Here is the link to the article >>> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2022/04/24/brexit-supposed-take-back-control-immigration-hasnt/

 

And here is the full text (as it is behind a paywall):-

 

Brexit was supposed to take back control of immigration. It hasn’t

Britain's new points-based system is designed to keep numbers high. When the public realise, there will be trouble

NICK TIMOTHY24 April 2022 • 9:30pm

From the application of human rights laws to the analysis of statistics, immigration can be a complex subject, and the public debate about it can be deeply dishonest. But most of us ought to be able to agree some common-sense principles.

From bringing skills and enterprise to adding to the cultural capital of the country, immigration can bring great benefits, but in large numbers can also bring great challenges – so the flows must be controlled. This control needs clear laws, strong enforcement and tough but intelligent border security. Decisions ought to be made not in the interests of foreign nationals, immigration lawyers or supranational organisations, but the British people. And the decision-makers themselves must be politicians, directly accountable to those who elect them.

There is of course huge scope for disagreement in the practical implementation of these principles. We can differ over the extent of the need for foreign workers, for example, when there is a dire lack of technical and vocational education and training for people already living here. We can argue about the desirability of allowing colleges and universities the right to sell long-term immigration, not just education, to hundreds of thousands of foreign students.

Regardless of such differences, it is difficult to deny that our immigration system is failing, despite Brexit and the end of free-movement rules.

We are yet to see meaningful post-Brexit immigration statistics. In 2020, thanks to the pandemic, net migration fell by 88 per cent to just 34,000. In 2019, net migration was 271,000 – high, but not unusual for the past couple of decades, when the number has been known to exceed 300,000. We can already see from the number of visas issued that immigration is about to soar again, probably to record highs.

Comparing 2021 to 2019, work visas (239,987) are up 25 per cent, family visas (280,776) are up 49 per cent, and student visas (432,279) are up 52 per cent. More than a quarter of foreign students are Chinese, but the number of Nigerian students is up 415 per cent, Pakistani up 256 per cent and Indian up 164 per cent.

This enormous increase in immigration is not happening by chance. Even as the Government ended European free-movement rules after Brexit – a decision driven, pollsters agree, by concerns about sovereignty, democratic control and immigration – Boris Johnson demanded a more liberal policy.

Work permits were unlimited, and the definition of “skilled work” was watered down. The shortage-occupation list was extended to allow the recruitment of foreign workers in yet more trades. Employers were no longer compelled to seek workers from the resident population before recruiting from overseas. A salary threshold, supposedly set to ensure only high-skilled immigration, was set at £25,600 and for some workers only £20,400. Foreign students – whatever their qualification – were given the right to stay and work in Britain at the end of their courses.

And a new framework was established. The points-based system, the Government likes to point out, is inspired by the Australian model, which focus groups tell them is widely believed to be tough. But while Australia is uncompromising on illegal immigration, its policy on legal migrants has been liberal for decades, with its per capita immigration higher even than ours. Just as Australia’s points-based system was created to increase immigration, so is the British one. Our numbers will keep going up.

A points-based system surrenders the very principle of control. When migrants want to come to Britain, if they have the requisite number of points they simply win the right to come. And the principle of control – the very promise of Brexit, remember – will be further eroded by trade deals the Prime Minister is negotiating. In India last week, Johnson signalled his agreement with further liberalisation for Indian workers and claimed, despite probable record immigration this year, “we’re short to the tune of hundreds of thousands [of workers] in our economy”.

This is not true. But then, of course, the debate about immigration has never been honest. Advocates of mass immigration pretend we have always been “a country of immigrants” and engage in countless forms of evasion and sophistry. Some say the numbers are irrelevant and all that matters is control. Others insist that the public simply want the system to work, even as they oppose every reform to make it work. Most common, however, is those who pay lip service to the notion of overall control, while opposing control in every visa route going. In practice, they claim that each application is of vital national interest.

It is easy to make it sound reassuring. Who could reasonably oppose skilled workers coming here to contribute? But under the points-based system, skilled workers are not only astrophysicists: they might also be bricklayers. Who could oppose the brightest and the best coming to use their talents here? But the majority of foreign students attend institutions outside the Russell Group of top universities. Three quarters of the increase in student visas from 2019 comes from applicants to lower quality universities. All have the right to work here afterwards, whatever their qualification and whatever their job.

Supporters of mass immigration might not care. Every day that these policies continue, they get what they want and conclude that they will win in the end. But nobody has ever made the argument for such rapid population change and won an election. And this includes the Prime Minister, who has no mandate for the policies he is pursuing. His manifesto promised “overall numbers will come down … we will ensure that the British people are always in control”.

The British people have good reasons for wishing to remain in control. They know, from bitter experience, the costs of mass immigration. They know the problems caused by rapid social change, stark cultural divides, pressure on infrastructure and public services, housing shortages and high rents, job displacement and the suppression of wages.

When they realise, having voted to take back control, that the PM has given it away, the Tories will find there will be hell to pay.

 

 

 

English PARLIAMENTARY BY-ELECTION RESULTS 2021

 

PARLIAMENTARY BY-ELECTION RESULTS

 

In the last three Parliamentary by-elections in a row the vote for the Conservative Party has dropped but not in the way that has been suggested in the Media, which insists upon talking about majorities when there are none. 

 

In the recent by-election in Shropshire North the majority did not vote.  Nor did the majority vote in either of the previous two by-elections, with turnout below 50%.  “Turnout” does not take account of the fact that the Electoral Commission thinks that up to 25% of those that are eligible to vote are not on the electoral roll.  So really a significant majority do not vote.

 

In Shropshire North what happened was very similar to what had happened in the Chesham and Amersham By-election which is that the Liberal Democrats pursued a successful two-pronged strategy.  The first of those was to suppress the Conservative vote, which Johnson’s behaviour no doubt enormously helped them to do.  The second was to get the “Progressive” vote to coalesce around them.  This can easily be seen from the figures. 

 

In the 2019 General Election in Shropshire North, the Liberal Democrats got 5,643, Labour got 12,495 and the Greens got 1,790, giving a total Leftist vote of 19,928.  I am not sure whether the Shropshire Party who also stood would qualify as a Leftist Party.  Most of these parties which appear to be locally patriotic turn out on investigation to be Liberal Democrats in mufti.  So the total of LibDem, Labour and Green was 19,928, including the Shropshire Party that would be 21,074 vote. 

 

On the 16^th December the Liberal Democrats got 17,957, Labour got 3,686 and the Greens got 1,738.  Rejoin the EU got 58 votes.  Interestingly when the Liberal Democrats were pushing for a surge the Shropshire Party did not stand, which I think may suggest that they are simply Liberal Democrats in mufti.  The total Leftist vote therefore in the By-election was 23,439.  The total extra votes for the Left therefore in the Shropshire By-election was 2,365.

 

By contrast the numbers of voters voting Conservative dropped from 35,444 to 12,032.  This was a reduction in the total number of Conservative votes by 23,412. 

 

18,439 of whom was the reduction in turn-out of Conservative voters.  There was also 1,427 Reform, 378 UKIP, 375 Reclaim and 79 Heritage, who all might previously have been Conservative voters. 

 

It does seem clear therefore that relatively few, if any, voters actually went from the Conservatives to the Liberal Democrats.  Whereas the tactical voting was in favour of the Liberal Democrats. 

 

That leads to at least the encouraging conclusion that the numbers of deluded Left-wing voters in Shropshire North did not increase by any substantial margin, despite what the papers and BBC have tried to tell you!

 

 

 

 

 

RESULTS FROM OLD BEXLEY & SIDCUP BY-ELECTION ON THE 2ND DECEMBER 2021

THE RESULTS FROM OLD BEXLEY & SIDCUP BY-ELECTION ON THE 2^ND DECEMBER 2021

 

This was a By-election in which there were two Party Leaders taking part and also the reputation of the Conservative Party Government was at stake. 

 

The recently deceased MP, James Brokenshire, was someone, who (like many Conservative MPs) was selected by his Party and elected on the basis that he was a Eurosceptic.  Once elected he proved in fact to be a Remainer who became a May loyalist and he actively worked to undermine the EU Referendum result. 

 

He was also like most Conservative MPs carrying on mass immigration whilst dishonestly maintaining that they are trying to do something about it!

 

There was therefore plenty of good reason for Conservative voters to refuse to turnout to vote for the Conservative Party and for his replacement, Louie French, who seems to be cut from very much the same cloth. 

 

There was also the dismal performance of Labour nationally and Kier Starmer, in particular, who is a lacklustre Leader.  Labour’s full-on support for Refugees Welcome and all the Multi-Culturalist agenda has now largely got through to even the least engaged White Working Class voter!

 

Many LibDem voters also have given up on their former Party on the basis that they actively sought to betray the democratic vote of the country to Leave the EU.

 

There were therefore very good reasons why the vote in this By-election would be suppressed. 

 

Sure enough if we look at the results which I set out here there was a massive drop in turnout and a drop in the votes of those parties that stood in the election last time. 

 

                                                                      Votes in                 Votes in

                                                                      2021                      2019

 

34% turnout           69.8% turnout

 

Conservatives                                                11,189                   29,786

Labour                                                           6,711                     10,834

Richard Tice - Reform UK                             1,432                    

Greens                                                           830                        1,477

Lib Dem                                                        647                        3,822

Elaine Cheeseman - English Democrats     271

UKIP                                                             184

Rejoin EU                                                      151

David Kurten – Heritage                                116

Christian Peoples Alliance                             108

MRL                                                             94

 

No drop in turnout greater though than the Conservative drop.  Their candidate was elected on First Past The Post but he got only slightly over a third of the votes that they got last time in 2019 and only about 17% of the electorate voted for him.

 

What of the two Party Leader candidates?  David Kurten and his newly created Heritage Party only got a dismal 116 votes, despite an active campaign and a full leaflet drop using the Royal Mail free leaflet drop facility which is available for parliamentary candidates.  His result for a Party Leader in an area close to his home gives pause for thought as to whether it is worth standing in any further elections for them (particularly with such a non-descript Party title!).

                                                                                                            

There was also Richard Tice of the re-badged Brexit Party, now calling itself the meaningless and Leftist sounding name of Reform UK.  He had a light blue rosette but very deep pockets.  From what I could see it looks likely that he spent the maximum spending allowance in a By-election of £100,000.  He had a fully paid and quite a large team of perhaps twenty odd leafleters and canvassers and lots of leaflets, including a 20 page plus booklet, but still only managed 1,432 votes! 

 

Given the amount of money that must be in the bank account following the company when it was called the Brexit Party taking £17.5m during the last EU election, I would expect them to turn up regularly at By-elections and not make any headway, despite massive spending. 

 

With Elaine Cheeseman, standing for the English Democrats, we had an excellent candidate, who, if elected, could have done a very good job as an MP. 

 

We did however suffer from problems with our normal printer who let us down.  We were then rushing to catch up and, although Royal Mail did a reasonable job, we probably only got leaflets distributed to a third of the constituency. 

 

Nevertheless the result we got for a really very small spend of just over £1,000 is, I think, credible and certainly shows that if we had got all our leaflets delivered and were able to equal the leafleting efforts of Richard Tice and Co we would probably have beaten him easily.

 

The other Right of Centre contender was UKIP, who got 184 votes, despite having a full leaflet drop, demonstrating again that they are electorally over!

 

Our next By-election would seem to be likely in Southend West which can now be called at any time. 

 

We want to do well in that election, which we may well be able to do, given that the other “Mainstream” parties have announced that they are not standing, as has Richard Tice’s, UK Reform Party.  This will give us a good opportunity which would be a shame to miss.  Please do help us raise enough money to do a good job.