Well, They Are Famously Law-Abiding...

..so I'm sure this will work:

Travellers who built a caravan site in the shadow housing secretary's constituency have been hit with a court order banning them from living there.

Which they will pay as much attention to as they do everything else. 

Around 30 cars, vans and diggers descended on a four-acre green space in the hamlet of Willows Green, near Felsted, Essex, under cover of darkness as the early May bank holiday weekend began. They ripped up lush greenery in Sir James Cleverly's Braintree constituency to tarmac the land and lay the ground for 12 families, retrospectively applying for planning permission.

Its always bank holidays, but local councils never learn lessons, do they? 

An injunction against anyone living on the site was granted on May 7, a decision upheld by the High Court after it heard it was 'fanciful' to suggest families were on the site when the injunction was granted.

Caroline Bolton, for the council, asked a High Court judge on Thursday to continue the injunction, saying there was nobody living on the site at the time it was originally granted. She said: 'It is the claimant's position that at the time of applying for the injunction, the site was under construction, not an occupied site.

Should be easy to prove!

'The defendant's position, in essence, is that there are 12 families with children all in occupation of the land prior to the injunction being served'

Should be easy to disprove! 

.Tahseen Choudhry, for the group of travellers, said they should be allowed to stay because of their right to a family life under the European Convention on Human Rights.

A non-English origin lawyer.... 

She also said the council had described the caravans as 'shabby', adding: 'As gypsies and travellers, that is their home, it is how they live. 

'It can be shabby, broken down, derelict, anything, that is their preference. No one can judge that.'

What are you talking about? We allow local councils to judge it all the bloody time!  

Of communism, the EU and Brexit

Single, standalone posts can be great to good, as these two below are. But it’s the combination, including others we see from good sources elsewhere … and that’s the point … forget the MSM … and we start to get a more complete, more rounded picture, with some themes recurring over and over and over.

Enemies Of The State...

Immigration judges granted a convicted child sex offender the right to enter Britain after ruling that barring him would breach his human rights. The latest shocking example of a ‘deeply perverse’ ruling from the immigration courts involves Jamaican paedophile Oniel Spence, who was jailed in the United States for a sexual offence against a 15-year-old girl.

It really shouldn’t surprise me anymore, the depths of depravity of British judges seems fully equal to that of Yank paedophiles...

Details of the case are revealed by the Daily Mail for the first time today after Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp this week blasted judges’ ‘tyranny’ over the immigration system.

It’s nice to see a Tory speaking out about this, though one wonders why he didn’t speak before when his party was in a position to do something about it. 

Spence, now 43, applied to come to the UK in 2023 to join his wife and child - who are both British nationals - but was blocked by the Home Office. Officials barred his application on the grounds his exclusion was ‘conducive to the public good’. The paedophile then lodged an appeal at the lower immigration tribunal and won permission to come here from immigration judge Jonathan Greer.

It’s nice to see that they’re naming the judges, and I would hope that people in a position to provide services and goods to them take note of this 

His lawyers argued preventing him from entering Britain had breached Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which covers the right to ‘private and family life’. The Home Secretary at the time, Yvette Cooper, appealed to the upper immigration tribunal against the decision. But judges Madeleine Reeds and Nathan Moxon refused her arguments.

Did no one point out that there was nothing stopping them from going to him to resolve this? 

Current Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood then brought a further case at the Court of Appeal.Earlier this month senior judges overturned the original decision, describing it as ‘perverse’, and ordered the case to be re-heard by the first-tier tribunal.A Home Office spokesman said: ‘We will do everything in our power to continue contesting this case.'

Well, why not? It’s just taxpayers money after all. 

The Betrayal of Brexit by the political class, under the deep state

The Brexit referendum was on this day in 2016 and the wrongdoers in the heading tried everything to rig it. Having failed, mainly due to the north, the various PMs ensured Brexit never properly happened, the traitors.

Cameron’s promise:

Ethnicity two

Last evening’s post on ethnicity began by looking at a TV show and movie, one from England, one from the US. What I did not mention though was that the Miss Marple series was coproduced by the 7 Network in Australia. Stop watching? Keep watching?

All right, let’s say a film in Arabic came on the box, with the strangled caterwauling of a man having a vasectomy without an anaesthetic, just as Birmingham must be experiencing right now. For added zest, they’ve declared that they’re taking over the country and slaughtering you. Nice.

Then we get the schoolkids of thousand year old British stock (of one of the tribes) being attacked and beaten up by gangs of blacks. Then the habit of British females putting it about with those very blacks. Producing mulatto children. Does it matter at all or should we all, in our most libertarian way, welcome a muddy soup of ethnicities, especially while at least two of those are trying to wipe out the Brit one? It’s not a question resolved by instalabelling Brits in danger of becoming a minority as farrightnazis … thereby closing all discussion, with autocratic govt incarcerating anyone who dares raise the issue, in order to cow the natives.

Am I farrightnazi by asking readers to watch William Powell and Myrna Loy in The Thin Man, an American classic movie? What about the caterwauling movie in Arabic? Or a Bollywood movie? Is my first request there ageist or generationist, the film released in 1941?

In short, what criteria matter and which do not so much? My WN1 was of British stock, WN2 Serbian, fiancee Russian, another close lady Ukrainian, one American, one Australian. Was that muddying the waters? One gf was Muslim until pressure from everyone without exception made it unviable. Another was part Jewish, ended by the Russian fiancee.

Yet I vote Restore, not Reform.

What’s the resolution to the whole thing, poised as we are to be slaughtered by the fighting aged men pouring into the country, installed in hotels and military barracks?  By the way, the calmest and most sane, most fun lady was WN1, of British stock.  Wonder what that says?

Ethnicity

 IYE brought Miss Marple earlier … did I post and get on with the next job? Did I heck … I watched 3×54 mins of it, thinking what to have tomorrow apart from Dragnet.

Suddenly youtube dropped William Powell and Myrna Loy in Shadow of Thin Man in my lap … had to check out the embeddability … yep, fine but British audiences and modern American might not know about this pair.

Essentially, we’re talking screen chemistry and knowing the back story helps too. The pair might not grab you, especially in this slightly lesser third episode but it sure grabbed audiences, that whole series … they could not get enough late 30s till just postwar. I’m sure you can guess why, given the tough wartime and the need for wisecracking comedy.

What audiences also picked up on was the real chemistry too between the the protagonists … the audiences could not get enough, plus the copy is excellent … someone has done a labour of love there. When I was in Russia, similar happened with what they called staroye kino or old cinema … if one such filum was on tele, I observed natives dropping everything, grabbing a drink and sitting around, watching. With the end of communism, it was their equivalent of us and the US.

That’s why the notion of outposts of Christendom being at war with other outposts is sheer bleedin’ stoopid. Or else the psychos above us are pushing this … which is a theme at this blog.

Anyway, Rupert yesterday was goaded into attacking “ethnats” … see the misuse of the label, and Restorers know that behind this was Alistair Hilton, his “media manager” who calls this BNP types, fascists … doing the Left’s work for them.

Stoopid Rupert was doing this Faragist backtracking. Reaction was swift:

Did I ever go out on the street shouting: “Down with Russia, Rule Britannia!” Did I ever try that in the States or Canada? Did I suddenly insist, if the family were watching a movie, to take it out and put one of mine instead? That sort of thing is beyond the pale.

Attitude. Behaviour. When in someone else’s country.

So WTF was Rupert trying to pull?

A 'Far Right' Fantasy? Not So

As all such, it never materialosd, being a figmentt of left wing imagination.

Zürich on a Sunday morning can feel like the day after Armageddon: so empty, so calm, despite being Switzerland’s biggest city. But then the church bells erupt across the lake basin, and a jogger trots by like a polite deer in aerodynamic sunglasses, and one knows that all is fine in this proudly impeccable place, where little is left to chance and the authorities even track the city’s pigeons with GPS.

Sound good to me… 

Swiss people know they are lucky. A highly diversified economy keeps salaries high and income inequality comparatively low. A British friend once remarked that our supermarkets feel like the gourmet hall at Harrods. The state makes business easy. Hiking paths are maintained by armies of volunteers. In a restless world, Switzerland remains a place where one can exhale.

But..? There has to be a ‘but’, right Reader?  This is the ‘Guardian’ after all. 

The problem with luck, of course, is that one becomes afraid of losing it. But fortune has a tendency to make conservatives of us all, of course. Yet how to preserve what one cherishes? The answer offered by the far-right Swiss People’s Party (SVP) is to freeze the country. On 14 June, Swiss voters will decide whether the permanent population should be capped at 10 million. That threshold could be reached sometime between 2033 and 2041. Polls suggest the vote will be on a knife edge.

And what makes them ‘far right’? 

Switzerland’s population has indeed grown rapidly. In the last 25 years, it jumped from 7.2 to 9.1 million, with roughly four-fifths of that increase driven by immigration. The SVP, the country’s largest political party, blames this for rising rents, crowded trains and “density stress”: a reminder to democrats across Europe that a healthy economy won’t stop the far right.

Well, it doesn't stop the conditions that lead to the 'far right' - often nothing of the sort, just ordinary citizens noticing that they are being replaced - so why the surprise?

Should this referendum pass, and should the population then exceed 10 million, Berne would be required to terminate its agreement with the EU on the free movement of people.

Well, now we know.  On a 60% turnout, the vote was rejected by 55% to 45%.

If there is one near-uncontested lesson from modern economic history, it is that open societies win. Openness to immigration was long the defining superpower of the US. Japan’s strict immigration policy explains its dismal growth performance, and the fact that its average effective retirement age for men stands at 69.5 years.

History is not especially kind to societies that confuse preservation with paralysis.

It’s not especially kind to those who welcome in the barbarians at the gates, either. 

A summer solstice tale of the UK media

This is a tale of censorship in which any pundit, pollie or otherwise interviewed person is going to have his/her responses recorded, then later cut behind the scenes in order to either overemphasise what happened or else to misrepresent that.

There's a certain "known-known" about it ... GB News is Farage Media, as with Talk TV, X is maybe more Restore friendly ... any of the MSM tends more Uniparty but if private, then that's a debate for another time.

For example, the egregious Cathy Newman (remember Jordan Peterson) ... well, it's a private company.

Not so the Beeb of course, paid for by tele users and others.  Observe:

In one sense ... to admit you plan to edit and twist something around ... to admit it upfront ... well at least it's admitted.  And GB News is hardly unbiased, is it? It's highly p***ed that this upstart Restore did as it did, even if both votes combined were still fewer than Burnham's.

Which then gets us to how the count was conducted.  Unsupervised by any "independent" for sure.

When the cat gets out of the bag

The Deep State, plus its govt branch in the UK, its organs, plus NGOs, letter agencies, the media, you get the idea, are all hellbent on suppressing details of horrors ... and then this happens:

... then the cat's out of the bag ... innit?

And Them (alluding to those of paragraph one)  either find themselves on the backfoot, trying to suppress X ... or else are all part of the Grand Plan to get the indigenous v invading savages conflagration going ... all those weapons stashes in religious buildings up and down the country are doing nothing, after all.

Next step?

No Amount Of Pieces Of Paper Or Government Proclamations Will Change The Basic Fact...

 …that you are a man, and always will be!

Things have been getting worse, but until recently, my life as a transgender woman had not been consumed with worrying about how I’m supposed to live it. That is, until last year’s UK supreme court ruling.

🥱 

In fact, when I’ve worried about needing a bathroom or felt hesitant about taking up space when invited to join a women’s network, it’s been other women who have made me feel welcome and pushed me to stop worrying. This was the reality for many trans people in the UK until 2025, when the court decided that “man” and “woman” in the Equality Act must refer to “biological sex”, upending decades of shared understanding of the law.

The handmaidens who are pleased to sell their sisters’ rights out for woke brownie points have overstepped one too many times. Your movement has proved to be a liability.

In a human sense, the government is leading us into a dark reality with its eyes wide open. It can stop this at any time. The government’s own equality impact assessment admits that the impact on all trans people will likely be wide-ranging and negative, and notes trans women could face “disproportionate risk of violence and sexual assault” if we are left only with access to men’s services.

Yes, men are a threat to women’s safety, that’s exactly why we don’t want you in our spaces! 

Trans people will be left with a choice between researching toilet provision every time we go out or living our lives as we always have – only now without the protection of the law. In reality, our worlds will get smaller, and so many trans people who enrich our communities will self-exclude, leaving everyone worse off.

How exactly do they do that?  

Far from Andy Burnham’s preferred “live and let live”, not fixing this will define Labour’s legacy on LGBTQ+ rights for a generation.

We tried 'live and let live', but you weren't satified with that, it wasn't enough that you were tolerated in your kink, you always pushed for more, more, more - insisting on changing birth certificates and invading female spaces, and women finally had enough and the Supreme Court agreed.

Trans people’s legal protections, hard-won and vital, clearly no longer work. We elect our politicians to be legislators, and they must fix the law itself. Not doing so is a political choice, and they cannot hide behind the courts in making it.

That's exactly how laws are made in this country, you loon!