logo
Don't believe Starmer when he says he's angry about the small boats

Don't believe Starmer when he says he's angry about the small boats

Yahoo2 days ago

In the week that the Prime Minister vowed to increase defence spending and solemnly averred, 'My first priority is the safety and security of the British people', the British people scratched their heads and gestured crossly in the direction of their southern coastline. 'Hang on, Keir,' they muttered. 'What about those 1,195 men from God-knows-where who broke into our homeland on Saturday to access the all-you-can-sponge benefits buffet that's 15,000 of the blighters this year so far, a record. How are you making us safe and secure?'
You could tell the PM thought he was making a historic speech; the hair gel gets heavier and greasier along with the sententious, slippery phrases. It didn't help that he was speaking at the Govan shipyards in front of a group of workers who appeared to have been taken hostage during their break, wrestled from their Twixes and builder's tea to provide a stirring backdrop for this tinpot authoritarian dictator. All credit to the Scots, they looked either bored or openly hostile. Samuel Johnson's observation that 'patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel' never rang truer. A hugely unpopular Labour leader, who acts against the national interest at any given opportunity, was suddenly asking the country to pull together because his party risks coming a humiliating third, behind Reform UK, in the Hamilton by-election on Thursday.
Don't get me wrong. I welcome any rise in funding for our beleaguered armed forces, but the PM's promise to make the UK 'a battle-ready, armour-clad nation' sounded absurd. Not least because he called committing to spending 3 per cent of GDP an 'ambition' when highly-respected generals (and now Nato) say 3.5 per cent on defence is the bare minimum. The damage has already been done as a result of years of underinvestment, lack of purpose, partly through constant change of leadership in all three services, lack of political will and an increasing number of civil servants without any military experience who hold down jobsworth appointments resisting change and threats to their position. But it wasn't just the lack of a firm financial commitment that felt evasive. Starmer avoided any mention of the clear and present danger, which is by far the biggest threat to our national security.
There are currently more illegal male migrants of fighting age in the UK than there are soldiers. The British Army, once among the world's best, is now 71,000-weak and can no longer put an armoured division in the field, yet the state somehow finds a stupefying £8 million a day to place 'asylum seekers' in pleasant hotels beyond the means of any squaddie. The 1,200 invaders who came ashore on just one day last weekend are roughly the equivalent of two infantry battalions. One estimate has numbers reaching 50,000 by the end of the year, although if we have a good summer, it could be much worse. It's frightening.
To add to the jeopardy, in 2020, MI5 said that nine-tenths of the 43,000 suspects on its terror watchlist were jihadists. More potential terrorists from Iraq, Iran, Syria and North Africa are ferried ashore every hour by the RNLI and Border Force; they are so busy transporting unwanted arrivals that last week they asked trawlers for help. (When Keir Starmer promised to 'stop the boats', little did we realise the boats he planned to stop were British fishing boats! The PM sold our fishermen out to the French as an incentive to prevent migrant dinghies setting sail. Curiously, for our 500 million quid, the numbers being 'prevented' are going down not up. Tant pis, Monsieur Keir!)
If you or I were the prime minister or home secretary, the numbers above would be giving us sleepless nights. Who knows, maybe Keir Starmer in the wee small hours frets a little that the multicultural experiment is fast approaching breaking point and no amount of jailing 'far-Right thugs' like Lucy Connolly or clamping down on free speech is going to keep a lid on civil unrest. I doubt it somehow. It is an article of faith for the Left that Western countries have no moral right to control their borders and keep out unfortunate people from supposedly exploited places. In 1988, Starmer even said that 'a racist undercurrent… permeates all immigration law'. Nowadays, living in fear of Farage's turquoise tsunami, the hypocrite tweets: 'You have every right to be angry about small boat crossings. I'm angry too.'
Don't believe him. Sir Keir is a member of that human rights legal elite who have set themselves up as defenders of the international 'rules-based order', rejoicing in their principled stand against their less enlightened and bigoted countrymen. (That's us, folks.) Irreversible change to the population and culture of our country is not an accidental by-product of their love for open borders; they won't rest until every last vestige of despised Britishness and patriotic feeling is erased.
No one better personifies that sanctimonious, canting breed than Sir Keir's old mucker Attorney General, Lord Richard Hermer. Last week, Lord Hermer caused uproar when he said that politicians threatening to withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) were basically Nazis 'echoing 1930s Germany'. It is that very same wretched ECHR which all the human rights zealots love to exploit. Immigration judges regularly place some Islamist maniac's right to a family life above the right of British people not to be blown up, or raped, successfully blocking the deportation of thousands of dangerous foreign criminals.
Imagine hating your country so much that you dedicate your life to representing those who hate it even more. Gerry Adams, Shamima Begum, five brutes linked to al-Qaeda – all were represented by Lord Hermer. So I was disgusted, but not surprised, when The Telegraph disclosed on Sunday that Lord Hermer personally signed off on the prosecution of Lucy Connolly for a single, deeply unpleasant tweet. At the time of the fast-tracked show trials around the Southport riots, the Attorney General warned: 'You cannot hide behind your keyboards – you will face the full force of the law.' (Looks like he and the PM both approved the draconian crackdown on free speech to cover up the cracks in their multicultural project.)
The Telegraph also discovered that Hermer's office had declined to review 'unduly lenient' sentences handed to a convicted rapist, a paedophile and a terrorist fundraiser – all of them received shorter terms than Lucy. What a sick, ideologically-warped society it is where a convicted rapist is sentenced to 28 months and a devoted mum and childminder who typed one bad thing (swiftly corrected) is sent down for 31 months. Thank goodness for Robert Jenrick, who perfectly summed up the grotesque two-tier justice meted out to Lucy in an excoriating question in the Commons, and for Baroness Kate Hoey, who demanded compassion for Lucy in the Lords.
In Scotland, the Prime Minister asked the country to 'work together' to confront the threat from Russia. I don't know about you but, right now, I'm less worried about Vladimir Putin than Richard Hermer. Even if the Royal Navy and the Army get the funds they need and deserve, there is no way the current Attorney General will permit our forces to repel or repatriate the thousands of undocumented males who present such a danger to the UK (particularly to women and girls).
Unless we leave the ECHR, the hands of our soldiers and sailors are forever tied. Imagine trying to explain that mortifying impotence to those who died protecting this island from actual Nazis. Confronting the enemy within is every bit as important as bolstering our defences to engage the enemy abroad. Make no mistake: uncontrolled migration is by far the biggest threat. Starmer, Hermer and their ilk are not to be trusted with our nation's security; they owe their loyalty to international human rights law. Not to the men, women and children of Britain.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Maori MPs suspended for performing haka in parliament
Maori MPs suspended for performing haka in parliament

Yahoo

time18 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Maori MPs suspended for performing haka in parliament

Three Maori MPs have been suspended from New Zealand's parliament for performing a haka during a sitting last year. On Thursday, the legislature voted to ban Rawiri Waititi and Debbie Ngarewa-Packer, the Maori Party co-leaders, for a record 21 days. Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke, the Maori Party MP who started the dance, was handed a seven-day suspension. Mr Waititi said the suspension was a reminder of the 'silencing' of his ancestors. He said on Thursday: 'In my maiden speech, I talked about one of our (ancestors) who was hung in the gallows of Mt Eden Prison, wrongfully accused. 'The silencing of us today is a reminder of the silencing of our ancestors of the past, and it continues to happen. Now you've traded the noose for legislation. Well, we will not be silenced.' The MPs did the haka in November as a protest after being asked if their party supported a Bill that sought to redefine New Zealand's founding treaty with the Maori people. Although performed on many different occasions, haka are often used as a kind of ceremonial war dance or challenge to authority. Winston Peters, New Zealand's foreign affairs minister, mocked Mr Waititi in the chamber on Thursday for his traditional full-face Maori tattoo. Mr Peters, who is also Maori, said: 'The Maori Party are a bunch of extremists, and middle New Zealand and the Maori world has had enough of them. 'The one that's shouting down there, with the scribbles on his face... can't keep quiet for five seconds.' Ms Maipi-Clarke, 22, sparked the controversy as parliament considered the highly contentious Treaty Principles Bill last November. In footage widely shared around the world, she rose to her feet, ripped up the Bill and started belting out the strains of a protest haka. She was joined by Mr Waititi and Ms Ngarewa-Packer, who strode on to the chamber floor chanting the Ka Mate haka, which is often performed by the country's All Blacks rugby team. Credit: X/@Maori_Party Ms Ngarewa-Packer was also accused of pointing her fingers in the shape of a gun at David Seymour, the leader of the Right-wing ACT Party, who had proposed the Bill. The trio were hauled before the parliament's privileges committee but refused to take part in the hearing. Supported by New Zealand's three governing coalition parties, the bans were voted on and accepted on Thursday. Ms Maipi-Clarke vowed that Maori would not be silenced, saying: 'A member can swear at another member, a member of Cabinet can lay their hands on a staff member, a member can drive up the steps of parliament, a member can swear in parliament, and yet they weren't given five minutes of suspension. 'Yet when we stand up for the country's foundational document, we get punished with the most severe consequences.' The Treaty Principles Bill sought to reinterpret New Zealand's founding document, signed between Maori chiefs and British representatives in 1840. Many critics saw the Bill as an attempt to wind back the special rights given to the country's 900,000-strong Maori population. Its proponents argued that the current principles of the 1840 Bill have distorted its original intent, resulting in Maori now having more rights than non-Maori. Parliament resoundingly voted down the Bill in April. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.

All eyes on Germany's Merz ahead of White House meeting with Trump
All eyes on Germany's Merz ahead of White House meeting with Trump

Yahoo

time18 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

All eyes on Germany's Merz ahead of White House meeting with Trump

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz is scheduled to meet US President Donald Trump at the White House on Thursday in his first visit to the US capital since becoming chancellor a month ago - in what is likely to be the toughest test of his young tenure yet. Trump is scheduled to receive the German leader at 11:30 am (1530 GMT), followed by a bilateral meeting in the Oval Office and a working lunch. Previous visits to the Oval Office by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and South African President Cyril Ramaphosa were marked by controversies, and the way Merz handles the situation is likely to set the tone for future German-US relations. The meeting is expected to focus on efforts to end the war in Ukraine, NATO's response to growing external threats, and the trade dispute between the United States and the European Union. Merz has already made it clear that he is not travelling to the US capital begging for support but as a confident representative of European positions. The chancellor has only briefly met Trump once before, many years ago in New York. However, since taking office four weeks ago, he has spoken with Trump several times about Russia's war against Ukraine - both individually and in larger groups with other European leaders. The two now address each other by first names and are in regular contact via text messages. Merz spent the night at Blair House - the president's guest house - after arriving in Washington. He is due to spend only about 17 hours in the US capital and also plans to visit the Capitol, the seat of the two chambers of Congress. In keeping with tradition, Merz left a book at Blair House - a collection of letters from German immigrants published by Walter Kamphoefner in 1988 titled "News from the Land of Freedom. German Immigrants write home." At the encounter in the Oval Office, which is open to the press, Trump's closest advisors are likely to be present as well. However, Vice President JD Vance is expected to be absent after playing a leading role in the dressing-down of Zelensky in front of rolling cameras in February Vance, as well as US Foreign Secretary Marco Rubio - whose participation has been confirmed - have attacked Germany and other European allies over what they say are restrictions on free speech and the marginalization of far-right parties including the Alternative for Germany (AfD). Merz, whose conservatives came out first in February's elections ahead of the AfD, has repeatedly made it clear that he rejects the US meddling in Germany's domestic politics. In June, Merz and Trump are scheduled to meet twice more: at the Group of Seven (G7) summit in Canada in mid-June and at the NATO summit later that month in The Hague.

Hegseth praises ‘near consensus' to raise NATO defense spending target to 5% of GDP
Hegseth praises ‘near consensus' to raise NATO defense spending target to 5% of GDP

Yahoo

time18 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Hegseth praises ‘near consensus' to raise NATO defense spending target to 5% of GDP

US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said after a meeting with alliance counterparts in Brussels that there was a 'near consensus' over raising NATO's defense spending target to 5% of GDP. 'Countries in there are well exceeding 2% and we think very close, almost near consensus, on a 5% commitment for Nato,' Hegseth said. The alliance is expected to sign a new pledge at a NATO summit this month increasing defense spending targets to 3.5% of GDP and add a 1.5% target for security-related infrastructure such as cyber capabilities and transportation. Many countries already spend roughly 1.5% of GDP on the types of infrastructure expected to be included in the pledge, but the figure would allow US President Donald Trump to say the alliance is setting the 5% spending target he has demanded, a Western official told Semafor.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store