How to Watch UK TV Channels Outside of the UK? I'll give you a simple trick that will explain how to watch UK TV channels live abroad. Now you can watch all of your favorite UK TV programmes while you are away from home without VPN with 1Fakt.com
As Keir Starmer twists and turns over Labour’s record on immigration – one minute blaming ‘the Left’ for being soft, the next decrying his opponents as ‘racist’ – remember this: it is embedded in the party’s DNA to throw open the borders, lie about the impact and then smear their critics as bigots.
The Prime Minister’s duplicity was exposed after he used his address to last week’s party conference to recall his meeting with Joyce Todd. This ‘ordinary working-class woman from Oldham’ had expressed her concerns about eastern Europeans who had moved into her street, routinely spitting on the ground and leaving rubbish strewn around the neighbourhood.
Starmer claimed the encounter made him realise that ‘the Left had got it wrong on immigration’.
Mrs Todd, however, has a very different recollection.
She says that, after describing her concerns, Starmer had actually declared: ‘Mrs Todd, I think you could be racist!’
Then last week, she summed it all up – explosively: ‘Keir Starmer is a liar. He still doesn’t get it.’
It was just two days earlier that Starmer had used a BBC interview to brand Nigel Farage as ‘racist’ – a move straight from the Tony Blair playbook.
But the reality is this: Britain has changed irrevocably because of decisions made in secret – and then disguised – by Blair’s government. As voters witness first-hand the pressures on housing and public services and turn to Mr Farage in their droves, the finger of blame can be pointed directly at the very Blairites who are now pulling the strings of Starmer’s Downing Street.
When Blair won his landslide in 1997, the UK population was 58 million. It is now more than 69 million, and rising. The UK birth rate has fallen by more than 6 per cent over the same period, so the part played by immigration is clear. That rise of 11 million people over 28 years compares with just three million over the equivalent period before 1997.
This did not happen by accident. Under Blair, Downing Street deliberately opened the floodgates in an attempt to reinforce Labour’s grip on power.
The aim, as one of his advisers later admitted, was to ‘rub the Right’s nose in diversity’ and to portray opponents as ‘racist’.
It should come as no surprise that, at the time, Downing Street was run by Chief of Staff Jonathan Powell – who is today back in the heart of No 10 as Sir Keir’s National Security Adviser.
Blair and his team naively assumed that hundreds of thousands of foreign nationals entering the country every year would translate into a growing block of pro-Labour voters. I well remember the casual blandishments of the Blairites over the likely impact of the population surge, and the dismissal of critics as racists.
I was working in Westminster for this newspaper in 2009 when we revealed that the nation-changing immigration report had been written by civil servant Jonathan Portes, by then a speechwriter for Gordon Brown.
Today, I am still working in the parliamentary lobby as I hear the Blairites’ puppet Prime Minister rehearse the same lines – even though, as latest polls have shown, they are helping to put Mr Farage on course to be prime minister.
And calling him or – as Starmer insists he meant – his policies ‘racist’ has only made that outcome more likely.
Starmer’s current Chief of Staff and main strategist Morgan McSweeney has told friends that it was not his decision to smear the Reform UK leader in that way. He claims that Starmer acted alone under the pressure of a live interview with the BBC when he was asked about Mr Farage’s proposal to remove the right of some migrants living legally in Britain.
But Mr McSweeney is a protege of Peter Mandelson, the now ex-ambassador to the United States, who was a founding father of the Blair project.
Mandelson remained heavily influential up to the point of his sacking last month over his links to millionaire sex-trafficker and paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
Along with Mr Powell, there is Tim Allan – Starmer’s Executive Director of Communications – who was also a key member of the first Blair government. And Sir Tony himself remains on speed-dial to the Starmer administration.
Until he came to power, immigration had remained relatively constant since the 1960s at around 200,000 a year. By the time Gordon Brown finally wrestled away the keys to No 10 in 2007, eastern European countries had been admitted to the European Union and hundreds of thousands of their citizens had taken advantage of freedom of entry to this country.
Neither successive Conservative administrations nor Brexit did anything to stem the flow.
It is now running at three-quarters of a million per annum, which is equivalent to a city the size of Leeds being added to the population each year.
Andrew Neather, a speechwriter for Mr Blair at the time, later revealed that a ‘driving political purpose’ of the Blair administration was to use mass immigration ‘to make the UK truly multicultural’ but to conceal their work.
A generation later, the effects have permeated every stratum of society and helped to feed the growing ‘wokery’ displayed by public sector bodies.
Just last weekend, for example, The Mail on Sunday revealed that the National Health Service had issued official guidance citing the so-called ‘benefits’ of first-cousin marriages, despite the proven increase in the risk of congenital birth defects that results.
One of the arguments against a ban on the practice – something supported by three quarters of Britons – was to avoid ‘stigmatising certain communities and cultural traditions’, said the guidance.
Dealing with the associated deformities is estimated to cost the NHS billions of pounds a year.
Dr Patrick Nash, an expert on religious law and director of the Pharos Foundation social science research group in Oxford, told us: ‘Cousin marriage is incest, plain and simple, and needs to be banned. There is no “balance” to be struck between this cultural choice and the severe public health implications it incurs.’
The origins of the move to change Britain so irrevocably can be traced back to a harmless-sounding report published by Jack Straw’s Home Office in January 2001. Called Research, Development And Statistics Occasional Paper No 67 – Migration: An Economic And Social Analysis, it stated baldly: ‘There is little evidence that native workers are harmed by migration. The broader fiscal impact is likely to be positive because a greater proportion of migrants are of working age and migrants have higher average wages than natives.’
It added: ‘Most Britons regard immigration as having a positive effect on British culture.’
Mr Neather said: ‘I remember coming away from some discussions with the clear sense that the policy was intended – even if this wasn’t its main purpose – to rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date. That seemed to me to be a manoeuvre too far... there was a reluctance elsewhere in government to discuss what increased immigration would mean, above all for Labour’s core white working-class vote.’
And he revealed that earlier, unpublished versions of the report had made it clear that one aim was to make Britain more multi-cultural for political reasons.
Other sources from the time have revealed it was decided to brand Tory leaders William Hague and Michael Howard as racists to deter them from investigating the covert initiative.
Now Starmer has followed suit by denouncing Mr Farage and Reform as ‘the enemy’. They would ‘rip Britain apart’, he says.
Mr Farage believes such tactics are counterproductive.
‘The use of the word racist may have frightened people in Blair’s time but will now backfire,’ he told the MoS. ‘We now see Starmer for who he really is: a shallow careerist who has sunk to the gutter to save his own skin.’