Immigration.

 We now have close to 120,000 illegal immigrants in the UK just from the channel dinghy crossings alone. These people are being housed in 4-star hotels across the country at huge cost.

Over the past week have now added to that figure by "repatriating" over 10,000 "refugees" from Afghanistan. We've also opened the doors to hundreds of thousands of people from Hong Kong.

Apart from the illegal channel crossers, in general I have no qualms about the people coming in from Afghanistan and Hong Kong. We have some moral obligation towards them. In Afghanistan we went in with size 10 hobnails and failed to sort out their country. In Hong Kong we gave them away to the authoritarian Chinese government lock, stock and barrel. 

But, and the is a big but.... where are all these people going to go? We are already in the midst of a housing crisis. We have hundreds of thousands of people homeless on the streets, we have people unable to afford rent on a single wage, let alone buy a property and pay a mortgage.

So where exactly do we put these new immigrants these new citizens of the UK? Where do we house them? How do we house them?

We don't have the housing to place them, we don't have the infrastructure to support the new houses that need to be built, we just don't have the facilities to keep the door open for ever, accepting everyone into the country.

Yet we spend billions on HS2. 

I firmly believe that the country's priorities are fucked up. First an foremost should be providing basic facilities to people at a cost they can afford. We need more houses and if necessary, legislation should be put forward to ease the planning burden and sad to say, encroach on the green belt. 

It's without a hint of self-awareness that the people that shout loudest about accepting immigrants into the country are usually the ones that shout loudest against new housing developments and roads. Well, you can't have it both ways. You want to allow all and sundry to come in, then your precious green belt is going to have to go. Your fault, no on else's. 

Think that virtue-signalling and being virtuous won't have an effect on your middle-class life? Think again. 

Want to keep your precious greenery? Want to preserve your idyllic towns an villages? Don't want them to be swallowed up by massive conurbations? 

Don't want your house price to fall as more and more houses are being built? Enjoying the increased value of your house? Don't want to experience negative equity?

Then start to reject the open-door immigration policies. Because at some point, you will have to pay the piper for your virtue.

I blogged a few years ago that the housing crisis can only be solved by classing it as a national emergency and giving national government special powers in order to solve it. Planning objections need to be swept away and the houses need to be built now.

Being a national project, we need to identify decent sized accommodation, not the poxy shoeboxes that developers cram into the smallest plots in order to maximise profit. The houses need to be built and sold with a small profit. The difference between material costs and the actual value of a house is huge. 

By contracting the building of houses and selling them at a small margin over the material cost brings in revenue for the government and provides affordable housing.

At some point one of the major parties need to run with this policy. Because if one of the minor parties like UKIP (Change that bloody name!) or Nigel Farage's ex-party Reform run with this, they could well collect a huge number of votes from the low-paid working class. 

Add a dab of virtue by housing the homeless and immigrants then it might also bring the middle-classes on board too. After all if they are so virtuous they want to save everyone, then surely a drop in house values is a small price to pay eh? 

Or is all that virtue available just so long as it doesn't affect them?

I'd also add in a dash of Tax reclamation from the Mega-corporations like Google, PayPal and the like to pay for it. Change the rules so they can't pay tax offshore. If they resist then they're denying homes for the homeless and immigrants, the selfish bastards.

Afghanistan.

Well, what can I say about this clusterfuck of a situation, other than it was entirely predictable. The past 200 years of history has proven that the Brits, the Russians and now the combined Western World can't tame that country.

I'll explain later why Afghanistan can't be tamed, but first let's pause an remember all of those men and women that lost their lives, or who were badly injured whilst on duty in that fly-blown, sandbox of a country. It's those people and their families that I have sympathy for today. Just what did they die for? Just why were our soldiers permanently maimed? To what purpose? 

Twenty years and several lives later and Afghanistan is returning to the status quo. 

The country cannot be tamed, because there are not enough people in the country to police every inch of it. The country is a disparate set of towns, separated by hundreds of miles. Armies can disappear into the wilderness and because they have no uniform, can travel at will around the country. When necessary they can form into organised groups and attack in force, only to melt into the wilderness again afterwards.

The other thing to understand is the Taliban, like other Muslim extremist groups, are actually looked on as more pious, more Muslim and therefore less pious Muslims can't resist them. Because to do so would be to go against a group that follows the teachings of Allah to a more extreme degree. The Taliban are better Muslims than those that have been corrupted by the West's values. Those the West call moderate Muslims, the favourite kind of Muslim for the Media.

It's exactly the same here in the UK with extremist Muslim groups and the child rape gangs. That's why they can flourish within the Muslim community. The extremists are following the Koran more accurately and to a more extreme degree than the lax Muslims that are "moderate". 

In the Muslim world, the extremists will always win out. It's built-in.

And so Afghanistan slips back to extremism. The Western World has failed, due to a lack of stamina. 

The sad thing is that we are now more at risk at home too. The extremists are here on our soil. Once Afghanistan and Iraq fall back to their default positions, the training camps will start up, the networks in the West will be activated. 

Emboldened by these "victories" you will see more atrocities on Western Soil. 

Mark My Words.

Who will be next to try their hand in Afghanistan? China maybe? There are resources to be had there and the country is virtually empty. China has no compunction about the excessive use of force in order to quell insurrections. The type of force required to win in Afghanistan. Although to do that, China would need to neutralise Pakistan. 

Both countries are nuclear powers, although I do have doubts about the effectiveness of the the Pakistani nuclear deterrent. I'd put money on China to win that bout if it came down to it.

So, let's see what happens next. Although we do need to grow balls and defend our borders and step up internal security. Not the creepy all-seeing security that makes criminals of everyone. But security forces targeted at those that would cause atrocities in this country.

Right now there are enough ex-Taliban fighters and sympathisers in the UK to cause an atrocity on the level of the Mumbai attacks. Just think what damage a group of gunmen could cause in a crowded London shopping street? Or (and the extremists have form for this too) a crowded shopping Mall? 

A handful of heavily armed fighters could kill hundreds of civilians. 

My advice is to avoid large shopping centres, especially in London and Birmingham for a while.

Those people we pissed off in the first hours of the invasions of Afghanistan, the people I've blogged about before will come for revenge.

When is a Vaccine not a Vaccine?

When it's a genetically modified Simian virus that doesn't stop you getting the virus it's supposed to prevent and it doesn't prevent transmission of the virus it's supposed to.

So, lets state the facts.

The government itself has stated the Covid-19 "vaccines" don't stop you getting the virus, nor do they stop you passing it to others. The "vaccine" actually just lessens the risk of you personally being hospitalised. 

So I'm a bit confused by the narrative that it's selfish not to get the vaccine. Especially when the only person it benefits is you. That's a fact. 

It's also a fact that you are more likely to die from the virus if you don't get vaccinated, but surely that's a personal choice. It's your informed choice to accept the higher risk of serious complications from covid-19 rather than accept injection of a  genetically modified simian virus into your body.

I'm also confused by the narrative that getting the vaccine makes you less transmissible, it makes you less likely to infect others.  That certainly isn't a fact. 

This then leads on to mandatory vaccination for people in certain jobs. Initially I'm talking about carers, many of whom themselves have health issues. So they cannot take the vaccine on health grounds. Should they be sacked because of a health issue? Even if they refuse vaccination on religious grounds, or just personal choice, should they be sacked?

Especially if they can get the virus, take it into a care setting and pass it onto their residents even if they have been vaccinated. Why is the vaccination mandatory?

Are we looking at low hanging fruit? Are we seeing the persecution of a section of society to test the reaction of the population? Are we seeing the persecution of poor, low-paid workers who can't afford to fight back in order to establish employment case law? Will we see the case law then rolled out to include the suspension or sacking of anyone for transgressions of arbitrarily established rules?

So the authorities don't like your health status? Sacked.

They don't like your Political stance? Sacked.

Don't like the words you are using on Social Media? Sacked.

Don't like the company you keep? Sacked.

Think it can't happen? Just extrapolate what is happening right now and understand that government NEVER uses legislation for it's original purpose, no matter how narrowly defined. 

The anti-terror laws have been abused, the violent porn laws have been abused, the offense laws have been abused, the communications act has been abused. ALL of those laws, all of that legislation has been used in way it wasn't originally intended for. Call it mission-creep, call it overstepping the mark; it still boils down to the abuse of law. 

The rules being proposed now essentially are work permits. You will not be permitted to work unless you fulfil certain criteria. Initially it's based on your vaccination status, but very quickly could include political status, mental health status, family status, loyalty to the party, loyalty to the state, eh comrade?

If the government gets away with mandating vaccinations or allowing discrimination against unvaccinated people, then we will truly deserve the tyranny that will follow.