Sixty Years On    
    Ian Buckley examines the fruits of our victory in 1945    

There are certain events that are better ignored than noticed. Into this category, of course, would come the return to No. 10 of Tony Blair. Sadly(?), the shiny new product first put on the electoral market by a consortium including – inter alia – Messrs. Levy, Chinn, Hatter and Goldman is now very shop-soiled and past its sell-by date.

By this stage, the phoney Labour chief is good for no more than one more foreign war or a major factory closure along the lines of Rover's Longbridge plant. Then – his usefulness to his globalist masters ended – he'll be put out to pasture, probably to receive a £5 million advance for his unreadable and unreliable memoirs. The memoir business is quite a useful form of disguised patronage for 'services rendered' as witness the large advances from Rupert Murdoch's Harper Collins for the two volumes of Thatcher reminiscences. Despite all the advertising and hype, the sales of that particular pair of now remaindered books must have been minimal.

Unfortunately, a great many of the British people are stupid, or perhaps a better description would be that they are extremely politically naive. The result of the election proves that fact. The electorate votes in droves for a party that no longer exists, often for no better reason than that "my old granddad was a Labour man."

It is always comparatively easy to subvert an organisation from the top, something many traditionalists would say has also happened in recent years to the Roman Catholic Church. In the case of 'Labour', many decent but foolish folk continue to register votes with them, in spite of the fact that their toxic policies are a mixture of extreme Thatcherism on the economic side, combined with nutty Trotskyite social engineering schemes.

VE Day: Cause to celebrate?

More controversially perhaps, I would also suggest that the VE Day commemorations fall into the same category as the return of the phonies of New Labour. The 'victory' celebrations have disregarded most of the awkward questions, instead providing a useful focus to look back to an idealised past, a handy palliative device when the immediate present is so bleak. The line of the mainstream media was always the same when announcing the various events: the victory in 1945 gave us 60 years of 'freedom'.

As I have commented in earlier articles, 'freedom' is a bit of a tricky concept. We have the freedom to walk around the streets of our big cities at night, but who would dare to exercise that freedom except the foolhardy or perhaps – those expert in karate?

How about freedom of speech? Well, that has been gradually reduced and constrained over the years since the end of World War II by various bits of legislation culminating in the Public Order Act of 1986. At this moment, some leading figures from Britain's new 'fourth party' are facing court proceedings for the crime of speaking their minds. Intriguingly enough, probably 80 or 90 per cent of serving wartime British soldiers would have held views similar to the ones that are now proscribed this appalling Act.

Without doubt, if opposition leaders in Russia or Ukraine faced this kind of treatment, there would be a great orchestrated outcry from the media. Indeed, various idiots writing in the Financial Times on May 9th suggested that Russia should be excluded from the victory celebrations, not because they arrest political dissidents – as this country does – but for being somehow 'undemocratic'.

'Undemocratic' in this context means not allowing vested, oligarchic interests to control your media and oil industry. Perhaps someone should tell these 'pro-democracy' activists – including British MPs – that the war-time USSR wasn't a democracy anyway!

Freedom from work

Then there is freedom from work as 'enjoyed' by many former industrial employees, most recently including the 800 workers from Marconi. When Britain was high and mighty, the 'Marconi scandal' provided Gilbert and Cecil Chesterton with an insight into the sorry way the British Government was going. That process has continued ever since, with the inevitable result that our Westminster rulers are too feeble to do anything except offer 'job hunt' courses to the redundant workers. How free does an ex-Marconi worker feel today? World War II was allegedly fought to ensure the territorial integrity and independence of Poland. But at the end of the war Poland wasn't free or democratic at all, but had instead fallen into the Soviet orbit. Maybe it should also be recalled that the USSR was much more hostile to the very existence of Poland than was Germany. The Germans, after all, had initially wanted to keep a smaller and (nominally) independent Poland in being.

Nor did World War II bring about any lasting end to war and conflict: if anything, the exact opposite is true. Since 1945, tens of millions have been killed in wars fought throughout the world. These conflicts have usually been the result of the 'liberal' delusions of American foreign policy – plus the even more base desire of armament manufacturers for profit and new markets.

Additionally, largely as a result of the example and tactics of Britain's wartime SOE, the same period has also seen a massive growth in terrorism. In Greece and Malaya in particular, the guerrilla groups initially sponsored by Britain became a hostile problem for us even before the end of the war.

The pseudo-patriotic papers such as the Daily Mail run the 'What if we had lost?' articles describing a defeated Britain with the babble of foreign voices on the street (haven't we got that already?), its independence gone as the obedient satellite of a dominating power (ditto); but surely this is all overdone. In the event of a German victory, some form of peace treaty was envisaged even with France and Poland, as well as Britain.

Reasons for war in 1939

Then again, some might say that Britain was right to go to war in 1939 because of the persecution of minorities. Well, in the post-1945 era, many different peoples have been persecuted, most notably the Palestinians, but – of course – this doesn't often lead to war unless some globalist imperative is also involved. Diana Mosley put it well in her interview with the Birkett Committee following her arrest without charge in 1940. Over to 'Hitler's English Rose', as the Nazi-obsessive Mail recently dubbed her:-

'When Birkett asked whether I disapproved of the bullying of Jews in Germany, I said I always disapproved of bullying: that for example I strongly disapproved of the treatment of black people in the southern states of America, where they had no civil rights and there were frequent lynchings which went unpunished, but that I did not therefore consider Britain should declare war on the United States.'

Incidentally, this part of Lady Mosley's statement was omitted from the transcripts of the interview released in 1983, her biographer Jan Dalley finally managing to obtain the quote in spite of the efforts of our 'freedom-loving' Government. So much for the liberty that we celebrated on May 8th to the not so dulcet tones of Vera Lynn! On the same topic of the freedom of information, or rather the lack of it, do you fancy reading 'The Ricin Ring That Never Was', an article that exposes the Government's attempt to work the public up into a state of fear over alleged 'Islamic terror'? Well, hard luck! The article has disappeared from the Guardian website, as if it were never there at all, thanks to the issue of a D-notice.

For this country in particular, the years since VE Day have been years of defeat, following a victory that was only Pyrrhic and illusory. Ten years on from VE Day saw the loss of overseas possessions and the beginning of the displacement of our native inhabitants by mass immigration. The thirty-year mark saw our submergence in the EEC and the decline of our fishing industry. For forty years from 1945 brought the destruction of much of our industrial base and the coming of a grab-as-grab-can commercialist anti-culture. By fifty years on from VE Day, in spite of all the glib talk of 'prosperity', one in three people in Britain depended on a means tested benefit.

State of Britain now

Today, the state of our country would seem incredible to many Britons of earlier times. We have useless wars abroad, foisted upon us by the 'Israel-firsters' in the USA. Combined with this is societal decay at home, manifesting itself in drugs, drug-related crime and general ugliness and brutalisation. Corruption, sleaze and incompetence are commonplace in official circles and government agencies. It shows how dire things are when a judge, Richard Mawrey QC, described an electoral fraud in postal voting as resembling the situation found in a banana republic. One German car executive remarked that his firm always tried out alarms and security devices in Britain, as our car thieves were so expert. World class in car theft!

Under these circumstances, while understanding the feelings of the veterans, why should we be celebrating a victory with great ceremony and palaver, when that 'victory' feels like a defeat?

* Anyone who wishes really to understand this policy patterns involved in mass immigration – and even the nervy mainstream noises against the immigrant flood coming mostly from the Tories – should consult the two papers by Dr. Stephen Steinlight online at:-

    Spearhead Online