Tuesday, July 31, 2018

Building with water gushing out - A George Laird production

Glasgow South West Labour ‘Race Row’ explodes, Labour Party bitter selection contest for Westminster turns even more nasty and squalid as Labour Scottish Executive Committee remove Anas Sarwar ally Asim Khan from the candidate list, how exactly can any reasonable person think this contest is fair and just after these antics?

Dear All

The bitter Labour Party selection contest in Glasgow South West has had a dramatic moment but not unexpected turn of events. Recently I was talking to a Labour office bearer who said to me that in their opinion, Glasgow Labour hopeful Asim Khan would be passed by the Labour Party Committee called the SEC tasked with investigating him.

I didn’t believe he would be passed by them, and as is custom, time for a quick, ‘George Laird right again’.

You know politics and how it works isn’t as hard as many people try to make out, if you sit back and watch, you will be amazed what you can see and hear.

The only way to stop Asim Khan from becoming the candidate in Glasgow South West in preference to Labour Cllr Matt Kerr was to remove him from the candidate list.

Now, it seems job done!

That was my impression from what I observed as an outsider, it seemed to me that Pollok CLP was geared up to accept Matt Kerr as the candidate. Due to the rise in the Pollok CLP membership, and sudden interest in politics by certain people, it seemed a racing certainty to me that Khan would be passed by a popular vote.

Now that Labour hopeful Asim Khan has been blocked by the Scottish Executive Committee, he intends to take legal action against the party after what he describes as a “disappointing decision”. So, it seems that the this selection contest, apparently this brings the numbers down to 3, and maybe it will be put back again.

The rejection of Asim Khan will also be a personal blow to Labour MSP Anas Sarwar who supported the candidacy of Khan. The fight was seen by some as a proxy fight between the Scottish Labour leader Richard Leonard and Anas Sarwar in the ongoing power struggle for control of Scottish Labour.

Asim Khan’s plight stems from his past at a charity for abuse survivors, he was was accused of a “complete failure” to protect a female worker from harassment and victimisation by two other men. The charity was called the Roshni charity and he was the chairman which rather puts a lot of pressure on him to explain himself fully.

An employment tribunal judge recommended Khan should issue an apology to the woman over what happened to her. She was awarded over £70,000 for her treatment at the now-defunct group. The Tribunal said Khan failed to act when the woman complained to him, with the tribunal describing parts of his evidence as “evasive” and “untruthful”.

So, that rather puts him in an awkward place.

After an investigation by the Sunday Herald, ten women from Pollok CLP, his local branch wrote to party bosses complaining about his suitability as a candidate, and a female committee member allegedly filed a complaint. When I read that ten women complained, I was surprised, having done Johann Lamont’s campaign, I never saw once during the campaign for the entire short campaign saw 10 women turning up for activism. Of course Labour MSP Johann Lamont lost the seat rather badly due to an incredibly badly organised campaign which bordered on pathetic. As an experienced campaigner, I have seen good campaigns and bad campaigns, and this one was pure crap.

Glasgow South West is one of the most marginal seats in Scotland, along side Glasgow East, the SNP held it with a majority of just 60 votes in 2017, previously the majority was substantially higher for the SNP in 2015, around the 23k mark. Given that there isn’t going to be an election until 2022 for Westminster, the Labour Party aren’t looking for 61 votes in Glasgow South West to win it.  

They are looking for several thousand above the 2017 result.

If you don’t know much about politics and activism, this should help, campaigns aren’t won in the short campaign; the real work is done in what is termed the long campaign. The sad fact of life is that Pollok CLP isn’t very good at campaigning, so here are two examples. This month, there was no CLP meeting, at the previous meeting before I attended, there was no mention that the next month meeting not taking place. This is an example of bad communication. The second one to look at is a work day/ activism, this was collecting for the local foodbank, I got the text to attend this event which arrived on my phone on 23/7/2018, 09.26.03 am; for an event taking place on the 21st.

Two days after it finished.

Back to the unhappy, regarding Asim Khan; the Scottish Labour Women’s Movement said of his removal:

“This is the right decision and shows that the Scottish Labour Party and the SEC value women’s place in the party. We should never be in a position where someone with such a terrible record on equality can put themselves forward to represent the party of Equality.”
So, lets remove him from a selection contest were members can decide his fate, so where was their concern about my and other Pollok CLP members’ equality and rights to cast our vote for whoever I chose?

Does Asim Khan have a ‘terrible record on equality’?

Ian Davidson, the former Labour MP for Glasgow South West said:

“Matt Kerr took Labour to within 60 votes of winning and there is absolutely no reason for anyone to deselect him as the candidate for any future election. Asim Khan has now been shown to be clearly unsuitable. Those who backed him should now get behind Matt Kerr and help to secure a Labour win in the seat.”

Firstly, Pollok CLP did nothing of note prior to the short campaign, post election that “work rate” dropped even lower.

Secondly, the Matt Kerr campaign only generated an extra 888 votes more than Ian Davidson’s result in 2015 so there wasn’t exactly a Labour revival more previous SNP voters of 2015 not turning out.

Thirdly since Labour doesn’t hold the seat, no one should have a monopoly on the candidacy, that isn’t democratic.

As to Ian Davidson’s last point,

“Those who backed him (Khan) should now get behind Matt Kerr and help to secure a Labour win in the seat.” This is what is termed wishful thinking, well; it is more like bullshit because that isn’t going to happen. ‘Those’ who Ian Davidson refers too are the presumably the Muslim members who saw their choice of candidate removed in what some describe as a ‘race row’ contest, they also saw their vote removed previously.

As an outsider watching the lead flying in both directions, I wonder if anyone will stand up at Pollok CLP and embarrass themselves by ‘calling for unity’ after what has gone on.

Finally, a bit of facts and opinion:

Westminster 2010      pre indy campaigning

Labour Co-op Ian Davidson 19,863          SNP Chris Stephens 5,1921      Labour win

Holyrood 2011

Labour Co-op Johann Lamont 10,875       SNP Chris Stephens 10.252 Labour win

Westminster 2015

Labour Co-op Ian Davidson 13,438         SNP Chris Stephens 23,388      SNP win

Holyrood 2016

Labour Co-op Johann Lamont 8,834         SNP Humza Yousaf  15,316 SNP win  

Westminster 2017

 Labour Co-op Matt Kerr  14,326             SNP Chris Stephens  14,386     SNP  win

Now then, if you look at Johann Lamont (2016) and Matt Kerr (2017), both these results look rather bad, actually they are exceptionally bad, given Holyrood precedes Westminster, this makes taking the Westminster seat so much harder for Pollok CLP.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Monday, July 30, 2018

The playbook of the Fascist SNP, Dinesh D'Souza's talk on 'The Race Card of Leftists' could be applied to Scotland, this is how Nicola Sturgeon's SNP and Government seem to operate, division, deflection and grievance

Policy Exchange, right wing think-tank uses the Windrush scandal to call on post-Brexit ID system for EU and UK citizens, in the past this has been rejected on civil liberties grounds, with so much illegal immigration into the UK, is it time to review this issue, can there be cross party consensus on protecting the UK borders?

Dear All

Think tanks are bodies that come up with ideas, in the past, some ideas have been useful and other ideas border on plain stupidity. If you take the ‘Windrush’ scandal, the reason for the problem is that the Labour Government of the time; ordered their documents destroyed. Down the line, this meant the incumbent government of Theresa May couldn’t do their job properly, leading to confusion and problems. Brexit is still moving forward, the Policy Exchange thinks that there is a case for a ID registration system for EU citizens in the UK and also for British citizens.

In many walks of life, the ID card system is already here, in education, in construction, police and in health, even private companies have id systems to allow their staff access to their premises. Previously in the UK, we had an ID card system during WW2, the scheme continued well after the end of the war and then was phased out. There is a case for an ID card system, and a case not for a card system, in several posts, I wrote about the need for an EU wide identity card to cope with the migrant crisis.

Illegal migrants need to be documented, and we need to know where they are and who they are since the political elite opened the flood gates and let these people roam free in our country and others in the EU. I have no problem with EU citizens being issued with an ID card; similar schemes operate in other countries of the EU. But if there is to be an extended ID card programme to document British citizens, it cannot similar be about the issuing of a card. It is said that there are one million illegal immigrants in this country, these people are criminals, and should be removed, no matter how long they have been here.

The idea of a national ID system for British citizens has been controversial, with many people opposing it on civil liberties grounds. The state of politics in this country means that one group plays off against the other group which we all know as party politics, civil liberties are just the ‘peg’ that they use to hang their grievance on. 

A £5 billion national identity card scheme was introduced by the last Labour government in 2006 under Tony Blair, probably to bring us more into line with European practice. The idea wasn’t acceptable and a Bill to scrap it was the first legislation introduced by Theresa May when she became home secretary in 2010. After Brexit, EU citizens already in the UK will have to pay £65 and join a registration scheme if they wish to stay in Britain after the end of the transition period on December 31 2020.

£65 isn’t a high fee, and I think the government has got the balance right.

David Goodhart, Policy Exchange's head of demography, immigration and integration, suggests that the scheme should be widened to Britons, initially on a voluntary basis. In other words, voluntary first then turned into compulsory.

He said:

"We strongly recommend reopening the debate about ID management to reassure people that we know who is in the country, for how long, and what their entitlements are. A proper national ID system would have prevented the harassment of the Windrush victims."

I never favour knee jerk politics as a basis for making policy, usually, a single incident is used to justify an idea which the authors aren’t able to articulate on its own merits, hence they find a victim.

The report by the Policy Exchange has other ideas:

A more decisive removals process, the current system has been abused using the Human Rights Act as an opened ended book to concoct the most ridiculous decisions.

An amnesty for illegal immigrants who have been in the UK for 10 years or more, this is unacceptable, we don’t reward people for crime because they have been doing it a long time.

More cash to pay illegal immigrants to leave and a joint scheme involving the Department for International Development to help them set up businesses in their countries of origin, I see no problem with this idea.

A British version of the US Electronic System for Travel Authorisation (ESTA) that allows non-UK citizens to use e-gates at borders and made it quicker for "low-risk groups" to enter, this is idea has merit provide the scheme is secure.

Make rail and ferry operators provide more information about passengers and introduce more collaboration with Irish authorities to close down the Common Travel Area "backdoor", private companies shouldn’t have to act as border agents, this would create a security problem.

Higher overall investment, including better detection systems for lorries at Calais and Dover, more staff and more border patrol boats, this isn’t setting the heather on fire but if anyone is found, we should send them back to France without judicial review, instant deportation.

The farce of letting them in has gone on too long.

Mr Goodhart added:

"Illegal immigration is not only unfair on legal immigrants who wait their turn in the queue and the employers and businesses who play (and pay) by the rules, it also fosters a twilight world of criminality, dependence and exploitation in which modern slavery flourishes. Combating illegal immigration should be overtly linked to minimum wage enforcement, private landlord licensing and action against modern slavery. While a general amnesty for the estimated 500,000 illegal residents here would send the wrong signal, some form of regularisation should also be considered for those who have been here for more than 10 years, who are now parts of their communities with ties to the UK and often become the focus of grassroots campaigns."

Everyone should play by the rules and no one should be getting special treatment, this has been the cause of division in this and other EU States.

A Home Office spokesman said:

"We are pursuing an ambitious programme of reform at the border as well as investing in new capability to improve passenger experience. Examples of this include e-Passport gates and motion detection technology which benefit passengers and improve security. Border Force invested £63.5 million in new technology and capability in 2017-18 and £90.4 million in the two previous years combined. Decisions on the future immigration system will be based on evidence. This is why we have asked the independent Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) to advise on the economic and social impacts of the UK's exit from the EU and also on how the UK's immigration system should be aligned with a modern industrial strategy."

If you are the type of person who gets angry when someone breaks into your house to steal, then you should be equally angry when someone breaks into your country to steal, the fact they aren’t lifting your possessions is irrelevant. The madness of Germany’s migrant crisis, the crisis in Sweden, Italy and France, show what happens when rules are abandoned for political virtual signalling, chaos, rape, murder, theft and acts of terror.

I favour a fair, strong immigration system based on evidence, need and cohesion, sadly the open borders people are the facilitators of much of the current problems, if you don’t have strong borders, you don’t have security, just ask the Germans. Immigration is a good thing, what has happened in Europe and in the UK has been exceptionally bad, it is time that someone cleaned up the mess.

Finally, Angela Merkel ruined Germany by her open borders policy, in the UK, much of the damage was done by Tony Blair when Labour Prime Minister, his social engineering experiment done under the 'lie of economic reasons' caused many of the problems of a similar nature to Germany's troubles.

Yours sincerely

George Laird

The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University   

Thursday, July 26, 2018

Upsetting the liberals: the fury of politicians such as Labour MP Diane Abbott's concern over Isis Terrorists Alexanda Kotey and El Shafee Elsheikh is utterly sickening, and out of touch with the British people, they will get a fair trial in the US, and we should remember the victim’s families, they have a right and expectation of justice

Dear All

Tuesday saw me do a post on Isis Terrorists, Alexanda Kotey and El Shafee Elsheikh, it is my opinion, that the correct place for them to stand trial is America. The fact that the Home Secretary has asked for assurances that they will not get the death penalty has sent many people into a spin.

On one side, we have fools like Labour MP Diane Abbott the Shadow Home Secretary, hyperventilated that the Government's position was 'abhorrent and shameful' and on the other, people saying they are fine with their extradition. If Kotey and Elsheikh had committed their crimes on British soil, I would argue that they should stand trial here.

But they did, they committed their crimes in Syria.

As I blogged, we ended the death penalty in the UK, many years ago, it was the right thing to do, killing by the State has no place in our society. In many other countries, in the West and in the East, the death penalty is still enforced.

Recently Japan executed the last of the terrorists who used Sarin gas on the subway.

Whether you agree with the death penalty or not, we are not the World’s policemen or their moral guardians, we can advise, comment and make known our feelings, but at the end of the day, their rule of law takes priority over our concerns. I don’t agree with the death penalty, never did, never will, I don’t see it as part of British values. From time to time, we get a situation which on the surfaces seems plausible that the death penalty argument could be used. Generally this is cases were the public have no problem in someone being hanged, such as the Moors Murderers or the Soham killer, or the IRA bombers of the past. If you take the case of the Birmingham Six, innocent people were arrested, tried and put in jail,

If hanging was still vogue at that time, these people would have been hanged; this is why I am against the death penalty. Injustice isn’t a part of justice, and ‘sorry’ really doesn’t cut it for me. Stephen Glover of the Daily Mail; asks a question, but must we rule out executing terrorists?

That is a complicated question but the answer is simple.

Yes, we must rule out executing terrorists.

In case anyone thinks I am a pacifist, the answer is no, I had no problem when ‘Jihadi John’ was killed in a drone strike, this guy deserved to die a painful death for what he had done.
Stephen Glover aks;

“Where should two former alleged terrorists who were once British citizens be put on trial for the most brutal and barbarous acts against innocent civilians, some of them British?”

I would strongly disagree with him saying:

“The right answer is surely the United Kingdom. Two young men brought up in this country, who are accused of unspeakable terrorist offences, should face justice in a British court”.

This brings me back to where they committed their crimes and to whom; these two points; don’t make the case for a British trial, I would say that the choice is either Syria which is doubtful due to Syrian and US relations and the US of A. I would therefore believe that the US is correct venue for Alexanda Kotey and El Shafee Elsheikh.

Our system of justice and sentencing in the UK could do with an upgrade, we have a system which due to the Human Rights Act abuse wouldn’t it is said give a strong enough sentence on conviction. The alleged crimes of Elsheikh, 30, who was born in Sudan but raised in London, is accused of supervising the torture and killing of Western hostages by ISIS. Kotey, 34, London born-and-bred, is charged with being part of the same ISIS cell which beheaded 27 hostages and, according to reliable testimonies, displayed horrendous cruelty and unbelievable sadism.

These two don’t deserve to escape the full measure of the American legal system.

Shipping them off to America; besides being the right thing to do, does solve a few problems, like under existing legislation our courts are unable to apply the very lengthy sentences that can be handed down by American judges. If you watch American prison documentaries, you would be surprised at the sentences some people get, hundreds of years. And as I mentioned above; abuse by their lawyers, using the Human Rights Act in various ways to attempt to circumvent justice.

The Labour Party is up in arms, principally because it is so opposed to the death penalty as I said, I oppose the death penalty as well, were we part waves is that I recognise that other countries have the right to run their own judicial system as they see fit.

Labour MP Hilary Benn opined that 'we have to show we are better than Islamic State in our morals, and should therefore have nothing to do with capital punishment'. Islamic State don’t care about our morals, they see this as our weakest, which is why this and the lack of morals by politicians have placed us in the state we find ourselves.

When Stephen Glover says:

“In my humble opinion, the prospect that these two alleged killers might be sentenced to death if found guilty of horrendous crimes by an American court is by far the least troubling aspect of this affair”.
I think he speaks for many people in the UK, right across racial and religious divides, but speaking up for justice can provoke hatred towards you which is why many people remain silent.

Finally, Stephen Glover said:

“If Kotey and Elsheikh were to be tried in this country, we might understand how it was that two young men who enjoyed the benefits of living in a free society should seemingly have done their utmost to destroy it. And such a trial, if it had led to a conviction, would have given the British people the satisfaction of seeing justice meted out to two British traitors who appear to hate, and wanted to damage, their country”.

I don’t think any excuse will bring forward the advancement of human knowledge in this case; these two were ‘recreational killers’, who enjoyed torture and murder of innocent people. American families have the right to see these two before a US Court, let them have their day in Court to explain their actions.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Wednesday, July 25, 2018

Losing control, losing the agenda, identity politics destroyed our society: now press and politicians fear the rise of media-savvy populist right parties and their appeal to working class people, across Europe, people are turning their backs on the ‘left’ and the ‘liberals’ because they have actively discriminated against people using public office and the resources of the State, Scotland is a prime example of ‘identity politics’ gone wrong

Dear All

The most discriminated groups in the UK are black people and white working class people. Political parties of the ‘left’ years ago abandoned the working class as organisations set up to protect their rights were infiltrated by middle class careerists straight out of university or via trade unions. As the working class lost their representation, they also lost out on other benefits from elected people. The political elite became to symbolise ‘identity politics’ to the max. If you were white working class you were pushed to the back of the queue, discriminated at every turn.

Right across Europe, ordinary working class people have turned to people who understand their concerns and shown an interest in them. One example of how detached the political parties are is using ‘foodbank collections in order to increase their support in the community. When the election is over, the winning party very quickly abandons this trick because their agenda has moved on. What hasn’t moved on is the need of vulnerable for food aid.

Across Europe, we have seen the right of parties of the right, this has led to the incumbent political parties and the ‘liberal’ press tagging them as ‘far right’. Despite a co-ordinated campaign of sorts, the public has decided to ignore the fake news agenda and continue to give new parties their support. If you see a Donald Trump or Vladmir Putin, you usually see a smear campaign of them not far behind.

Clare Foges, David Cameron’s former speechwriter wrote that authoritarian “strong men”, like Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin get things done, this is in stark contrast to people like Nicola Sturgeon who is mired in identity politics and abandonment of the white working class. The SNP lie ‘Stronger for Scotland’ doesn’t apply to white working class in education, jobs, health, and law and order unless you tick an ‘identity politics’ box.

People should be aware of the intolerance of ‘liberals’, these are the people who don’t want you to speak or have an opinion aired unless it agrees with them. The rise of the fascist thugs dubbed ‘Antifa’ is a group which uses violence to silence people who dare to protest about what is going on around them.

You could describe these people are as mixture of middle class thugs and ‘commies’ masquerading as socialists. People who are so anti establishment that they want to become the establishment.

Iain Macwhirter isn’t a fan of Brexit, he says at the moment that there is a distinct air of Weimar about British politics; of course, you should remember that Germany had just come out of WW1 as the loser. Germans were angry with the political class who hadn’t just led them to defeat but also starvation and unemployment. Not a happy time indeed, but the misery wasn’t just a German thing; the ‘Great Depression’ of the 1920’s caused problems everywhere from Germany to the US, Russia after the revolution wasn’t a paradise either.

In politics, you have to face up to a plain simple fact, in elections, the ‘best man’ doesn’t always win, that isn’t the purpose of elections; it is to elect someone. I don’t have to reel of a list of scumbags who got elected, you can google that yourself and see depending on how much research you want to do. One thing which you will have heard of is ‘tactical voting’, tactical voting isn’t about electing someone you want, it is about attempt to ‘get anyone but’ the party you hate getting in.

In Europe, the rise of the ‘right’ in politics is not a surprise, the ‘left’ and ‘liberals’ caused it by neglect, which is why we get leftwing thugs on our streets hunting for ‘nazis’, not World War 2 Nazis, not Zombie Nazis but ordinary people who dare to speak out about what the political elite has done while in office.

Yesterday, I wrote about how American families were right to get justice for their love ones who were brutally murdered by ‘British’ Jihadists dubbed ‘the Beatles’, if their crimes had taken place on British soil, then I would say that legally, they would have to be tried in our jurisdiction but the murders happened abroad. I have no problem in sending these Isis ‘recreational killers’ to the US to face justice. Iain  Macwhirter seems to think this is a problem, he wrote:

“It’s perhaps no accident the UK Government appears to be prepared to accept the death penalty for British Islamic State terrorists in America, something that would have been unimaginable until recently. This is pure populist politics”.

To be clear, the UK Government in the shape of the Home Secretary said that he wouldn’t ask for assurances that these people wouldn’t get the death penalty if convicted. The Prime Minister said she hoped they spend the rest of their lives in jail. Given these people have been stripped of their British citizenship, perhaps the use of the term ‘British Islamic State terrorists’ is wrong.

We don’t have the death penalty in the UK, but they do in America, Alexanda Kotey and El Shafee Elsheikh doesn’t deserve to escape justice, no one does, and certainly not for engaging in torture and murder, these two aren’t soldiers.

And they do have charges to answer.

Iain Macwhirter is wrong to say that the refusal to seek assurances:

“This is pure populist politics”.

No, it is not, it is the ‘politics’ of justice.

The contempt that people must feel for those who have protested that the Home Sec didn’t ask for assurances against the death penalty just beggars belief. No trial has taken place; no sentence has been handed down but the ‘left’ and the ‘liberals’ are practically in tears about poor ‘recreational killers’. This case encapsulates why the British people are so sick to death of the political class in this country.

A recent YouGov poll suggests that 24 per cent of British people would now vote for an anti-immigrant party like the Alternative fur Deutschland or Marine LePen’s National Front. The thing is any political party cannot just be a party of protest, it has to be willing and able to be a party of government, this is why so many minor parties fail to gain support beyond a ‘single issue’. Right-wing populism is the dynamic force in European politics at present, in Viktor Orban’s Hungary and Slovenia has just elected a right wing, anti-immigrant government.

Even the carefree Italians in Italy ares now under coalition led by Lega’s Matteo Savini, who has talked of “a mass cleansing” Italy of immigrants. Norway and Denmark have right-wing parties participating in government. The one to watch is if the Swedish Democrats who are leading in the polls go all the way to government.

Sweden is the rape capital of the world.

How did it become so?

The political elite allowed in rapists from third world countries, the migrants done the raping, but the political elite did all the backroom facilitation, everything from ‘soup to nuts’, transport, food, clothing, housing and money.

Of course, their ‘excuse’ is that ‘we didn’t know this would happen’.   

When people like Iain Macwhirter talk about a new form of nationalist populism and how that transpires into a sophisticated, media-wise Alt-Right, he could be talking about people like Austria’s Martin Sellner.

It would be wrong to say that people like Sellner just target white working class, his organisation cross the social barriers in his own country. That said regards of country, the appeal of the right in white former working class communities, hit hard by globalisation, and feeling abandoned by the left is a ready market. The fact is the white working class has been abandoned by the left, it isn’t a ‘feeling’, it is a reality. The political parties are not interested in the working class; they focus on ‘identity politics’ focusing on minorities such as racial and gender minorities, LGBTQI++ and religions. At the moment the media is as Iain Macwhirter wrote, is preoccupied with transgender issues and feminists of #metoo movement. As Milo Yiannopoulos says, feminism is now a man hating activity.

Even trade unions seem to have abandoned young working class people. As the Institute for Fiscal Studies noted recently, “union members are now overwhelmingly public sector, white collar and middle-aged”.

Finally in the ‘good old days’, political parties could count on the white working class vote, given what we have seen, the white working class have abandoned them, in Scotland, this can be seen by the spectacular fall of the Labour Party, once the dominant force. Given that so many people have been disenfranchised from voting, there is a pressing need for the emergence of new political parties who are not willing to engage in the murky mess that is identity politics’ which are platforms for active discrimination of people. If we are all supposed to be the same and equal, and it is enshrined in law, why are political parties allowed to operate discriminatory policies?

The old days of just giving your vote because of your social class are gone, and so is fairness, justice and equality of outcome, it all died a long time ago which is why the working class despites so many middle class politicians.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Tuesday, July 24, 2018

Facing Justice: Islamic State ‘recreational killers’ who were dubbed ‘the Beatles’ could face the death penalty after UK drops its opposition and will not seek assurances if the men are sent to the US, families of Americans murdered should be allowed to get justice for their loved ones, it seems the ‘holiday’ is over for Alexanda Kotey and El Shafee Elsheikh

Dear All

The death penalty was abolished in Great Britain in 1965; the last hanging took place in for murder took place in 1964. The Act to abolish the death penalty was introduced to Parliament as a private member's bill by Sydney Silverman MP. This was an important bill; it signalled that Britain had moved on.

I oppose the death penalty, but by the same token, I respect the fact that other countries must be allowed to have their own rule of law. One of the issues which I have talked about in the past was young Muslims who effectively went on murder holidays to join groups such as Isis. These people because they spoke English became online internet murderers who enjoyed murdering people by beheading victims.

One group of killers were called "The Beatles", dubbed as such by their hostages because of their English accents, Its members were nicknamed "John", "Paul", "George", and "Ringo" by their hostages. Jihadi John was probably the best well known of the murderers until he was killed. Justice caught up with Jihadi John when he was killed in a drone strike. His military service with his terror group lasted two years, in that time he murdered several people.

Here is his wiki,

Jihadi John wasn’t a soldier, just a recreational killer.

Two of the other members of the “Beatles” Alexanda Kotey and El Shafee Elsheikh have been captured, the US wants these two for extradition to the US, and they have been rightfully stripped of their British citizenship. They were captured in January this year, and then a row what to do with them has broken out.

The UK doesn’t want them returned to British soil, and if they go to the US, they will probably face the death penalty. Interestingly, the new Home Secretary Sajid Javid has been accused of abandoning Britain’s long-held opposition to the death penalty in negotiations with the US about the two terror suspects. The Home Sec has told US Attorney General Jeff Sessions that the UK will not demand a “death penalty assurance” as part of the extradition of Alexanda Kotey and El Shafee Elsheikh.

The UK “does not currently intend to request, nor actively encourage”, the transfer of Kotey and Elsheikh to Britain said the Home Sec.

He added:

“All assistance and material will be provided on the condition that it may only be used for the purpose sought in that request, namely a federal criminal investigation or prosecution. “Furthermore, I am of the view that there are strong reasons for not requiring a death penalty assurance in this specific case, so no such assurances will be sought.”

Amnesty International accused the UK government of abandoning its blanket opposition to the death penalty, describing Mr Javid’s letter as “a huge backward step”.

In a move that shows she is completely unfit to be Home Secretary, Labour MP Diane Abbott has called the decision not to seek assurances as ‘abhorrent and shameful’.

Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman Sir Ed Davey said: “The use of the death penalty – no matter the crimes involved – is wrong. By refusing to stand up to Donald Trump’s administration on this issue, Sajid Javid has abdicated his responsibility to uphold fundamental human rights.”

To that I would say James Foley, Steven Sotloff, David Haines Peter Kassig and Alan Henning, all tortured, all beheaded and killed without mercy, their human rights violated.

In the past, the UK has always sought assurances from the Americans regarding no death penalty, however the request is simply that, a request, there is no legal duty for any Home Secretary to the request.

So, the question is should the Americans be denied justice for their citizens who were murdered?

The answer is no, in the UK we don’t have the death penalty, the same however cannot be said for the US.

A spokeswoman for the Prime Minister said Theresa May supported the Home Secretary’s handling of the case. She also said that the PM hoped it would end with the two men remaining in prison for the rest of their lives.

She said:

“The Prime Minister was aware of these plans and supports the way that these are being handled.”

If you take the time to look at American prison videos, you will see that the supermax system isn’t a bed of roses, it is a very violent place full of predators. Alexanda Kotey and El Shafee Elsheikh might escape the death penalty but chances are they will become high profile targets of opportunity in prison. Instead of a quick clean death via lethal injection, they may get a dose of their own medicine repeatedly in prison.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Monday, July 23, 2018

Nicola Sturgeon’s Massive Cuts Agenda; SNP's independence blueprint is a plan which 'would have seen public spending slashed by £60bn', the damage to Scotland would be incalculable but the SNP acknowledge, independence means cuts on a scale never seen in Scotland, damaging every hospital, every school and every public service in this country, Scotland deserves so much better

Dear All

The ‘white paper’ which the SNP delivered on the 26th November 2013, I remember that date well as I was a guest on a BBC radio programme, other guests were Professor Sir John Curtice and ex SNP MP Natalie McGarry.

The BBC broadcast was held in a coffee shop next door to the Holyrood Parliament. In the summing up at the end, I said that the reason why Scottish independence would fail was because there was an issue of trust in Alex Salmond. The viewers were then treated to Natalie McGarry trying to defend against that statement and failing miserably.

You see when you speak the truth; you are armed with the most powerful weapon in debating.

The ‘white paper’ was a sham, 650 pages described by Joan McAlpine as a document more substantial than the American Declaration of Independence. The US document signed by the 13 colonies was signed in 1776, great minds had written that document; the same couldn’t be said of the SNP ‘white paper’.

The ‘white paper’ was a 650 page con trick, there was no critical thinking, and wild assumptions were made which had no basis on facts. In order to attempt to deceive people, the SNP made claims about how rich the people would be post independence, when the opposite was true.

The SNP were not even guaranteeing people’s pensions.

Now, in 2018, we have the next piece of junk, outsource to what is laughingly called the party’s Growth Commission. In an analysis of the report, These Islands, a pro-UK think tank says that spending on public services would have been slashed by around £60 billion if it had applied over the last decade. In case you don’t know what that means, our education system would suffer even more than it already has, and our health service would have been so badly damaged by severe underfunding that innocent people would die.

You have to ask yourself, what kind of person would inflict such a catastrophic disaster on its own people; let me introduce you to the ‘real’ Nicola Sturgeon, not the fake PR version of the child hugging and LGBT friendly leader.

Nicola Sturgeon may think she is on a journey but the reality is that the rest of Scotland won’t join her on it, she isn’t a leader of men.

Scotland moved passed Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP on referendum night 14th September 2014.     

These Islands, the pro-UK think tank has a number of leading economists including Glasgow 
University professors Ronald MacDonald and Jim Gallagher, Strathclyde’s Professor Brian Ashcroft and Brian Quinn, the former acting deputy governor of the Bank of England as part of their organisation. 

Their analysis says that the SNP’s Growth Commission has actually strengthened the economic case for Scotland remaining in the union. After waiting such a long time for the report, it seems that the effect has been what the SNP intended when people look at the fine detail.

And details count, when you are risking the future of your home, your job, your pension and your kids future!

Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon tried to win the referendum by trying to generate an 'emotional vote' based on hatred and fear of the UK Conservative Government, but people in Scotland saw beyond that, beyond the emotional spin. 

Now, we have ‘white paper two’, the agenda of the left has been replaced by an agenda of the right. This is quite a difference, which begs the question, either we are being lied to now, or we were lied to in 2014.

Which is it?

The SNP’s Growth Commission report claims living standards in Scotland could "equal the best small countries in the world" within a generation of independence. The word in that sentence top home in on is ‘could’, in other words, no guarantee and this is a guess. Interesting the key recommendations included cutting the country's deficit and keeping the pound for at least a decade are both disastrous. Cutting the country's deficit means destroying public services, and the idea of keeping the pound for a decade is a complete non starter.

For example, one of the SNP’s pet projects is to rejoin the EU, to join, a country needs to have its own currency, own central banks and balance the book. You can’t get membership of the EU using someone else’s currency; the EU rules don’t permit it. 

So if the SNP keep the pound for 10 years, then they dump the pound to set up their own currency, and you add in 3  years post dumping there (that’s being charitable), you are talking 13/ 14 years minimum wait to join the EU. Interestingly the Growth Commission report avoids discussing how or when an independent Scotland might qualify for EU membership.

But my view is that given the SNP leadership have been unable to tell the truth to the people before and actively deceived them in the past, the SNP leadership isn’t worth listening too.

Which is why Scotland has moved passed them.

Nicola Sturgeon wants Scottish independence at any cost, and is willing to accept the current austerity policies of the UK Government and then max that out even to achieve its goal. If the SNP believe that the current austerity policies of the UK Government are so bad; and the SNP claims to reject them, how can they argue for even worse under their regime?

Scottish Conservative shadow finance secretary Murdo Fraser said the analysis showed the SNP “is now making even wilder claims about secession than Alex Salmond did prior to the referendum”.

He added:

“Quite simply, they are making it up as they go along. As everyone apart from the SNP acknowledges, independence would mean cuts on a scale never seen in Scotland – damaging every hospital, school and public service in the country.”

When Scotland rejected the SNP claim that we could be like Norway, the SNP is now back with a new country, we could be like New Zealand, or would a better definition be that we could be like Nigeria.

Anyone know how to tie two plastic bottles to your feet to use as shoes…… asking for a friend!

Shadow Scottish Secretary Lesley Laird said it was now “abundantly clear that the SNP’s plans for an independent Scotland would result in austerity cuts that not even former Tory Chancellor George Osborne would have dared to implement”.

And George wasn’t exactly seen as people friendly by many.

She added:

“If these proposals were put into practice Scotland’s already under pressure public services would be devastated, with spending slashed on the NHS, schools, and on other vital areas.”

Finally, it seems the SNP will say anything to trick the people of Scotland, they certainly don’t care what harm they would inflict on organisations like Scotland’s NHS. When I fought in the 2014 referendum, one of my primary motives was to protect our NHS; ironically I was to fight for an organisation which in the same year was to save me from death.  

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Thursday, July 19, 2018

Diversity In Action; UK Government Office Knew About Mass Rape Gangs over a decade before Investigating, political parties ignored the serial rape of little girls because they were courting the Muslim vote, when people spoke out they were gagged, condemned, de-selected and belittled, the motto should be ‘know your political class’ and who they represent

Dear All

The scandal of grooming Pakistani grooming gangs is appalling, serial rape of little girls, children, politicians whose few who spoke out in parliament were soon gagged by parties. Yes, gagged is the right word to describe what political parties were willing to do to cover up serial rape in the name of diversity.

Read this;

One of the lies sold to the public after every scandal of this nature is that people get replaced, removed or retire and then the political class says that ’lessons have been learned’. Those who did nothing to help; disappear into the background and some even pop up in another job somewhere else.

With their pension intact!

Here is another article worth reading:

Just as Labour MP Sarah Champion speaks out, disgraced shadow equalities minister Naz Shah tries to deflect from the issue. Shah is a disgrace, she is the kind of person which makes you wonder about whether or to whom you should cast your vote for.

This is her glorious family history.

Her father allegedly abandoned her by her father when six years old after he ran off with their neighbour's sixteen-year-old daughter. At age 12, she was sent to Pakistan by her mother, Zoora Shah. Zoora Shah fatally poisoned a man she was having an affair with. She served 14 years in prison for four charges including murder, attempted murder, solicitation to murder and forgery.

Jeremy Corbyn has a hard time finding quality people to be in his Cabinet which is why no MP should have a seat for life at Westminster, re-selection prior to ever election and that should be mandatory.

The cover up of the Pakistani grooming gangs went beyond the political class but infiltrated its way downwards into the establishment, police, social services and councils weren’t interested in child rape of white girls if the predators were Pakistani.

Here is a clip from a radio show that a Muslim caller tries to ignore the factual claim that Pakistani grooming gangs make up 87% of gang rape.

No one comes out of the Pakistani grooming gangs scandal with a clean sheet, even Britain’s Home Office had received information about Pakistani grooming gangs raping vulnerable white girls more than a decade before it finally commissioned an investigation.

A decade plus of silence; a decade plus to allow these gangs to operate and thrive, claiming and hunting for victims at will.

Documents relating to an unpublished report were sent to the Home Office in 2002, but the department failed to act on it. The Government of the day was led by the Labour Party, a Labour Party which courted the Muslim vote actively and was promoting a failed multicultural experiment. 

When an assessment of a University of Luton (now Bedfordshire) research project titled “Risky Business” funded by the Home Office was sent in 2002, some Home Office officials claimed to have no recollection of having received it. No copy of the 2002 draft report had been found in the Home Office archives.

This is the bit you should home in on, it is being said the fault lay with a filing system, this is the point that everyone who ignored this gets off ‘scot free’ and the epic line that is synonymous with scandals can be trotted out, ‘lessons will be learned’.

The July 2018 investigation was prompted by documents uncovered in the Home Office archives relating to the 2002 study during the Jay review into the sexual exploitation of some 1,500 white girls by Pakistani-heritage Muslim men in Rotherham between 1997 and 2003.

The Jay Report, published 2014, was only prompted after an investigation into the sexual abuse by The Times newspaper; it seems that publicly makes a difference in politics. One of the cases sent to the Home Office was a case study of the mother of a 14-year-old girl being groomed for sex by “[South] Asian” men but whose pleas for help were ignored by police.

Ignored by the Police because in the UK, minorities play the race card, but so do political parties which is why the Police probably felt that they didn’t want to put their careers in danger by getting singled out and called racist. Where would we be if the political case agreed to abandon the use of race politics?

Probably a safer society!

Conservative Home Secretary Sajid Javid said: 

“The review did find that pieces of information questioning the response of statutory services were available to the Home Office, meaning that opportunities to follow up on, or seek further information about, matters in Rotherham including whether the police and other statutory agencies were responding appropriately existed.”
Rotherham Labour MP Sarah Champion said:

“It is clear that the Home Office knew about child sexual exploitation in Rotherham from 2002. The report also highlights the knowledge of the local authority and South Yorkshire Police of the abuse. Why, when so many in authority knew the scale and severity of this crime did it take until 2014, with the publication of the Jay report, for a large scale investigation to occur? How many lives could have been protected if swift action had been taken a decade before?”

Labour MP Sarah Champion is what I consider a Labour MP to be, someone worth campaigning for, I have said in the past that minorities have joined political parties to push their own agenda. In return the party uses them to show how welcoming and diverse they are, while expecting votes and probably donations.

Yesterday, I was blogging on how we live in a corrupt system:

‘most people are ignorant of politics, how it works, who is in, and how they got there, in the past, I said the system is corrupt, from attempted vote rigging of candidates, to people being discriminated on the basis of their skin, background, sex, and other numerous combinations to keep it like a private club’.

Today, we have this story of neglect, are you wiser to how politics works?

Rochdale grooming gang whistleblower and former Greater Manchester Police detective Maggie Oliver alleges the Home Office were more interested in covering up their mistakes than protecting vulnerable girls.

I would say that is fair comment, she also added that the conspiracy “goes right to the top of government. She then made the explosive revelation that the Home Office were getting daily updates about Operation Span [an investigation into Child Sex Explotation]. They are more interested in covering up for mistakes instead of holding their hands up she said.

These people in the Home Office were afraid because they knew that there wasn’t the political will to protect little girls from being raped by those who stand in parliament and are addressed as the ‘Right Honourable’.

When I heard that Diane Abbott was appointed Shadow Home Secretary and Naz Shah as Shadow Equalities Minister, I thought about how little quality material that Jeremy Corbyn has to work.

And I doubt I am not the only one thinking this.

I found someone who is also worth consideration to be an MP.

Telling the truth is the most important ‘weapon’ in today’s society, this guy doesn’t seem to have a problem standing up and being counted, why can't our political class?

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Wednesday, July 18, 2018

Denying Direct Democracy: the ‘Remain Camp’ think they have hit the jackpot as Met Police are to probe Vote Leave after Electoral investigation, now there are calls for the referendum result to be made void, dream on, Brexit is still moving forward, if Brexit doesn’t happen then the UK will face a political crisis not seen since Suez

Dear All

Ever since the result of the Brexit referendum in June 2016; the ‘Remain side’ have been exceptionally bad losers, they have tried repeatedly to deny the British people their democratic right to have their vote respected. I fought on the Leave side, the EU is a wholly corrupt organisation which is anti worker and anti country, it is controlled by a ‘political elite’ who are un-elected.

Lack of accountability makes the EU a dangerous organisation.

The Remain side is made up of various vested interests groups, including the ‘Progress’ wing of the Labour Party. They want to see a re-run the EU referendum; this cannot be allowed to happen. Ireland voted against the Lisbon Treaty but the politicians re-ran the referendum till they got the “right” vote, their vote.

The Ireland situation was a complete betrayal of democracy.

Several attempts have been made to garner support from the people of the UK for a second referendum but the public isn’t interested, the political elite in the UK have set up various little organisations but the reality is, they are just talking to themselves.

Everyone else has moved on.

In elections and referendums, we expect each side to act in a fair and democratic manner, following the letter of the law and the spirit, but as I have mentioned numerous times, our politics have been infiltrated by minority groups who operate to their own agenda within various political parties. These people use their minority status to undermine parties for their own ends, and that of others they are in league with.

Police are investigating senior figures in the Vote Leave campaign after the group was fined for breaking strict electoral rules. This information has prompted Winston Churchill’s grandson, Sir Nicholas Soames, to declare the British electoral system should be “blown up and started all over again”. Although everyone supports in theory a fair system, the fact is the system is geared towards larger parties, which is why proportional representation is always being called for in the past.

It is said that the official campaign for leaving the EU exceeded spending limits by almost £500,000, flouting electoral law, would this have swayed the result by much, I don’t think so, the UK Government prior to the referendum sent a booklet to every home at the cost of circa £9 million. The machinery of government and the ruling party led by David Cameron were staunchly pro EU, however they activities it seemed didn’t come under the electoral law because they were publishing ‘information’.

During the Second World War; Winston Churchill defeated this country from Nazi Germany, one wonders what he would think of his grandson, Sir Nicholas Soames now. It seems that investigators found "significant evidence" of joint working between Vote Leave and another campaign group, BeLeave. The latter was founded by Darren Grimes, then a 23-year-old fashion student who made a name for himself, today he found out the price of ‘fame’ Darren Grimes: the pro-Brexit student activist fined apparently £20k.

Kyle Taylor, director of Fair Vote UK, said:

“This is much bigger than Brexit: breaking election law is undermining the very fabric of how we believe our society should make rules. We are sleepwalking into a future I don’t want to be a part of.”

In the interest of fairness, here a link to their site;

You might want to pop in and have a look.

One of the people who is quite happy to sabotage the direct democracy of the people is the middle class sycophant Labour MP Chuka Umunna, he has condemned the revelations as an “affront to our democracy”. Umunna is someone who shouldn’t be a Labour MP in my opinion, who he ‘represents’ is anyone’s guess, but I doubt it is the ‘little people’.

That’s you and me!

Apparently in his element, Umunna is raising concerns of “foul play”, and siding with the SNP, they are saying via Brexit Secretary Mike Russell by insisting the vote to leave the EU was “obtained, at least in part, by breaching electoral law”. Before this storm in a tea cup erupted, both Umunna’ crew and Nicola Sturgeon were attempting any trick to get a second vote.
Russell is trying the old trick that this shouldn’t be a UK wide vote but each country should have one single vote, it denies a fair process, and is designed to be possibly a stalemate. Westminster has already dismissed this nonsense previously, Scotland is part of the UK and the UK voted to leave the EU. This ploy is all about the SNP angling for a second referendum at a time of their choosing; effectively they want an ‘open’ Section 30 order without a time limit.

And they aren’t getting that from Westminster.

In what can be seen as politicking, the Labour Party has called for ministers and formers ministers who were key figures in Vote Leave such as Michael Gove and Boris Johnson to be investigated, the end game is the collapse of the Conservative Government, and attempting to garner election support.

Labour MP David Lammy declared that Vote Leave had “cheated” on spending rules and the payday should be a new vote on whether the referendum result was now void. There will be no parliamentary vote on whether the result of the June 2016 referendum should now be classed as void, it will never happen.

The Electoral Commission found Vote Leave failed to declare money it spent with controversial data firm Aggregate IQ. BeLeave "spent more than £675,000 with Aggregate IQ under a common plan with Vote Leave", investigators found. This was not declared and took the latter over the legal spending limit. This came to light via whistleblowers, the cash was used to pay for targeted messaging services on Facebook and other social media. One of the whistleblowers was Shahmir Sanni.

So, who is Shahmir Sanni?

If you think back to the start of this post, you will have read me stating that ‘our politics have been infiltrated by minority groups who operate to their own agenda within various political parties’.

Found this as well for you to look at:

One thing that Shahmir Sanni isn’t is a hero!

A Vote Leave spokesman said the Electoral Commission's report contained "a number of false accusations and incorrect assertions that are wholly inaccurate and do not stand up to scrutiny".

Finally, most people are ignorant of politics, how it works, who is in, and how they got there, in the past, I said the system is corrupt, from attempted vote rigging of candidates, to people being discriminated on the basis of their skin, background, sex, and other numerous combinations to keep it like a private club, merit doesn’t count, hard work doesn’t count and vision doesn’t count either. The Met Police can do what they want to do if investigating is their wish, however, there isn’t going to be a re-run of the 2016 referendum.

The Prime Minister Theresa May is getting on with delivery of Brexit, the process is in motion, there are legal frameworks, and come 29th March 2019, we are out of the EU. Cabinet Office minister Chloe Smith insisted the Government was “getting on with delivering the result of the referendum”.

There is no going back!

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Tuesday, July 17, 2018

The Way Ahead; Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babiš says EU must turn back boats, and that resettling Migrants is ‘Road to Hell’, the EU Border Force need to operate a no go zone in the Med and impound NGO boats which fuel the crisis, it is time that nation states stepped up and opposed the EU or see wide spread trouble in Europe

Dear All

A few years ago, I proposed a series of measures during the ‘migrant crisis’ as it has become to be known in a few blog posts.

The ideas were:

1/ EU Border Force

2/ EU internal immigration policy for EU citizens

3/ intervention and mobilisation of the military in member states

4/ New EU wide ID card scheme

5/ No non EU economic migrant processed from this crisis and allowed to remain within an EU country which has accept them can travel to any other EU member state. Everyone should be completely documented, if a breach occurred; the person or group will be returned to the EU country they were settled and registered in.

The idea of the EU Border Force was that it would work jointly with the military in the Med and at other human trafficking smuggling routes to stop migrants entering Europe. Evidence is plain to see, the migrant crisis has altered Europe in a bad way, it led to the rise of the far right, a rejection of the political elite, the formation of new populist parties and an angry population.

One of the States which has acted in the best interests of Europe, is the Czech Republic, they have stood firm along with a few others from EU intimidation, which was done by direct threats via the EU body and Germany. One thing which the Czechs are saying is that Europe must turn back the boats. Migrants should not be resettled in Europe but in Africa. The Czech believe the current situation is the road to hell, and making illegal immigration worse.

Prime Minister Andrej Babiš has restated his nation’s position of not taking any third world migrants from other EU nations; I agree with him, the problem was created by Germany’s Angela Merkel and her attempts to spread her problem to other EU States should be resisted. Merkel’s doesn’t have a future as German Chancellor, she is a stupid and dangerous woman responsible for the crime wave which emerged due to her open borders nonsense.

The situation is grim, Italy has asked fellow bloc members to take a share of a batch of hundreds picked up by Brussels border force Frontex in the Mediterranean, the Italians are following suit of other countries such as the Czech Republic and Hungary, ordinary people are now politically motivated to speak and vote out politicians who are a threat to their countries national security.

Prime Minister Andrej Babiš  said:

“[Like other European leaders], I received a copy of the letter from Prime Minister [Giuseppe] Conte, … in which he asks the EU to take care of the 450 people currently at sea. Such an approach is a road to hell” and “only motivates smugglers and increases their income. It is no solution to accept these people. On the contrary, this is just worsening the problem we have in Europe.”

A huge mistake was made early on in the migrant crisis by allowing illegal migrants freedom of movement in a member state, this led to rape, murder and multiple other crimes.

I call this Merkel’s Murders!

Would you put your hand into a fire, probably not, you are intelligent enough to know that it will burn you, Angela Merkel is intelligent enough to know that the illegal migrants would end up raping, killing and attacking the indigenous population.

The NGO boats ferrying migrants across the Mediterranean known as “Soros ships” must be stopped by the military and impounded. These boats are doing the work for human traffickers; effectively they are engaged in criminality under the guise of humanitarian work. No country can have open borders; history teaches that weak countries go under when led by bad people.

And that is what we have in Europe, bad people elected as politicians who care more about virtual signalling while at the same time expose their utter contempt for their own people.

Prime Minister Andrej Babiš  stressed that the EU bloc should follow Australia’s lead and turn back the boats, writing:

“We must send a clear signal that illegal migration has ended and that the European Union is ready to return illegal immigrants immediately.”

This is why the EU Border Force is so important, they should be a permanent force patrolling the Mediterranean with assistance given to African countries which border the Med.  

When Italian Interior Minister Matteo Salvini initially closed the country’s ports to the Frontex vessels, the government declared a “political victory” after France, Malta, Germany, Spain, and Portugal agreed to each take 50 of the 450 migrants. These people are Syrians flee Assad, the majority are from Eritrea.

Finally, we have seen the start of a trend:

Everyone knows what is going on, even US President Donald Trump:

Why can’t our home grown politicians see it, well they do, they just don’t care because they live in a bubble.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University