Leo McKinstry/ Sunday Express

They just keep coming:

They are not refugees, they are not asylum seekers and they are not migrants: they are invaders…

It is a cast iron principle of justice in any civilised soci- ety that nobody is above the law.


Yet this does not seem to apply to the hundreds of thousands of migrants who are illegally living in Britain.  a vast, swelling army of foreign lawbreakers has been allowed to settle here without the slightest interference from the authorities.    

Thanks to the destruction of border controls, it is reckoned that there are more than 700,000 illegal immigrants in this country, though even this may be a huge under-estimate.    

As the Home office notoriously admitted last year, the Government “has not got a clue” how many are really here.    The current immigration system is so shambolic that the numbers deported are pitifully small, while thousands of illegal entrants have even been allowed by the state to work in Whitehall, Westminster and the security industry. 

The mix of neglect, indifference and chaos has prompted demands for an amnesty to be given to illegal migrants.  This call comes not just from the usual rag-bag of left-wing pressure groups, trade unionists and political activists, but also from more moderate voices such as the Christian churches and even the Conservative mayor of london Boris Johnson.  

Advocates argue that it would bring dignity to the “people in the shadows”, as well as raising money for Government since newly legalised workers would start paying taxes. 

But the financial argument of campaigners like Boris John- son has been comprehensively blown apart this week.  

A report by the independent think-tank migration Watch reveals that an amnesty, far from contributing to treasury cof- fers, would actually cost the taxpayer at least £4 billion because of the increased costs of providing welfare benefits, education, health services and housing to newly enfranchised foreigners. 

In truth the promises about the economic benefits of migration were always palpable nonsense. as Britain’s recent experience demonstrates, the attempt to boost prosperity through the import of foreigners is a recipe for disaster.    

For a decade under labour, we have had uncontrolled mass immigration and now our econ- omy is in meltdown. If migration were really the answer, then open-door Britain would be in the middle of a boom  instead of sliding into ruin. 

An amnesty would mean greater pressure on our public services and a greater demand  for handouts. Contrary to what the lobbyists claim, immigrants are far more likely to be jobless than the indigenous population.  

It would be absurd to sanction the immediate settlement of another 700,000 people here, particularly at a time of lengthening dole queues.  Boris Johnson says an am- nesty is an acceptance of reality.  

On the contrary, it is an admission of defeat, a supine declaration that the state is too enfeebled to uphold the law.    Johnson argues that there is no other way forward since the deportation of illegal immigrants “just isn’t going to happen.”      

But the failure to deport is entirely because of the absence of political will. If the state wanted to send illegal migrants home, it would start the process tomorrow. After all, ministers have shown the determination to carpet the country in CCtV cameras, impose a  smoking ban,  create a massive identity database and go to war in iraq and afghanistan. 

Given that Britain is an island, it should be easy to en- force border controls. Boris’s message of despair hides the Government’s unwillingness  to tackle illegal immigration because the continuing influx of foreigners  is central to labour’s agenda to destroy our nationhood.    

The practicalities of an amnesty further expose its absurdity. If the state is too weak to deport illegals beforehand, why would it suddenly gain the confidence to do so afterwards?    

In practice, amnesties are always a sign of surrender to criminality. That is why the police, ineffectual against urban youth crime, often resort to knife and gun amnesties.   

Rather than bringing order to the immigration system, an amnesty would provoke further disintegration, encouraging even more arrivals to our shores.   

That has been the experience of every other nation that has tried this experiment. Since 1980, italy has had 20  amnesties and spain six, but the sole consequence has been heightened immigration.  

The same is true of the Usa, where an amnesty was imposed in 1986, when the total of illegal immigrants numbered 3.5 million. Today that figure has reached almost 20 million. 

This proposed amnesty would make a mockery of justice. The state would be rewarding criminal behaviour by giving foreign  offenders rights to British citi-zenship and welfare. There is no justice for the ordinary, tax-paying,law-abiding citizen who will end up paying the price for the over-crowding and social dislocation that always  results from surges in immigration.  

Boris Johnson is a highly  intelligent politician, full of wit and erudition. But he should heed the lesson from one of his areas of expertise, the fall of classical rome. For the imperial city was brought down by its rulers’ unwillingness to uphold its integrity in the face of destructive foreign influences.   

Instead of calling for amnesties, Boris should be fighting against the dissolution of our country. 


  1. “a vast, swelling army of foreign lawbreakers”

    That really does sum up my country perfectly!

    I’d much rather live in London during WWII than the London that I live in now. At least back then the country was united against the invasion they were facing. Right now, I’d have to say the unarmed invasion that is in progress is much worse, the people are divided and in many instances fall on the side of those who would strip us of any kind of human decency as soon as they reach the majority. Those suicidal tendencies of the far left, they’d have us in chains paying the jyzia before their saudi masters, rather than give Britain back to us, the people.

    Whatever happened to this Britain:

    “Should the invader come to Britain, there will be no placid lying down of the people in submission before him, as we have seen, alas, in other countries. We shall defend every village, every town, and every city. The vast mass of London itself, fought street by street, could easily devour an entire hostile army; and we would rather see London laid in ruins and ashes than that it should be tamely and abjectly enslaved.”

    Excerpt from the “War of the Unknown Warrior” speech by Sir Winston Churchill

    The only hope for Britain is the BNP, and that is only if enough people have managed to free themselves from the social stigma imposed by those subscribing to fascist ideology of the far left:

    Very few people realize the threat we face, and while many westerners concern themselves with the imagined threat of Israel and the Jews themselves, the Islamists, a very real threat are on the march.


  2. Davey, I feel for you. I’ve been dealing with a guy that fits your description of a Brit ‘dhimmi’ who would rather bash me than get his head out of his anal orifice and face the problem at hand. The problem is that he would face what I face with him. The tide of our own that bash us is very strong and it is not easy to stand up to these jerks.

  3. Davey…I spent too much time at the Arizona/Mexico border and echo your sentiment(s). Even middle easterners walk-across, and many of us realize Al Qaeda can, and at any time, walk over with a nuke or smallpox. We’re stupid beyond belief.

Comments are closed.