Why was Sayeeda Warsi created a life peer at the age of 36 in 2007? What has she done to merit the title of ‘Baroness’? A failed Conservative candidate, who specialised in immigration law who is said to have opportunistically selected the Conservative Party because it seemed to offer her the best chance of career progression, and who has spent time working for Pakistan’s ‘Ministry of Law’. How does that experience and background translate into the right to hold such an honour, or to take on the role of Chairman of our governing political party? The number of better-qualified candidates is legion, so why was she selected? What does she have to offer, that others could not? In what manner does she purport to defend and advance our national interests? How can she speak, with any authority, on behalf of the nation, or of the English?
I ask these questions today, as Warsi once again takes up the baton to fight on behalf of maintaining the right of chain-migration from outside of the EU, using the spurious pretext of familial reunion, which of course is only invoked when those in question wish to be reunited in our country rather than in their familial country of origin (remember the case of Rashida Chapti?). Warsi has knowingly chosen to play the race card, claiming that Theresa May’s proposed immigration reforms ‘could be considered racist’ because of the stated intent of preventing ‘UK citizens earning under £40,000 to bring in a foreign wife or husband,’ although this has subsequently been reduced to £18,600 with a £2,200 allowance for each child. Warsi claims that this will effectively be a ‘whites only’ policy.
How many conservatives with a small ‘c’ genuinely support what the Conservative Party has become? Do they really think that it seeks to represent them today, being as it is pro-EU, pro-mass immigration and pro-multiculturalism? Isn’t it time that they started looking around for other political options to support?
Danny Lockwood's book 'The Islamic Republic of Dewsbury' ISBN 978-0-9570964-0-0 has a lot of gems about Warsi (she is originally from Dewsbury). If you want a copy contact me.ReplyDelete
Thanks Ivan. I may well take you up on the offer. I'll be in touch.Delete
I have long held the view that Warsi and the Tory Party have a cynically symbiotic relationship; she uses her position to do a PR job for islam and the Tories use her to gain multi-cultural kudos and tap into the muslim vote which, for as long as the indigenous Britsh population remains politically apathetic, is crucial to win many urban seats.ReplyDelete
Whilst I am with you regarding our right to self determination being threatened by mass immigration, the argument only stands up if one accepts that immigration changes the 'body fabric of the body politic' as you rightly state. The counter argument is that it does not because we are 'all human'. And whilst immigrants are indeed as human as us British, they are not , nor can they ever be, as British as us. Until that is accepted en masse there can be no cogent or effective defence of Britain.
Regrettably, the British public have presently, and for some decades, handed the right to determine who lives here and who should be given rights of citizenship to a political class which not only does not serve them but does not even recognise the existence of indigenous Britons.
You've hit it on the head SN. That is precisely the reason for Warsi's presence within the senior ranks of the Conservative Party. However, I would not wish her to join the new party.Delete
The recognition of indigenous rights is a crucial issue, but whether or not this is a central concern for the indigenous population, given the nature of the mass media, the education system and mainstream politics, is a different matter. It has the potential to be such a concern, but concentrating upon it at present does not seem to be a massive vote-winner. Working towards achieving such recognition can however be incorporated into a broader policy platform articulated by a credible anti-globalist party.
The Upper House should either be elected or disbanded - the whole thing needs major reform. All parties agreed on this, including a much-needed reduction in peer numbers and an end to hereditary appointments. You only have to get a cat out of a tree these days to be made a peer - Warsi has gone from token Jigaboo to pursuing her own agenda on behalf of the Muslim community!ReplyDelete
It does need serious reform, and a democratically elected revising chamber would be preferable to what we currently possess. Existing arrangements are fundamentally anti-democratic and wide open to abuse by whichever party happens to be in government.Delete