Colin Mitchell-Role Model For A New Generation

Colin Campbell Mitchell born 17 November 1925 died 20 July 1996, is a modern British hero who found the best way to serve his country was to rebel against the anti-British and emasculated politicians who are betraying their country. This is a story of one who rebelled against the wet, defeatist elites who rule and became a national hero only to be victimised by corrupt and vindictive elites.
He served as as a lieutenant Colonel in the British Army and became a national hero in July 1967 when he led the his regiment the Argyle and Sutherland Highlanders in the re-occupation of the Crater district of British colony Aden. On 5 July 1967, Lieutenant-colonel Colin Mitchell, was CO of the 1st Battalion in Aden and led his men the reoccupation with 15 regimental bagpipers playing “Scotland the Brave” and their regimental charge "Monymusk".

Mitchell became famous as “Mad Mitch” and the re-occupation of Crater became known as "the Last Battle of the British Empire". It was not Colonel Mitchell's last battle, though. He fought hard and sincerely to save the his beloved and legendary Argyle and Sutherland Regiment from Socialist Prime Minister Harold Wilson's anti-British manoeuvres to disband or amalgamate regiments loyal to Britain with long and noble fighting traditions. The regiment was not disbanded, it was reduced in strength and many of the soldiers were placed with other Scottish regiments for a time but there was a massive public appeal which was extensively covered by the media at the time.

It was a very successful campaign to fight-back but the regiment was probably saved because of the troubles in Northern Ireland. The British army needed to be at full strength to cope with the situation in Ireland and to fulfil its commitments throughout the world. This same defeatist mentality governs the present Conservative leaders and they are taking the opportunity of the economic crisis to amalgamate our forces with European forces. Our new aircraft carriers will have French aircraft on them. They are out of touch with global realities and seem to think there is no longer any danger in the world. It is a utopian and foolish attitude.
The retaking of Crater became a symbol of the true British spirit. This is an example of when righteous rebellion is heroic. Mitchell is a role model for a new generation who are having their inheritance dissipated by the elites.

On June 20 British forces had been driven from the district with the loss of 22 lives. Mitchell knew that 500 well-armed police mutineers and terrorists had taken up positions there and were prepared to fight. He recalled: "It is the most thrilling sound in the world to go into action with the pipes playing. It stirs the blood and reminds one of the heritage of Scotland and the Regiment. Best of all it frightens the enemy to death."
The Treasury building which held the currency reserve for southern Arabia was retrieved from the police mutineers. By the end of the night it was clear to Mitchell that the push into Crater had utterly demoralised the enemy. Mitchell later said "To me that single moment in Crater was worth all my quarter century of soldiering".

The reoccupation and subsequent control of the Crater district were condemned by The Brass. The GOC Middle East Land Forces, Major-General Phillip Tower, feared that reoccupation of the Crater would provoke more disturbances. Tower, a veteran of the North African campaigns and Arnhem, also thought a full reoccupation of Crater was pointless as British withdrawal from Aden was already decided by politicians. Tower authorized a probe into the Crater to be led by Mitchell using the Argylls and other units but Mitchell took the initiative and reoccupied it. Tower instructed Mitchell to "throttle back" on his operations within the Crater. Mitchell stated that he thought Tower’s to be “wet hen tactics”. The situation was described in The Times:
"Mitchell frequently appeared on television: a small, handsome man with a direct, pugnacious manner, speaking the robust, unminced words that the British had not heard from their army officers since the acceleration of the Imperial decline had begun nearly two decades before. Newspapers took him up as a popular hero, proudly bestowing upon him the sobriquet of 'Mad Mitch'.”

Some MPs asked questions about the re-occupation in Parliament. They didn't want heroes countering their defeatism. Tam Dyell asked: “If "Mitchell had disobeyed operational and administrative orders of his senior officers during the recapture of the Crater". Mitchell himself later stated that he had been rebuked by General Tower. This was explained by Defence Minister and Bilderburger, Denis Healey:
“… the brigade commander thought it necessary to emphasize to Colonel Mitchell that the maintenance of law and order with minimum force leading to an orderly withdrawal from Aden with minimum casualties was the policy that had to be followed.”

The final British withdrawal from Aden took place in November 1967 and Colonel Mitchell and the Argylls arrived back at their Plymouth garrison on 27 November. All other battalion commanders from Aden were decorated but not Mitchell. He received only a Mention in Dispatches not the expected DSO. An OBE even would not have been unexpected but politicians bore him a grudge for his heroic attitude and by the time the British withdrew completely from Aden in November 1967, Mitchell was a marked man by the elites. It was made clear there was no room in the military for Mad Mitch.
In July 1968, he gave notice that he intended to resign from the Army at the end of the year. This was not the customary 7 months’ notice required of senior officers, but was accepted accepted with effect 1 October 1968.

Characteristically certain types made allegations of abuse and mistreatment. However, top Yemeni lawyer Sheik Tariq Abdullah recalled: "They were very rough. They tried to show as much restraint as possible but in general during that period you would find most of the people complaining."
Mitchell knew what they called Argyll Law was the only way of tackling the insurgents who killed 200 British soldiers in Aden. In 1996, he explained: explained why his methods were right:
"A great many Arabs are alive today because we used these methods and a great many Argylls are alive today because we used them. This to me is the complete exoneration of anything, if we needed exonerating, which we don't and never have done."

Maj Alastair Howman, who served with Colonel Mitchell in Aden, said the Argylls had nothing to apologise for on the 40th anniversary of their withdrawal. The end of British rule left a power vacuum which resulted in the deaths of thousands of people in the decades of civil war that resulted.
Maj Howman saw the same spineless weakness as in today's politicians and accused them of failing to learn the lessons of the Aden Emergency: "Crater was run on Argyll Law and that is perfectly sensible because there wasn't any other law. Once somebody declares what date they are going leave a situation it is fraught with danger for the people who are there. "That happened in Aden and it seems to certainly be happening in Iraq. I don't think politicians ever really learn this lesson. I don't think they read their history books."
Colonel Mitchell wrote his memoirs Having Been a Soldier, did some freelance journalism and worked briefly as management trainee with Beaverbrook Newspapers. However, he was a national hero to the people and serving military if not the elites. He became Conservative MP for Aberdeenshire West which he won from the Liberals by a 5,000 vote majority in 1970.
Mitchell was an excellent constituency MP whose main political interest was the British Army. He was critical of the Army’s leadership. For example, in August 1970 he was quoted: ”… those bastards in Whitehall”. He was on the patriotic or traditional wing of the Conservative party and opposed British membership of the European Community(now the EU), sanctions against Rhodesia and the arms embargo on Israel. He was prominent in the Monday Club and the Anglo-Rhodesian Society. Mitchell was one of 39 Conservative rebels who defied the Party whip to vote against British entry to the EEC(EU) in the Commons vote on 28 October 1971.

The Times diary reported on a Monday Club fringe-meeting he addressed at the 1976 Conservative Party conference on the subject of white-ruled Rhodesia:
“I went to mock, but came away with much sympathy for Mitchell personally rather than for the lost cause he espouses. He is quite at odds with the world in which he finds himself.”
Now, however, from our deteriorated condition he stands forth like a beacon to inspire us in our darkest hour.


Further reading:

Having Been A Soldier
It has been of print for some time but you can still pick it up from specialist booksellers. There are copies on Amazon and a search on Abebooks you should find someone selling a copy.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=Having+Been+a+Soldier+&x=17&y=24

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/7120629.stm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/military-obituaries/army-obituaries/5796166/Lt-Col-C-C-Mad-Mitch-Mitchell.html

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/editors-choice/2008/08/23/bravery-of-mad-mitch-goes-unrewarded-despite-success-of-middle-east-mission-86908-20708289/

http://argylls1945to1971.co.uk/AandSH_Mad_Mitch.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7111303.stm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mad_mitch

Alfred the Great-Role Model For A New Generation

BThe concern that children educated in state schools are taught an anti-British propaganda that makes them ashamed of themselves and their history is something that needs countering. This potted history of Alfred the Great (1)is a small attempt to correct this great evil and it also draws some parallels with our contemporary plight. A significant difference is that we have been conquered by our own elected representatives and pacified to submit to the encouraged invasion by Race Laws and the ideological use of terms like “Racism” which is stop us defending our women, children and territory from colonisation. (2)

Alfred was born into chaotic and dangerous times as we are today. Invaders from Denmark and Norway called Vikings, had sailed from their homelands in longships and were plundering England. Although these invaders were racially similar they had developed separately and were not Christians but Odinists. Like today the invaders coveted our territory and they also won repeated battles against the indigenous people. The three kingdoms of Mercia, Northumbria and Wessex were under sustained attack from Viking raids. The Viking incursions culminated with a "Great Army" landing in East Anglia in 865 AD. This army made widespread territorial gains, and by 875 the kingdoms of Mercia and Northumbria had succumbed with only Wessex remaining Anglo Saxon. Wessex was attacked in 878 and Alfred fled to the Somerset marshes were he regrouped to counter attack.

The Viking invasion of England began by raids in 793. They attacked London in 842 and colonised East Anglia in 865 followed by the colonisation of Northumberland in 870 and Mercia in 874.
When Alfred was born in 849 fifty years into the colonisation. England comprised the four kingdoms of East Anglia, Mercia, Northumberland and Wessex.
In Alfred's 21st year his brother King Aethelred led the Saxon army to Ashdown to engage the invaders in battle. However, when the Vikings sallied at them Aethelred was too busy praying to fight so Alfred took command. He led the charge. This surprised the Vikings and Alfred won. This was unusual as he Vikings won all the other many battles of the time. Then, fortuitously, Aethelred fell ill and died and Alfred became King in 871.

Alfred led his men at the Battle of Wilton but they lost. They had to make peace and buy the Vikings off with gold. They won a promise from the Vikings of no more raids. In 877, his 28th year, Alfred went to his fort at Chippenham to celebrate Christmas. Then, twelve days later, a large Viking army arrived to take them while they were feasting and not prepared for battle. The Vikings slaughtered many, burnt their homes and captured the fort. However, Alfred had fled with some of his men. They were indigent and had to wander begging food and billeting from his people. After much suffering they arrived at Athelney an island in the Somerset marshes. There was a building there that they used as a redoubt or stronghold. They hid there from the Vikings to recoup their strength and make plans.

A legend grew up at this time. It is said that he sheltered for a while with a farmer and his wife. She apparently went out to milk the cows leaving him to watch some oat cakes she was baking. Alfred being engrossed in planning his tactics to overcome the invaders, let them burn.

That spring Alfred contacted the English Earls telling them of his whereabouts. Then came the turning point – the Earl of Devon beat a Viking army in battle. Alfred knew the time had come to emerge from hiding and rally his forces. They mustered at Egbert's Stone. Alfred's Saxons cheered when they saw him as they thought he was dead and hope replaced despair in their hearts.
The Viking army, led by Guthrum, was camped at Edington. Alfred and his Earls decided their tactics, prayed all night to God and the next morning marched on Edington. The Saxon army stood close together forming the famous “Shieldwall”. The battle was fought all day with arrows falling like hail and at last the Vikings turned and fled the battlefield. Alfred pursued the foe to the fort at Chippenham and camped around to besiege them. The Vikings surrendered after two weeks. Alfred made peace and gave them North and East England. This became known as the Danelaw because Danish law held sway there, with Wessex and the South belonging to the Saxons. This was not satisfactory as the Vikings were still hostile and now with a claim on the land and battles continued until 937!
Finally, they took the English throne. In the summer of 1015, Cnut's fleet set sail for England with a Danish army of c 10,000 in 200 longships. Cnut was the head of Vikings from all over Scandanavia. The invasion force was to be in close and brutal combat with the English for fourteen months until the invaders took the country and Cnut was crowned.(3)

Alfred did not make many mistakes, though. He turned the towns into fortified communities with large, strong walls around them. He built a fine navy that later became the base of English power. This defeated the Vikings at sea in 875. People had previously thought the Vikings were invincible at sea. In 892 Alfred again beat the Vikings at sea. Then after four years of war Alfred drives the Danes out. Like most “Clashes of Culture” the conflict is permanent and when a nation has weak leaders thy surrender to the stronger power as Ethelred the Unready (4)and like the traitors in power today. A feature is trying to bribe those the weak rulers fear.

In 991, when Æthelred the Unready was about 24 years old after the Battle of Maldon, the English began paying money to the Vikings to leave them alone - a gafol of 10,000 pounds was paid for their peace. Yet the Danish fleet continued to ravage the English coast from 991 to 993. In 994, the Danish fleet sailed up the Thames towards London. The battle was not conclusive so Æthelred met with Olaf Tryggvason their leader, and signed a treaty with agreeing with the settled Danish companies and the English government to regulate settlement disputes and trade. The treaty stipulated that the pillaging and slaughter of the previous year would be forgotten, and stated that 22,000 pounds of gold and silver had been paid to the raiders as the price of peace. The parallel with decadent, spineless,contemporary elites like the Archbishop of Canterbury and Lord Phillips trying to introduce Sharia Law is striking. (5)

Alfred removed to London in 886 and built many new buildings setting it on course to become the Capitol city. Like today, the country faced colonisation and had to be brought out of chaos and decline. He made new laws and very importantly translated books out of the Latin into the vernacular English. This enabled more people to learn and also helped bind the communities with a common identity. Alfred encouraged writing, reading music and art among his people which originating in a national religious outlook give rise to civilisation. He died in 899 at fifty years of age. Alfred was the youngest son of the King of Wessex who took him to Rome where he met the Pope when he was four. He must have been impressed by the famous grandeur of Rome and seen the comparative barrenness of his homeland of the time.
His mother encouraged her children to learn and offered a beautiful book to her child who first learned to read. Wily Alfred could not yet read so he asked his teacher to read it to him till he had it by heart and won it as a prize from his mother!


I am very grateful to Peter Mullins for suggesting the idea for this educational piece to me
______________

(1.) http://www.mirror.org/ken.roberts/king.alfred.html
https://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_c_2_16?url=search-alias%3Ddvd&field-keywords=alfred+the+great&sprefix=alfred+the+great

(2) http://www.thompsons.law.co.uk/ltext/l0850001.htm
http://www.actiononaccess.org/resources/files/resources__Equaltiy_diversity_guidance.pdf

(3) http://www.atangledweb.org/2010/11/18/the-end-of-history/

(4) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%86thelred_the_Unready
http://www.channel4.com/history/microsites/T/timeteam/snapshot_cnut.html

(5)http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2242340/Muslims-in-Britain-should-be-able-to-live-under-Sharia-law-says-top-judge.html
http://www.churchtimes.co.uk/content.asp?id=59791
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1578534/Anxiety-of-Queen-over-sharia-law-controversy.htm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/3523672/Sharia-law-should-be-introduced-into-legal-system-says-leading-barrister.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article4749183.ece
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/3966680/Butler-Sloss-urges-courts-to-recognise-sharia-divorces.html

Churchill – Role Model For a new Generation

There is a great and evil slander laid upon those who call for control and common sense in open-door immigration. They are demonised as “Nazis” and “Racists", and accused of following Hitler when really we follow Winston Churchill. The slur shows the deep hatred for the British people of the media, political, intellectual and cultural elites have - we fought Nazism and many lost family in that war.

The important thing to keep in mind while reading this is that the elites were beginning to favour immigrants over their own people. I have cited some sources in the hope that young historians will follow in developing an honest history of open-door immigration: it is virgin soil: no one else is doing it. Establishment historians are writing multi-racial propaganda for the global elites. They pretend we are a nation of immigrants with no core people or culture which is false.
Churchill was aware that religions compete with one another for power and territory and he knew the truth of slavery. In !The River War:” The stronger race soon began to prey upon the simple aboriginals... But all, without exception were hunters of men. To the great slave-market at Jeddah a continual stream of Negro captives has flowed for hundreds of years ... The dominant race of Arab invaders was unceasingly spreading its blood, religion, customs, and language among the black aboriginal population, and at the same time it harried and enslaved them” and, "Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. (1)

In his St. George’s Day address of 1933 Churchill warned of the types who were then taking over our political and intellectual life: “The worst difficulties from which we suffer do not come from without. They come from within. They do not come from the cottages of the wage earners. They come from a peculiar type of brainy people always found in our country who, if they add something to the culture, take much from its strength. Our difficulties come from the mood of unwarrantable self-abasement into which we have been cast by a powerful section of our own intellectuals. They come from the acceptance of defeatist doctrines by a large portion of our politicians. But what have they to offer but a vague internationalism, a squalid materialism, and the promise of impossible utopias?" A tribute to the Royal Marines in 1936 showed his piety to our history: “Those who do not think of the future are unworthy of their ancestors” .
His admiration for Jewish people - “the most formidable and the most remarkable race in the world” - was part of his belief in superior and inferior races and offers us an example of co-operation in our plight in Europe now.

Sir Winston Churchill tried to introduce a Bill to control immigration in 1955. He also wanted the Conservative Party to adopt the slogan “Keep England White” to fight the 1955 General Election. These are important details of our modern history which are ignored by dishonest historians who write propaganda for the elites. (2)

There had been racial battles in 1870s and 1911 in Cardiff with the Chinese community but those of 1919 caused five deaths and serious injuries. Whole areas were cordoned off by the police and hundreds taken into protective custody. The Times reported the Cardiff battle: “Racial riots of a grave character occurred at Cardiff during the early hours of yesterday morning. The trouble seems to have broken out simultaneously in several adjacent parts of the city about midnight. A young man named Harold Smart walked up to a constable and complained that a coloured man had cut his throat”
The constable took him to hospital but he died on arrival. This culminated in crowds of whites and blacks facing and baiting each one another. Revolver shots rang out. Six Arabs faced charges including firing a revolver. It appears the riot grew out of white mens’objections to coloured men consorting with white women.
There were Race battles in 1919 in Glasgow in January, in South Shields in January and February, in London in April, and in Liverpool, Cardiff, Barry and Newport in June!

The type of attitude Churchill had to endure with his colleagues was growing even then. The early Globalist, One-Worlder, Lord Milner, wrote a Memorandum of June 23rd On the Repatriation of Coloured Men which explained why they could do nothing about it: ”I have every reason to fear, that when we get these men back to their own colonies they might be tempted to revenge themselves on the white minorities there…” This emasculated attitude grew until Churchill was nearly isolated in his own government. Oliver Lyttleton (later Lord Chandos) and the fifth Marquess of Salisbury are two other notable opponents of open-door immigration.

Even while Windrush carried immigrants here in 1948 there was racial conflict: Liverpool again, between 31 July and 2 August, in Deptford on the 18th July; and Birmingham between the 6th and 8th of August 1949 involving immigrants from seafaring backgrounds but the Progressives ignored them. The Times reported the Liverpool battle as about 50 persons ”mostly coloured appeared in court after. ..”a gang of negroes' stoned several white men who were walking peacefully. They were armed with bottles, swords, daggers, iron bars, coshes and axes. The white men hopelessly outnumbered ran away. A Negro club appeared to have been the headquarters of the coloured men, and police officers were stoned and had bottles thrown at them from club windows as they tried to disperse the crowd.”(3)
Despite this they continued with the policy of free entry for immigrants but gave no practical support to local councils and voluntary organizations. Throughout the 50.s many delegations from local councils of areas effected went to 10, Downing Street, to ask for practical help and funds. On the 21st of November 1952 the Town Clerk of Brixton asked for regulation of immigration because they could hardly cope and MP Marcus Lipton led several delegations to appeal to Downing Street as did several local councils. The programme of slum clearance was held back.

Churchill’s Cabinet discussed immigration thirteen times. The first on 25th November 1952 when he asked in Cabinet if the Post Office employed large numbers of “coloured workers”. “If so, there was some risk social problems would be created.” They were from India, Nigeria, the Gold Coast, Sierra Leone, Uganda, Mauritius, West Indies, Ceylon, British Guiana and Malaya. In all Churchill's Cabinet discussed immigration on thirteen occasions.
Churchill asked his staff to find out about problems in Lambeth, Brixton and Cardiff. B.G.Smallman, PS, to the Colonial Secretary, produced a paper on “The Coloured Population of the UK". This estimated the numbers to be 40-50,000 which included about 6,000 students. (4).

In his final ministry of 1951-55, Churchill was surrounded by effette decadent people and set the tone of weakness and emasculated leadership we have had ever since. There were no records kept of numbers entering, apparently because the immigrants were, as Commonwealth citizens, British subjects, but I believe they could not face it and wanted it to go away. Though they kept records of emigrants to Canada, New Zealand and Australia.
Historian Andrew Roberts wrote that The Commonwealth Relations Office worried that with restrictions “ there might well be a chance of the governments of India and Pakistan introducing retaliatory restrictions against the entry or residence of members of the British business community.” Commonwealth Secretary Earl Home, worried that they should not give the impression that Commonwealth citizens from India, Pakistan and Ceylon would be less favourably treated than those from the Dominions otherwise there could be retaliation.
In private interviews Roberts shows the decadence of those around Churchill: “A Minister closely involved in the decision-making process, ‘ In fact…we were just stalling and hoping for the best’… One of Mr. Churchill’s private secretaries, ‘at that time it seemed a very good idea to get bus conductors and stuff’ … a junior minister, ‘it was becoming hard to find somebody to carry your bags at the station’.’’(5)

Iain Macleod who became Colonial Secretary, who is infamous for rushing de-colonisation through and causing many problems had a booklet “One World” published by Conservative Central Office in1960 the same year Prime Minister Harold MacMillan made his Winds of Change speech to the South African Parliament in Pretoria. The present Utopia is the coffee coloured, Multi-Racial society with the free movement of peoples as cheap labour. Norman Pannell, patriotic Liverpool Conservative MP, urged a practical approach to immigration at the 1958 and 1961 Conservative conferences suggesting immigrants have health checks and those who are criminal be deported. In 1958 Home Secretary RAB Butler agreed with him but did nothing. At the 1961 conference Colonial Secretary Iain Macleod countered Pannell at a fringe meeting declaring his utopian belief in the brotherhood of man.

On the 27th of June 1953 Sir Winston suffered a stroke that left him paralysed down the left side. After, he told RAB Butler, “I feel like an aeroplane at the end of its flight , in the dusk, with the petrol running out, in search of a safe landing.”(6)
Interviewed by Andrew Roberts his Foreign Affairs Personal Secretary Anthony Montague- Brown recalled that he was “simply too tired to deal with the immigration problem. He could concentrate on a few big issues at a time- like the Russians -and the rest of the time he could only give a steer and not see it through.” (7)
In November 1952 His Private Secretary, Sir John Colville noted, "He is getting tired and visibly ageing. He finds it hard to compose a speech and ideas no longer flow. (8)

Cabinet set up an Inter Departmental Committee to look into preventing an increase in the number of immigrants. It reported its findings in December 1953. This Inter Departmental Committee comprised Ministry of Labour and National Service, the National Assistance Board, the Colonial Office and Chief Constables from areas where immigrants were settling.
The Home Secretary was to ask the Committee to look into preventing an increase in the number coming for employment. There is a note to R.J.Guppy of the Home Office in The Prime Ministers papers notifying him that Churchill had seen the report in that day's Daily Telegraph "about what is termed an influx of West Indians. He is considering bringing the matter before the Cabinet and would like to have a report from the Home Secretary about it." (9)
January 1954 Home Secretary Maxwell Fyfe reported on the findings of the “Working party on the Social and Economic Problems Arising from the Growing Influx into the United Kingdom of Coloured Workers”. He stated “the unskilled workers who form the majority are difficult to place because on the whole they are physically unsuited to heavy manual work…”

The prime minister's papers show Private Secretary Montague-Brown to Civil Servant Johnston 2/11/1954 on an article in the Telegraph of 19 Oct in which the Jamaican Minister of Labour said he would not attempt to stop mass immigration. The P.M. thinks this should be brought up in Cabinet.
It is important to note that Commonwealth citizens were classed as British citizens and had the same rights as British people here. This was known as civic britannicus sum, or “equal rights for all British subjects.” The British Nationality Act of 1948 did not give them that right but codified it.

This point is made in the following example from the Cabinet Secretaries Notebooks released to the public in August 2007. These are the handwritten notes of Cabinet Meetings. They record that on 3 February 1954 under the item 'Coloured Workers', Sir Winston stated ‘Problems which will arise if many coloured people settle here. Are we to saddle ourselves with colour problems in the UK? Attracted by Welfare State. Public opinion in UK won't tolerate it once it gets beyond certain limits.' Even he did not forsee the malicious propaganda that would be used to destroy the British people by their own elites!

In March 1954 Maxwell Fyfe told Cabinet: “ large numbers of coloured people are living on National Assistance” and that “coloured landlords by their conduct are making life difficult for white people living in the same building or area…the result is that white people leave and the accommodation is then converted to furnished lettings for coloured people, with serious overcrowding and exploitation”.
Maxwell-Fyfe typifies the weak rulers. In a Cabinet memorandum of 8 March Maxwell Fyfe feared “serious difficulties involved in contemplating action which would undoubtedly land the Government in some political controversy.” Lets keep it quiet?
In cabinet in October 1954 Mr. Churchill warned Maxwell Fyfe, “that the problems arising from the immigration of coloured people required urgent and serious consideration.” Maxwell-Fyfe emphasised that there is “no power to prevent these people entering no matter how much the number may increase.” This was finally tackled by the 1961 immigration Bill.

The Cabinet Notebooks of this period show Churchill’s attempt to get a Bill to control immigration introduced. It also refers to Cyril Osborne’s 1955 attempt to introduce a Bill to control immigration. NB: The Marquess of Salisbury describes the need for a Bill as “urgent.” This is a transcript from the actual Cabinet discussion:

Coloured Immigrants.

P.M. Need for decision before long.

Anthony Eden. Before Commonwealth P.M. mtg.

Henry Hopkinson. Osborne M.P. is thinking of introducg. Bill under 10 min. rule.

Lloyd George . Depn. y’day from B’ham. No objn. to them as workers. But qua housing. Figures are impressive.

Viscount Swinton. Might consider Cttee. on social aspects, alone.

A.E. Might be useful – to re-inforce action we decide to take.

P.M. Not in favour. Better to introduce Bill. May find we cd. get it thro’. At least we shd. have shown our view.

Marquess of Salisbury. Urgent.

H.H. Movement is starting now in favour of immign. from Barbados.

[Exit H.H.

This brings us to where we started with the discussion that Harold Macmillan referred to in his diary entry for January 20th 1955: "More discussion about the West Indian immigrants. A Bill is being drafted - but it's not an easy problem. P.M. thinks 'Keep England White' a good slogan! (11)
The Bill Sir Winston referred to was not ready until June, two months after he had to retire because of his health. His successor Anthony Eden was an internationalist who told Conservative Cyril Osborne in the House of Commons, “There is no question of any action being taken to control immigration and in any case most were from Eire.” Then in November Eden’s Cabinet ceased discussion of immigration.

Just before he gave up the Premiership in 1955 Mr. Churchill told Spectator owner and editor Ian Gilmour that immigration "is the most important subject facing this country, but I cannot get any of my ministers to take any notice". (12)

Cabinet Secretaries Notebooks covering this period CAB 195/13 was released at the beginning of February 2008. The papers of British Prime Ministers are classified under PREM at the public records Office at Kew. PREM 11/824 covers Churchill’s premiership. It has Information requested by the Prime Minister on immigration of coloured workers to the UK and their employment in the Civil Service; deportation of British subjects; powers of Colonial Governments; employment of Jamaicans in the UK 1952-1955 etc.

1 The River War http://www.munseys.com/diskone/8rivr.pdf

(2) Peter Hennessy, 'Having It So Good - Britain in the Fifties' (Allen Lane, 2006) p 224. Hennessy's reference is: Peter Catterall (ed.), 'The Macmillan Diaries: The Cabinet Years, 1950-1957' (Macmillan, 2003) p 382. This is Enoch Powell referring to Churchill's attempt at 56 seconds.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fw0rUJbE9k

(3) ( Panikos Paranyi (ed) “Racial Violence in Britain in the Nineteenth Century.” (Leicester University.1996). The discussions on immigration are classified as our “racism” and usually by Marxist academics who blame us”whites” for any difficulties. See also

British Immigration Policy Since 1939: The Making of Multi-Racial Britain, By Ian R. G. Spencer. (Routledge. 1997)

(4) These are held at the National Archive. CC100(52)8(cabinet Conclusions on 25/11/1952, CAB 128/25; The Post Master General’s report and the Chancellor being asked to restrict entry to the Civil Service is in CC106(52), 8/12/1952, CAB 128

(5) Eminent Churchillians, Andrew Roberts. (London, Weidenfeld & Nicolson) 1994,

(6) R.A.Butler,”The Art of the Possible, (London. Hamish Hamilton),1971, p173.

(7) ibid Eminent Churchillians.

(8) Sir John Colville.(London. Stoughton Ltd )1985.The Fringes of Power. P654

(9) Daily Telegraph 29/1/54 "Cities Concerned at Influx of West Indians."

(10) CAB124/1191 Report of the Working Party on Coloured People Seeking Employment in the United Kingdom. 17th December 1953.

(These are transcripts of Cabinet discussions on immigration taken in the hand of Cabinet Secretary Sir Norman Brook. I researched many original documents at the Public Records Office.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2007/aug/06/past.politics

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/churchill-renews-appeal-for-tighter-immigration-control-1485916.html

Cabinet Secretaries Notebooks. The eleventh Notebook (CAB 195/11) (released August 2007) covers the period 3.12.52 - 26.2.54.

Cabinet Secretaries Notebooks. The Notebook covering this period CAB 195/13 was released at the beginning of February 2008.

(11) ibid Peter Hennessy, 'Having It So Good - Britain in the Fifties' (Allen Lane.2006) p 224. Hennessy's reference is: Peter Catterall (ed.), 'The Macmillan Diaries: The Cabinet Years, 1950-1957' (Macmillan, 2003) p 382.

(12) Inside Right. Sir Ian Gilmour (Quartet.1977)