Demanding fairness – Our family law policy

Anne Marie Waters

March 25th 2020


When I was a law graduate, I spent a lot of time working around the courts of central London.  Much of it was voluntary clerking and paralegal work and while it involved long waits on a regular basis, it was also a fascinating insight in what goes on in our society.

I worked with Victim Support and spent time in the criminal courts, and I worked for various family law firms and so also spent time in the family court system.  Family law deals largely with divorce and its aftermath: division of assets and arrangements for children are the most common issues dealt with by family lawyers.  It is in the arrangements for children specifically that an injustice in the system is revealed, and needs to be corrected.

If a family cannot agree amicably on arrangements for children post-divorce (or separation), the courts will step in and make these decisions instead.  Both statutory and case law have established the methods by which the courts determine what is in the best interests of the child – the guiding principle in this area of family law.

Importantly, the law deems the best interests of the child to be served by causing as little disruption as possible in the child’s life.  This will usually mean arrangements are reached that allow the child to remain in the family home, remain in school, and crucially, to live with their “primary carer”.  This usually means the mother, who will often have a greater role in her child’s life, and therefore a greater advantage, not only in keeping full time custody of children, but in keeping the family home so that the child may live there.

If the child’s father has not been able to spend as much time with the child as the mother, because for example he works longer hours, it seems instinctively unfair to punish him for this.

There is a further more troubling element to this, and that is that mothers have the ability in practice to deliberately refuse access to children, and in doing so, force fathers in to long and expensive legal battles just to spend time with their own children.  Courts often make orders for visitation etc. that are not adhered to, meaning fathers must go back to court again.

This situation can’t continue.

For Britain will conduct a full inquiry in to real or apparent parental injustices in the courts system, with a view to a complete overhaul.  Immediately however, we will introduce the legal assumption of shared parenting (including clear instruction on the responsibilities of parents) as well rights for grandparents.  Grandparents are often the best people to care for a child but face can protracted legal battles to do so.

We at For Britain believe in family and we believe in the place of fathers within that family.  We must be fair at all times, and we must ensure that there are no automatic advantages to either parent.

Whilst the need for a child to live with their primary carer is understandable, it has opened a loophole that needs closing.  Family law needs to be modernised and updated to equalise parenting and reflect the modern age.

We must bring fathers back in to families. We must celebrate families; mothers and fathers, and the wonderful job they do.  But there’s a problem, and it has to fixed for the sake of fairness.  For Britain will do just that.


Anne Marie Waters


For Britain 

VIDEO: Demanding fairness – Our family law policy 


24th March 2020

Dear Members, Activists and Supporters.

We recently asked for you to help in your community, by dropping in contact cards to the elderly and vulnerable so that they can ask for assistance if needed.

Hopefully this paid dividends for some.

However, in light of the latest Government (23rd March 2020) announcement forbidding non-vital travel outdoors, we believe it is now NOT advisable to undertake this task.

Instead please try to contact people you feel may need help via phone or other methods. Caring for the elderly or vulnerable is not going to be restricted, so shopping etc can continue.

Thanks for your continued support of For Britain.

Party Chair and Committee.


Coronavirus – What we know

Anne Marie Waters 

March 23rd 2020


We have entered a frightening and confusing time with the outbreak of coronavirus.  People are uncertain, our society has plunged in to something unrecognisable almost over night.  So what is actually going on and how did it start?

What we know so far is that the virus began in the city of Wuhan in central China.  Doctors in the city began discussing cases they had seen, which one believed to be a resurgence of the deadly SARS virus that killed more than 800 people back in 2003.  A similar virus was now presenting, and doctors were worried.

Those same doctors were arrested by Chinese police and told to stay silent.  Other instances of state cover up have been alleged, and it was claimed in an extraordinary study that had China acted 3 weeks earlier, 95% of infections could have been avoided.

The source of the virus was identified as a ‘wet market’ in the city of Wuhan.  This is a market where wildlife is butchered and sold on the spot.  Live animals are taken from the wild, held in tiny cages and in cramped conditions, and slaughtered to order.  Australian scientists have claimed that the handling, rather than the ingestion, of these animal products is the most likely source.

However, as can be expected, left-wing agitators are attempting to shut down discussion of the practices of such markets across Asia. The label of “racist” has been used to silence such discussions, but they must be had.  The whole world is now subject to Asian hygiene practices – what happens in China can kill us in the UK; all thanks to our modern open-border globalist approach.  So important do open borders remain, even during this crisis, that flights from the worst affected countries were still landing in the UK as government was asking us to stay home.

As it stands, we are being asked to only leave our homes when necessary – for food or exercise.  When we do so, we should remain 2 metres apart from others.  Schools, shops (except food shops), cafes, bars, pubs, restaurants, cinemas, theatres, museums, libraries are all closed.  We don’t know how long they will be closed for, and this not only presents us with questions about how we will cope socially if this goes on for months or years, but what effect will this have on our economy?

Most people are currently unable to work.  That is staggeringly difficult for an economy to survive for any length of time, so the Government has taken unprecedented steps to intervene.  Chancellor Rishi Sunak announced plans for the government to fund 80% of the wages of many workers, increase working tax credit and universal credit, as well as providing unlimited 0% interest loans (for 12 months) for businesses, among other measures.  This is a solid response from the government and is welcome.

As for what the future holds, we can only speculate.  The possible options are these: a vaccine is developed, we develop natural immunity, or we begin to learn to live with it.  The latter of these is of course the worst option – what people want is to get back to normal, but not a whole new normal that doesn’t resemble the old one.  It must be government’s top priority to ensure that happens when the time comes.

In the meantime, we must remember that at the heart of all this, people are dying and their families left devastated.  That is at the forefront of our concerns, our thoughts and hopes are with all of those who are suffering.

We will come back from this.  In China, it is reported that life is beginning to return to normal as new cases of the disease have ceased.  There is every reason to hope that this will pass quickly, but we must never forget the lessons from this tragedy – we must bring back our borders, our manufacturing, and we must insist upon our right to criticise and condemn practices in China or elsewhere that lead to the deaths of innocent people.  To do otherwise is to allow this tragedy to have been in vein.


Anne Marie Waters


For Britain 

Chinese Whispers: Communist China Owes The World

By Suarav Dutt, Political Analyst & Author

23rd March 2020

When the COVID-19 dust settles, there has to be a reckoning, and the Chinese government cannot be allowed to deflect or deny. There is going to be a new global dispensation after the Coronavirus pandemic is over, and if the Chinese want to be part of it, they have a lot of changes they are going to have to make, and a lot of accountability to dispense.

China initially failed to regulate the highly dangerous “wet markets”, lied for months about the nature of the disease, refused to cooperate with the WHO, politically persecuted whistleblowers who refused to participate in the cover-up, and is now waging an international campaign of black propaganda to accuse the United States for nefariously creating the disease.

For the first two months the media was reporting on this virus, they were referring to it as the Wuhan virus. It wasn’t until the Chinese Communist Party propaganda machine started cranking up that the media hit their fainting couches at the mentioning of China in reference to the virus.

Nobody is foolish enough to blame the Chinese people, nor harbor any animosity towards them. However, it is accurate to blame the Chinese communist government, through their secrecy, lying and suppression, for this plague unleashed against the world. It is a Chinese virus, specifically from the Wuhan region. Call it the Chinese virus or the Wuhan virus, either is accurate.

China did exert enormous influence on the WHO and through international diplomacy to prevent any other countries from responding. The PHEIC wasn’t declared until Jan. 30, the WHO then refused to declare a pandemic (even claiming they no longer used the term on Feb. 24) until Mar. 11. China directly threatened repercussions for any country which cut off travel. They downplayed the severity of the disease and the outbreak through February in their foreign relations, while having shuttered their economy.

This only changed in early March, after it became clear that the disease had escaped their borders, and was spreading uncontrolled. They immediately pivoted the declaring victory domestically and offering humanitarian aid to Italy.

It should be obvious that this was done on purpose. The Chinese regime clearly did not want to contain the virus within their own borders. They wanted to make sure that they were not the only ones weakened, because that would have harmed their goals on the international stage and probably threatened their grip domestically. Instead, they now look like saviors to their own citizens (and look at how many Chinese are repatriating right now) and are driving hard to pin this whole disaster on the US.

Referring to COVID-19 as the “Chinese” virus or the Wuhan virus is not racist. Taking the name from the locale from whence a particular virus or disease first arises is a common and long-standing naming convention. Lyme disease anyone? MERS? Spanish flu? Do not concede this point. The moment you throw a bone to the insane woke left, they will devour you. The moment you buy into their narrative – that all people are secretly deeply racist and xenophobic – is the moment they own you. Why? Because it’s the moment you supplant truth with their lies. Truth matters

China can see that there will be a tremendous amount of anger directed against it by the rest of the world, that its attempts to become the world’s new indispensable power with every country dependent on its technology and resources and investment are suddenly threatened, and that countries everywhere may start to rethink their dependence on China in their critical supply chains.

And so Xi is taking actions to try and head all of this off – engaging in propaganda and rewriting recent history to deflect blame and generously “giving” (ie selling) much needed supplies to other countries out of the sweet and sincere generosity of their loving hearts.

Will this entire shameful episode make our western governments think twice about stripping their sovereign nations of the ability to self support? Only time will well.

Animal Welfare – Let’s Keep up the Pressure

Anne Marie Waters 

March 19th 2020 


On the 16th of March, MPs in our Parliament debated the welfare of animals.  This doesn’t happen often, and rarely is anything actually achieved.  For years, people have campaigned against the live export of animals, so far to no avail.  People campaign against religious slaughter, but this isn’t so much as entertained.  On this occasion however, our representatives debated the sentience of animals – something that should have been settled centuries ago.  The caging of farm animals was also up for discussion.

According to the campaign group Compassion in World Farming (CIWF), two petitions were promoted by animal welfare groups, and both passed the 100,000 signature threshold to be debated in the House of Commons.

The debate was opened by Kerry McCarthy MP stating:

“A sow confined in a crate in which she cannot turn around will suffer because she will not be able to exhibit natural behaviours, even with the best care and stockmanship”

Surely this is obvious.  Imagine being so tightly confined that you cannot turn around.  This is the fate of countless sows and it must be brought to an end.  There is simply no reason that we cannot make farming far easier for animals.  All that is needed is the will.

McCarthy also pointed out that Germany and Austria have already begun to remove cages from their farming systems.

In a response that was welcomed by CIWF, Defra Minister Victoria Prentis MP announced:

“the Government are currently examining the future use of cages for all laying hens. The Government have made it clear that we remain completely committed to the ambition that farrowing crates should no longer be used for sows”  

This is great news.  Let’s keep an eye on it to make sure it happens!

On the sentience issue, it is extraordinary to think that our Parliament would debate the sentience of animals!  Of course animals are sentient.  They are aware, intelligent, and exhibit complex emotions.  They feel joy, fear, pain, and attachment.  Luckily, the Government appears to agree.

While the sentience of animals is enshrined in EU law, there are concerns that there will be no such recognition upon our departure.  Therefore campaigners are asking the British Government to close the gap and ensure that animal sentience, and its recognition, is enshrined in British law.  The response of the Government has been positive on this also.

Victoria Prentis MP said: “It has never been in dispute that, of course, animals are sentient beings… While absolutely committing to bring forward the legislation at some point, I am not committing to bringing it forward this year.”

James West, CIWF’s senior policy manager, stated the following in response:

“Compassion would like to thank all the MPs who attended the debates on animal sentience and caged farming, and particularly Kerry McCarthy MP for leading them both.

We encourage the Government to bring forward sentience legislation that needs to be introduced, to prevent a gap in our animal welfare laws, as a priority.

It is clear from the debate that many EU countries are leading the charge when it comes to stopping caged farming practices. If the UK is to not be left behind and instead be the global leader it wants to – and should – be, the Government must set about phasing out crates and cages on UK farms. We urge Defra to consult on the use of farrowing crates and enriched cages with a view to ending the cage age – improving the welfare of millions farm animals each year.”

We echo those sentiments.  Let’s make it happen.

Read our animal welfare policy here.

Anne Marie Waters


For Britain 

COVID-19: Call To Action – Help Your Community

18th March 2020

We are in an ever changing and evolving situation with the Coronavirus pandemic, and many of us are keen to help within our local community as much as possible.

With activity on hold for the local elections, For Britain is urging members and activists to help the elderly and vulnerable in your community.  If each person delivers a few of these cards, it will make a huge difference (note, to be effective, just deliver locally to a limited number of people and gauge response to avoid over committing).

We owe the older generation so much and this is an opportunity to give something back.

If you are not in a high risk group, do not need to isolate and are fit and healthy / young enough – why not ask your neighbours and local community if you can help them? Many elderly and vulnerable are alone, without family and extremely worried.

Attached is a card that you can pop through letterboxes offering to help. To minimise printing costs, you can print 4 cards on one sheet of A4 paper (it has some colour but you can print in B&W).

It is a pdf that you can download and print 

Simply enter your contact details below the line so if a neighbour in need of help requires assistance, they can get hold of you to ask. Just post these through the letterbox rather than knock on doors – but of course always do this in line with current Government guidelines, this may not be possible in the coming days.

Brits pull together in times of crisis, and the kindness and generosity we show is something we excel at as a nation. For Britain has the protection of people encoded in our DNA, so I am sure you will all take up this challenge and do us proud.

Thank you.

Party Chair & Committee

Download PDF

For Britain Statement on the cancellation of the 2020 Local Elections

14th March 2020

Chairman Update

Yesterday, Government announced that Local and mayoral elections in England will be postponed for a year to May 2021 due to the coronavirus outbreak. Elections were due in 118 English councils, the London Assembly and for seven English regional mayors.

The announcement came the day after the Electoral Commission recommended a delay until the Autumn.

For Britain fully supports any measures to mitigate the impact of the coronavirus. The health and wellbeing of the people of this nation is always our top priority.

This clearly has an effect on our plans for 2020, as we were looking forward to contributing to the heavy losses predicted for the Labour Party. We appreciate all our candidates that stepped forward and have already put hard work into designing leaflets etc.

Our attention will now focus on the development and growth of our party, national activities, and the message to all our members and activists is to use this time to help promote the party and continue our expansion.

Many people could be spending weeks at home, and as such may have additional time to read articles and watch more videos, so please continue to spread our message and encourage people to our party.

There are a number of initiatives already planned for 2020, so we will focus on those and new national campaigns – the committee will be meeting shortly and further announcements will be made about our plans.

We urge everyone to follow the advice being given to stay safe and to do all you can to protect loved ones.


Press Release: Anne Marie Waters to represent teacher at misconduct hearing

For Britain Press Team 

March 11th 2020 


On Monday 16th March 2020, For Britain leader Anne Marie Waters will act as legal representative for Mr Damian Ryan.

Mr Ryan is charged with bringing the teaching profession in to disrepute and the case could result in his inability to continue in his profession.

The hearing will take place at Cheylesmore House, 5 Quinton Road, Coventry, CV1 2WT and will continue for 3 days.

Representatives for Mr Ryan include Father John Dane and For Britain leader Anne Marie Waters.

The facts of the case are that Mr Ryan produced a small number of YouTube videos (now unpublished) in which he expressed concern about the ‘grooming gang’ scandals erupting across our nation.  Mr Ryan stated his support of Anne Marie Waters, Tommy Robinson, and others who believe, based upon evidence, that misogyny and hatred of non-Muslims, as mandated in Islamic scripture, are significant factors in the ‘grooming gang’ debate.

Father Dane and Anne Marie Waters will argue that this is in fact true, and stating so is in keeping with Mr Ryan’s right to freedom of expression as guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights.

Mr Ryan has an unblemished teaching record, is not deemed to present any danger to children, and yet is facing the loss of his livelihood merely for stating an opinion based upon objective evidence and extensive study of Islamic scripture.

This case is crucial, and will set an important precedent.  Are we permitted to state facts and express our opinion and still maintain our ability to earn a living?  That question will be answered.

For Britain will update on the hearing proceedings daily and provide a full report upon its conclusion.



A good result on gender madness, but unlikely to be permanent

Anne Marie Waters 

March 11th 2020


The Court of Appeal has ruled that people must state their sex (i.e. male or female) on their passports.  This may sound like common sense has at last prevailed, but upon reading the court’s judgement, it is clear this is unlikely to last.  The fact that our courts are even entertaining the concept of “non-binary” shows how far in to science-fiction we have fallen.

The case began with an attempted judicial review of the government’s requirement that sex be stated on passports.  This was dismissed by the High Court before Christie Elan-Cane took it up with the Court of Appeal.  Elan-Cane is “non-gendered” and insists that there ought to be an ‘X’ option available on passports.  The government said otherwise and the Court of Appeal has agreed.

This will now go to the Supreme Court, and given the language of the Court of Appeal, the chances are it could succeed.  The core of the problem is the notion that sex and gender are separate and distinct.  The ‘thinking’ being that a person’s sex is biological, but their ‘gender’ is somehow separate and can be decided upon by the person in question.  This is of course completely absurd, and a recipe for chaos, but the Court of Appeal, despite ruling in favour of the government, doesn’t seem to think so.  The language used by the court is nothing short of alarming.

Christie Elan-Cane had argued that the refusal to provide an ‘X’ option on passports amounted to a breach of the right to a private life under the European Convention on Human Rights (the sooner we are rid of this, the better).  Elan-Cane was represented in court by the enormous law firm Clifford Chance, whose lawyer stated: ‘This is an important case in the anxious context of the proper understanding and respect for the intimate, human rights of the affected class – persons whose gender identity is neither, or neither exclusively, male nor female.’

So for clarity, a major law firm in one of our most significant courts, has matter-of-factly made the case that it is entirely feasible for a person to decide they are neither male nor female.  Apart from the tiny number of people born without a clear biological sex, this is demonstrably untrue.  We are born male or female.  That is biological fact, but our courts are pretending it isn’t.

Lady Justice Eleanor King delivered the ruling at the Court of Appeal: “There can be little more central to a citizen’s private life than gender. In this case, however, the passport issue cannot reasonably be considered in isolation, given that the driver for change is the notion of respect for gender identity across the board. The court finds that there was no positive obligation on the state to provide an ‘X’ marker in order to ensure the right of the Appellant to respect for private life. Therefore, the current policy of HMPO (Her Majesty’s Passport Office) does not amount to an unlawful breach of the Appellant’s Article 8 private life rights.”

Note the words “respect for gender identity”.  This is the driver of the problem, it is its source.

Our society has fabricated something called “gender identity” and for some reason, it has been taken seriously.  All contenders for Labour leader are fully on board with the concept, and the Mayor of London has even tweeted that ‘all gender identities are valid’.

Wikipedia’s entry on this is fascinating.  It states:

“The distinction between sex and gender differentiates a person’s biological sex (the anatomy of an individual’s reproductive system, and secondary sex characteristics) from that person’s gender, which can refer to either social roles based on the sex of the person (gender role) or personal identification of one’s own gender based on an internal awareness (gender identity).”

We are therefore told, all of a sudden, that gender means something completely different to what we once understood.  Most of us thought that sex and gender were interchangeable, but we were apparently wrong.  We’re now to believe that “gender” actually refers to our “role” in life.  It declares that women and men have a certain role to perform.  As part of that role, we are expected to behave a certain way, or dress in a certain way, and if we don’t, we no longer qualify as our sex.

If a man or woman doesn’t fit in to the narrow confines set down by the gender activist, they are no longer legitimately male or female.  So, if a girl is a bit of a tomboy (like me) or a boy doesn’t enjoy sports and instead prefers art or fashion, he is not in fact male.

This is an extraordinary limitation on our individuality and it is profoundly damaging to our basic self-image.

When I was a child, I was a tomboy.  I liked my Barbie doll, but I also liked climbing trees and kicking a football, and nobody ever told me that I wasn’t a real girl as a result.  I never thought I was a boy and I never wanted to be a boy, I never thought about it, I was just me.

Thankfully, I was a child of the 80s, when sanity and reality were still ‘a thing’.  I am terrified at the thought of growing up today, because I know that extremist activists would be welcomed to my school to tell me I was in fact a boy.  It would have confused me deeply and shattered my concept of myself.  That is exactly what is happening to children today.

Kids are now taught that their sex and gender are separate, and if they don’t fit in with the behaviour restrictions placed upon their sex, then their gender doesn’t “align” with their sex (that’s the lingo).

In other words, if a girl isn’t wearing pink and spraying glitter, she’s really a boy … but a boy stuck in a girl’s body.

This is child abuse and nothing less.

To deliberately and wilfully confuse children, to deliberately and wilfully tell them that they cannot be an individual of either sex, and to tell them that sex and gender are separate, has created a world where children no longer understand themselves, and they have become burdened with enormous “decisions” about their identity when they ought to be playing with their pals without a care in the world.  It is shameful.

Even more shameful is our court’s willingness to entertain the very concept that sex and gender are separate, or that people may “decide” they are neither of the two sexes.

Our legal system is built upon objectivity, without it, we are lost.  All of this is happening because bullying transactivists and revolutionary left-wingers want us to be lost.  They seek to bring down all that is true and functional and replace it with disarray and endless confusion.  They seek to destroy society and rule over the rubble – just as left-wingers have sought time and again.  This time they may actually succeed.

If we can ‘decide’ to opt out of reality, of biology, and then impose this on children, we are lost.  When our courts agree that all of this is legitimate, we know there is a long way back.

But there is a way back.  For Britain is utterly determined to fight back against this assault on the truth, this assault on science, and this assault on children.  Transactivists are using children, confusing and stereotyping them, to push a radical political agenda.  They are winning because they are merciless in their punishment of those who won’t concede.

There is only one way to deal with bullies and that is to push back, to stand up to them, and that is what we at For Britain do best.

Join us.


Anne Marie Waters 


For Britain  






At the Heart of Climate Alarmism

By Paul Burgess, Spokesman for the Environment

10th March 2020

The very heart of climate alarmism is the claim that CO2 levels control the temperature of the earth.  So let us examine that by simply looking at the history of the earth.

Ice core data has provided a very good record of the earth’s historic  temperature as well as its CO2 level. Here it is:-

Fig.1 Vostok ice core records for carbon dioxide concentration & temperature change

Now when you compress hundreds of thousands of years into a graph a few inches wide a relationship between CO2 and temperatures is clear for all to see. So there is no doubt that there is a relationship …… except that it is the exact opposite of what the alarmists claim.

What the graph shows is that the temperature changes first and then on average about 800 years later the CO2 increases. Hence the temperature change causes the CO2 change and not as the alarmist claim the other way around. In fact that has always been the case throughout earth’s history.

In real science it is not enough to show such correlations. After all ice cream sales correlate well with temperature but do not cause it. You have to show a cause and effect that makes sense. So what would cause CO2 rise to follow temperature rise?

The answer is very simple.

By far the most free CO2 on earth is stored in the oceans, and they absorb CO2 when cooling, and conversely give off CO2 when warming. So as the temperature increases, then the oceans begin to slowly give off CO2.

Boiling a kettle of water takes time, so imagine how much time it takes to heat up blue planet oceans such as those on earth? The answer is hundreds of years. So it is clear what is happening  – temperature increases and then as a result, CO2 levels in the atmosphere increase. Hence CO2 cannot be the cause of the temperature increase, but are a RESULT of it.

Of course this is simply ignored by the alarmists. They even claim that current CO2 levels are the highest we have ever had when the fact is they are at drought levels. The alarmists trade in the exact opposite of the truth and so have to suppress the truth and even turn it on its head. To do that they have to abandon the scientific method and squash free speech. So far they have done that very well indeed because today 2+2 does equal 5.

You only have to ask the BBC that.

Paul Burgess B.Sc., M.Sc, C. Eng (retired)

Failing victims, fuelling hate

Dr Elle Cockbain is an Associate Professor in Security and Crime Science at University College London.

Dr Waqas Tufail is a Senior Lecturer in Criminology at Leeds Beckett University. Dr Waqas Tufail’s research interests include policing, anti-Muslim racism, and racialisation.

Apparently, Muslims are a race.

They have written a report together.  We have the perfect storm here; a Muslim and a left-wing academic writing a politically correct report.  The main thrust of the report is to minimise any claims of Muslim involvement,  or disproportionate Muslim involvement, in grooming gangs.

The report is filled with term “racism” in every form imaginable.  This includes “anti-Muslim racism”, which is repeated again and again.  Dr Waqas Tufail’s “expertise” in “racism” comes to the fore. It seems nearly every sentence has “racism” in it.

It is also filled with the usual accusations of “Islamophobia” or “far right”.

Here is my response.

This article examines how racist framings of ‘Muslim grooming gangs’ exist not only in extremist, far-right fringes but in mainstream, liberal discourses too. The involvement of supposedly feminist and liberal actors, and the promotion of pseudoscientific ‘research’, have lent a veneer of legitimacy to essentialist, Orientalist stereotypes of Muslim men, the demonisation of whole communities and demands for collective responsibility.

Because of the above “supposedly feminist” input, the report later introduces a different form of feminism that is apparently needed… called “anti-racist feminism”.

It seems western people have Muslim men all wrong!

The “Muslim victim card” is played straight away in the report’s introduction.

 “Home to a significant population of Asian Muslim heritage, workers from the Indian subcontinent initially arrived into towns such as Rotherham to work within the manufacturing sector and were often treated poorly in comparison to whites”.

“Despite routinely (and wrongly) being depicted as a ‘specific’ crime type, ‘grooming gangs’ are better understood as a vaguely and inconsistently defined subset of child sexual exploitation (CSE) offenders”.

A large component of CSE is online, where the offender does not touch the child. It is abhorrent, but compare it with the violent gang rape of a child.

Most online offenders are white, so by including grooming rape gangs in CSE, it serves to obfuscate the offence. Grooming gang rape needs to be included as a special category regarding the rape of children.

“Existing data simply do not enable reliable assessments of the prevalence or correlates of CSE, let alone those of ‘grooming gangs’ so claims of ethnic or religious disproportionality in ‘grooming gangs’ are just not testable in any meaningful sense”.  

There you have it.  We can’t even prove that Muslims are grossly overrepresented in grooming rape gangs. Based on the names of the men convicted for this crime, it is obvious that they are Muslims. This was found by Times Reporter Andrew Norfolk, the Muslim Quilliam Foundation and their report, and Peter McLoughlin, the author of “Easy Meat: Inside Britain’s Grooming Gang Scandal”.   Drs Elle Cockbain and Waqas Tufail obviously reject this in their report.

“The racialisation of ‘grooming gangs’ must also be understood in the context of a long history of racialised and gendered Islamophobia, or anti-Muslim racism”.

Three versions of racism in one sentence!

“Muslim men have been stereotyped as both religiously fanatical and prone to committing violent, sexual acts motivated by a patriarchal, misogynistic culture and backward, barbaric religion”.

It’s called the truth! Islam is a patriarchal, misogynistic and backward, barbaric religion. Evidence for the above is mountainous and available in Islamic scripture, Islamic history, and current events.

Muslims have viewed white European women as whores for over a thousand years.

From the Muslim Quilliam Foundation website: “There are elements from within the British Pakistani community that still subscribe to outdated and sexist views of women embedded within their jaded interpretations of Islam. These backward views are passed down from generation to generation until the lines between faith and culture dissolve, making it increasingly difficult to criticise one without being seen as a critic of the other”.

Muslim grooming rape gangs include grandfathers, fathers, sons, grandsons, uncles, nephews and cousins. What more evidence of backward views passed down from generation to generation is needed?

But there is more.

Surveys show 2nd and 3rd generation British Muslims are at least, if not more, fundamentalist in their religious beliefs than their parents and grandparents. Some of the girls raped reported that the men read from the Quran or prayed to Allah before raping them.

They also reported the men said their religion allowed them to rape non-Muslim girls and women. Most Muslims in Britain are of Pakistani descent, and Pakistani Muslim men form the bulk of grooming gang rape offenders. A list of the best and the worst countries in the World to be a woman was produced by National Geographic; the list includes 167 countries. The best are Western countries, and the worst are Muslim countries.

Pakistan was rated the worst country in the World for discriminatory norms against women. It is also 164 out of 167 in the list with only Syria, Afghanistan and Yemen below; three countries at war!

We contend that genuinely practised anti-racist feminism is vital in tackling child sexual abuse and resisting anti-Muslim forces.

Even the highly respected Times journalist, Andrew Norfolk, doesn’t escape the ire of Drs Elle Cockbain and Waqas Tufail and their accusations of racism. In addition to this report, Andrew Norfolk has been accused of racism and Islamophobia by left wing and Muslim organisations.

“……The story combined two particularly explosive contentions: that Pakistani-heritage men were preying on white British girls; and that the authorities failed to intervene ‘for fear of being branded racist’….”

So, the facts in the Jay Report on Rotherham and subsequent grooming rape gang trials in other towns and cities throughout the UK do not exist; they’re just “contentions”. A cover ‘for fear of being branded racist’ below.

“…. seemingly chosen to stoke ‘his personally crafted crime model of white victims and Pakistani perpetrators’…”

 “His dubious journalistic standards notwithstanding, Norfolk’s racialised crime threat immediately caught the media, political and public imagination and soon became entrenched”.

 Labour politicians are also in the firing line:

“Centre-left politicians have proved particularly pivotal in migrating rhetoric more characteristic of the far Right to the political mainstream. Key early contributions came from Labour MP Jack Straw. he notoriously blamed ‘grooming’ on regressive British-Pakistani culture, arranged marriages and views of white girls as ‘easy meat’…”

 Jack Straw was 100% correct – well done Jack. The Labour MP for Rotherham, Sarah Champion, is especially singled out in the report and is mentioned many times. Even though she did a public “mea culpa” it was too late for the likes of Drs Elle Cockbain and Waqas Tufail; the damage had already been done.

“One particularly dramatic intervention came from Sarah Champion, Labour MP for Rotherham and, ironically, shadow secretary of state for women and equalities. Champion had to resign from the frontbench after writing an inflammatory article entitled ‘British Pakistani men ARE raping and exploiting white girls . . . and it’s time we faced up to it’ for The Sun….Her views in this article were likened to those of the far Right”.

 “The Sun’s former political editor Trevor Kavanagh, which characterised ‘grooming gangs’ as ‘the Muslim problem’: a framing heavily criticised for evoking Nazi-era rhetoric”.

I was wondering when Drs Elle Cockbain and Waqas Tufail would use the word “Nazi”.

“Consequently, the impression stood that ethnic disproportionality in ‘grooming gangs’ was an accepted fact and legitimate focus for government-commissioned research”.

 It’s not an impression; it is a fact!

The excellent book “Easy Meat: Inside Britain’s Grooming Gang Scandal” by Peter McLoughlin is classed as far-right propaganda in the report.

The Muslim Quilliam Foundation’s report on Muslim grooming rape gangs comes in for special criticism. After all, if you can rubbish a report by an officially recognised Muslim organisation on the subject, it helps to obfuscate the problem and classify those highlighting the problem as being far right, racist and Islamophobic. Much of the input on Quilliam’s report is taken from an article written by Dr Elle Cockbain titled: “When bad evidence is worse than no evidence: Quilliam’s ‘grooming gangs’ report and its legacy”. Her article was published in the Policing Insight journal. Anne Marie and the For Britain party are mentioned in the article. Anne Marie assures me she has never used the term “Rape Jihad”.

 “The report’s 84 per cent statistic, with its veneer of legitimacy, assists Islamophobic agendas and claims of “rape jihad”: a term favoured by the likes of “Tommy Robinson” (Stephen Yaxley Lennon) and Anne Marie Waters, leader of the extreme anti-Islam party For Britain.  

Central to this is Quilliam’s 84% of offenders being South Asian (read Muslim). The Quilliam Foundation Report is dated December 2017. Peter McLoughlin, the author of “Easy Meat: Inside Britain’s Grooming Gang Scandal” maintains an online list of those jailed to date for grooming gang rape and a ratio count of those who are Muslim. Assuming the latest date for evidence to be included in the Quilliam report was November 2017, Peter McLoughlin’s list produces 86% Muslims for those jailed as at November 2017. Quilliam took a sample of cases so their 84% is within the range of acceptance for a sample within a population. Considering Muslims are only 5% of the British population, they are grossly overrepresented in grooming gang rape convictions of predominantly white schoolgirls. That is a fact.

From Drs Elle Cockbain and Waqas Tufail’s report:

“Stereotypes of ‘Muslim rape gangs’ were greatly boosted by the Quilliam Foundation’s ‘grooming gangs’ report, source of the spurious but ubiquitous claim that ‘84% of grooming gang offenders’ are Asian”.

 “Worryingly, some academics (including the author of a book on ‘anti-racist practice in social work’) have since uncritically cited Quilliam’s drivel”.

“Information appears cherry-picked to support a central thesis that ‘regressive’ Pakistani culture drives abuse of white British girls”.

 Both Quilliam and Jack Straw mentioned earlier are 100% correct on ‘regressive’ Pakistani culture drives abuse of white British girls.

The Sikh Youth UK (SYUK) group come under fire because they also published a report on Muslim grooming rape gangs raping Sikh girls and collaborated with the left’s most hated person, Tommy Robinson.

“The fringe, nationalist Sikh Youth UK (SYUK) group then released a much lower profile but similarly shoddy report, which addressed ‘religiously aggravated sexual exploitation of young Sikh women’. SYUK had already been accused of propagating anti-Muslim hatred in collaborating with ‘Tommy Robinson’ around ‘Muslim grooming gangs’…”

 One of the subheadings in Drs Elle Cockbain and Waqas Tufail’s report is: “How the international far Right is co-opting women’s rights”.

 “Central to pan-European and indeed global far-right narratives is the presentation of Muslims as a specific and urgent civilisational threat. Far-right propaganda commonly refers to the ‘Islamisation’ or ‘Islamification’ of Europe, or ‘Islamofascism’. The ‘war on terror’ helped mainstream such perspectives and normalise the use of secular and feminist discourses to inveigh against the supposedly increasing threat of Islam in Europe”.

The Islamification of Europe, indeed western civilisation is happening and Islam is a civilisational threat. Islam is not a “supposedly” increasing threat in Europe; it is a “real” increasing threat. Women are complaining in Europe because their freedoms have been eroded by the influx of Muslim men and they have been the target of sexual assault by Muslim men.

This anti-Muslim climate has served as ideological justification for domestic and international ‘war on terror’ efforts – and the attendant wide-ranging human rights abuses – of which Muslims in Europe, the US and elsewhere bear the brunt.

 The justification for domestic and international war on terror efforts is down to Islamic terrorism and nothing else. The Muslim victim card is played yet again.

“In the Nordics, as in the UK, serious sexual offences have been racialised and politicised”.

 In the Nordics, as in the UK, and indeed in other European countries, governments have tried to hide sexual attacks on their women by Muslim men. Like everywhere in this report, the truth about these sexual attacks by Muslim men is classed as racism. People will vote for political parties that listen and act upon their justifiable concerns over immigration, Islam and Muslims.

The Jay Report into Muslim grooming rape gangs in Rotherham also doesn’t escape the ire of Drs Elle Cockbain and Waqas Tufail. They do not accept the oft quoted 1,400 victims in Rotherham. From the Jay Report itself and everything I have read on the subject that figure was conservative; the actual number was believed to be much higher. Also, there wasn’t enough emphasis on the non-white victims for Drs Elle Cockbain and Waqas Tufail’s liking when the Jay Report was covered by the press. Again, from everything I have read on the subject, the number of non-white victims was extremely small compared to white victims. Quilliam took a sample of cases so there were obviously no non-white victims in their sample.

“The Jay (2014) report received intense publicity for its (methodologically dubious) estimate that 1,400 children were abused in Rotherham between 1997 and 2013, mostly by groups of Pakistani-heritage offenders. BME victims were almost entirely overlooked in the coverage. Meanwhile, Quilliam’s report literally whitewashed out BME victims in its sample through untrue and insulting claims that all victims were white”.

 One of the subheadings in the report is: “Fuelling anti-Muslim hostility and violent Islamophobia”. This is where the typical Muslim victim card is played. We see the usual flipping of victimhood that we see after Islamic terrorist attacks. It includes Anders Breivik, Darren Osborne, the Mosque shooting in New Zealand and the murder of an 81-year-old Muslim man in Rotherham. All of them were horrendous attacks and not condoned by any normal person. If the truth is not allowed to be told as Drs Elle Cockbain and Waqas Tufail want in their report, it will worsen the situation and lead to more violence.

The following was mentioned earlier under “failed to intervene for fear of being branded racist”. It was classed as a contention and is now a misapprehension.

“…the misapprehension that ‘grooming gangs’ flourished primarily due to ‘political correctness’ must be tackled. Decrying political correctness (usually in the context of racialised minorities) is common among right-wing and far-right commentators but detracts from broader systemic issues that require attention.

The Jay Report and investigations in the many other towns and cities where Muslim grooming rape gangs operated with impunity for decades, do blame political correctness in the guise of accusations of racism as the main obstacle to reporting on and stopping Muslim grooming rape gangs. That is a fact. Ironically Drs Elle Cockbain and Waqas Tufail’s report is replete with the word “racism” for anyone who dares to speak the truth about Muslim grooming rape gangs. We all know the great power political correctness wields when commenting on Islam and Muslims in Britain and other western countries.

The report blames the following for why offenders were not brought to justice sooner: fear that the victims would not make credible witnesses, unsympathetic attitudes to sexually exploited children and austerity measures. Among the countless thousands of victims, there would have been a significant number who would have made credible witnesses. Remember this went on for decades throughout towns and cities in the UK. The girls were treated like prostitutes who had made lifestyle choices by some police forces but that does not detract from the power that political correctness had in the police covering up these cases. Besides the police, local councils (mostly Labour) were also at the centre of this problem and they used political correctness to cover up this abhorrent crime against schoolgirls. When thousands of schoolgirls are being brutally gang raped on your patch, it should be a top priority for spending in your budget so austerity measures are not a reason why action was not taken sooner. Blaming austerity measures also smacks of a left-wing political dog whistle.

For Britain 

Patel’s immigration policy is largely to be welcomed, but…

Anne Marie Waters 

March 2nd 2020


Priti Patel’s immigration policies are largely to be welcomed. A points-based system is an obvious method of weighing up a person’s merits and deciding who can or can’t come to Britain. It’s a convenient and common sense way to have a look at those who wish to live here, for whatever length of time.

But there are problems with Patel’s overall approach – culture isn’t taken in to account, and there’s a worry that the speed at which ‘unskilled’ workers will be severely restricted may contain risks to business.

What the Tories seem to see as a selling point is similar to that little bit of political correctness that Ukip used to put forward – that non-Europeans will now have the same opportunity to come to Britain as Europeans.

What is actually needed is for that policy to be reversed.

Europeans should have priority. There is nothing at all wrong with that. Europeans do not threaten our cultural values in to the future, nor are they likely to drag us back to the dark ages with practices like FGM or honour violence.

For Britain cares for the longer term, and we maintain therefore that Europeans are far more likely to integrate than migrants from other parts of the world. This is crucial.

Furthermore, is it right to make unskilled migration so difficult so soon?

Nobody wants to reduce immigration as much as I do, but I also understand the need to listen to the nation’s employers.  We cannot make rash decisions on our economy.

The ares most likely to affected included the hospitality sector, care, farming, and the NHS. Will we have enough grown workers for these jobs in a year’s time? I’m afraid it’s unlikely.

Patel proposes that ‘unskilled’ workers will need 70 points to work in Britain. They will earn 10 points for speaking English, and 20 for having secured a job. The higher the salary they will earn, the more points they will earn. The points are not easy to build and will most certainly bring immigration down (or should).

It’s right also to state that British business must invest in British workers, bringing employment and wages back up. But one must wonder whether the country will be ready for this by January 2021; we must be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater and damage British business – particularly small business which can ill-afford it.

For Britain proposes something different. Yes we propose a points system but cultural compatibility will be among the points.

Most crucially at this point in time, For Britain would stop all illegal migration via the English channel from France, close the open arms to refugees and asylum seekers, and certainly have no part in accommodating the masses currently making their way to the Greek border.

We will restore British culture and make certain that mass migration cannot further threaten it in the way that it has. We have religious violence and censorship in Britain and it is a direct result of immigration from societies where religious violence and censorship are not uncommon.

For Britain wants to suspend immigration for 5 years. This includes asylum (except in very rare circumstances), indefinite leave to remain, the granting of British citizenship, and all current visas to the UK. Temporary visas will be issued for vital workers, and Europe (e.g. eastern Europe) will be given priority.  The numbers will be determined upon balance; the short term needs of business versus the medium-to-long term investment in British workers, and the reduction of reliance on foreign workers.

The movement of large families from poverty-stricken parts of the world, something exploited using forced marriage, has to stop as well. We have to look again as the asylum seekers and illegal immigrants already in our country, and prepare to deport the vast majority. This is the only way we can stop mass movement towards our shores.

Britain has to secure its borders and has to do it soon. It has to happen, not only for our current well-being, but for the future of this nation. We have a duty to pass on a free and vibrant Britain to the next generation; that’s our task, let’s take it seriously…

Join us.


Anne Marie Waters


For Britain

Maths: We’re losing our ability to count

Getting the basics right at school is one of For Britain’s most important policies.  Children are leaving our schools without sufficient skills in the most fundamental subjects, such as maths and English.  

A For Britain member and maths tutor has sent us this account of the mathematics skills she encounters in her work.

I am a private tutor and constantly see poor levels of mathematics skills among pupils.  It is essential in mathematics to really grasp the basics before trying to embark on more difficult work.  The problem in school is that there is a fixed curriculum for the year, and all topics have to be covered regardless of whether the children are ready to learn them.

It is essential that addition and subtraction skills are learnt thoroughly, so children can quickly recall the answers without having to use fingers. Then they can move on to mentally calculate these sums involving 100s, 10s and units.  All too often they are allowed the use of a calculator before they are even able to do a sum such as 65 -38: they have not had enough practice to learn these skills, and just don’t know how to approach them. 

Alternatively, they may be able to do it if they write the sum down in columns, but even many in secondary schools will get this wrong!

Regarding multiplication, I rarely see children who know their times-table well, even in secondary school.  If they do come up with an answer, they often count one at a time – there is no instant recall in sums such as 6 x 7.  Even with the times-table, some don’t realise that 8 x 2 for instance is the same as 2 x 8. 

It is astounding, because within a short time studying these basic skills with me, through daily repetition, they can recall instantly all of the basic addition, subtraction and multiplication sums.  

These skills should form the basis of all mathematics teaching in schools, and pupils should be taught how to work things out mentally. 

When I was at school (many years ago!) we had daily drills on times-tables, and once these are learned, they are never forgotten.

It is impossible for instance to learn how to add fractions if the tables have not been learned thoroughly.  This applies in numerous other areas where these basics also need to be applied.  They cannot understand more difficult concepts without a thorough knowledge of these basic skills.

Of course, the huge problem with maths in primary school is that the classes are often of sizes of 30 or more, and are of mixed abilities. There are vast differences in the speed at which children can learn mathematics, so an overcrowded environment can only be detrimental.  

Overall, the standard is low, and getting lower.  Quite simply, we are losing our numeric and mathematical abilities.

For Britain is fully aware of the low standards in UK schools in the 21st century, and we are determined to turn this around.  There must be greater emphasis on intelligence, thought, and excellence in our education system.

You can learn more about our education policy here:

Video: The Foundations of it All – Our Education Policy 

Blog: The Foundations of it All – Our Education Policy 

London has fallen – but we can still save it!

Alessandro Merola

February 28th 2020


I have always considered myself patriotic. What can I say? I love this country. I am who I am today because of my country. It has given me healthcare, education, a home and a community to belong to. Therefore, I am so saddened to see the current state that our beloved nation finds herself in. But what concerns me most is the issue regarding the city of London. What was once a shining capital city that attracted so many from so far to come to gaze at its beauty in awe, is now (in my opinion) about as attractive as a landfill.

London has become a war-zone.

Not a day passes without another horrific murder or inhuman acid attack. The youth of London now find stability and meaning in gangs – leading a life of crime rather than pursuing an education.

Being young myself, I find myself looking at old videos of London online – videos filmed in what looks like a completely different city to the one that now stands. A city of smiling faces, where culture was celebrated, not hidden. A city where children were free to play in the streets, not forced to live behind double-bolted doors and barred windows. A city with happy and united communities, not no-go zones and foreign ghettos.

I fear that if action is not taken, the great city that survived invasions, the plague, great fires and the Blitz, will not be standing strong for much longer.

However, if action is taken, and taken quickly, I believe that we can salvage from the ruins the City of London that elder generations of my family and many others knew and loved dearly.

That is why I joined “For Britain”.

I saw that this was a movement of proud individuals, not elitist politicians, who were prepared to act to help their country be better – not for money, not for fame, but for Britain. A movement that would speak the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. A breath of fresh air, instead of the rotten stench of the mainstream political parties (Liberals, Labour and Conservatives) who are all the same and who are indeed all to blame.

And I believe with all my being that “For Britain”, is the movement that not only London needs, but it is the movement that the entire country needs, to return the greatness that was once proudly hers. We know this is possible.

After all, it’s in the name – Great Britain.


Alessandro Merola

For Britain, London Branch 

Government hides the truth about rape gangs (again)

Anne Marie Waters

February 23rd 2020


They must know the disquiet it will cause.  They must know that the silence will only help to confirm what I and others have said for many years.  Even so, even with this in mind, our leaders have chosen to cover up the truth.  The truth therefore must be truly terrible.

It is terrible.  The truth is that Muslims rape kuffar girls because they are kuffar, and therefore their rape is permissible in Islam.  I know this, the rape victims know this, and the government knows this.  Hence the silence.  Nothing has changed – Islam will be protected at all costs.  It will be protected even by Boris Johnson and Priti Patel, in whom so many had placed their hopes.  But the fact is that neither Patel nor Johnson can tell us the truth, because that would mean admitting what they’ve done.  The Tories have overseen mass immigration just as Labour has, and are equally to blame.  It is their failure that is being disguised here, and rape victims are merely collateral damage.

Lord Pearson, by far my favourite person in the entire Palace of Westminster, has written to the government for an update on their investigation in to the characteristics of the notorious rape gangs.

His question was:

further to the answer by Baroness Manzoor on 18 October 2018 (HL Deb, col 562), whether they intend to publish the findings of the working group set up on 3 September 2018 to examine the characteristics of the perpetrators of child sexual exploitation and abuse; and if not why not.

Baroness Williams of Trafford  replied:

Officials have been pursuing work on several fronts to improve our understanding of the characteristics of group-based child sexual exploitation, as well as the implications for the investigation and prevention of these crimes.

This internal work is being carried out as part of routine policy development. As such, it has not been undertaken with the intention of publication.

Much of the insight gained through our work with law enforcement partners contains operationally and personally sensitive information and will need to remain confidential.

In early 2020 the Government will publish a national strategy, the first of its kind, to tackle all forms of child sexual abuse.

Our new strategy will set out our whole system response to tackling child sexual abuse, including group-based sexual offending, drawing on this internal work. It will set out how we will work across government, law enforcement, safeguarding partners and industry to root out offending, protect victims and help victims and survivors rebuild their lives. We will work tirelessly to tackle all forms of sexual abuse; there will be no no-go areas.

Extraordinary stuff.  Lies upon lies upon lies.  The government will tackle “all child abuse”.  This means they will tackle none.

There is nothing complicated about the characteristics of these rape gangs, a child could tell them, they’re all Muslims.  Across Europe, rape gangs are comprised of Muslims.  Women and girls have been brutally attacked in Europe by men from Morocco, Libya, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Egypt, Iraq and elsewhere in the Muslim world.  In Cologne, in a notorious mass attack, German women were assaulted by 1,000s of Muslim men.  It’s the same story in Sweden, where Swedish women have been told to stay home to avoid sexual assault, just like in Muslim countries.  In Norway, in an infamous national report, it was revealed that Norwegian women were being raped by “non-Western immigrants” with a “very different attitude to women” than is normal in Norway.  Reports have even stated that blonde Norwegians have begun dying their hair because blondes are targeted disproportionately.

One rape victim in Norway reported that her rapist had told her “he had the right to do exactly as he wanted to a woman”.

Where might he have gotten this idea from?  He got it from Islam and it is that fact that our government is covering up, yet again.

Here in Britain, the women raped by these gangs are being heard for the first time, and what they are saying is uncomfortable for our leaders.  More and more of them have reported that their rapists tell them the Koran allows them to treat women however they wish.  I personally have spoken to survivors of grooming gangs who told me the same thing.  The gangs would call them “white whores” deserving of no respect.  They can be raped and abused at will by Muslim men, for the Koran says so.

Islam is uniquely poisonous to women.  It is truly abhorrent.  Men who are raised from the cradle to adopt the Koran’s attitude to women will, unsurprisingly, hold the Koran’s attitude to women.  Let’s not forget the reverence of the Koran.  Insulting it can carry the death penalty, and Muslims are raised to believe that it is the ultimate and final and direct word of Allah.  If the Koran makes a statement, it is taken very seriously.

Here are just some of the Koran’s teachings on women (thanks to

Koran 4:11 (Inheritance) “The male shall have the equal of the portion of two females”

Koran (2:282) (Court testimony) “And call to witness, from among your men, two witnesses. And if two men be not found then a man and two women.” 

Koran (2:228) “and the men are a degree above them (women)”

Koran (5:6) “And if ye are unclean, purify yourselves. And if ye are sick or on a journey, or one of you cometh from the closet, or ye have had contact with women, and ye find not water, then go to clean, high ground and rub your faces and your hands with some of it”

Koran (2:223) “Your wives are as a tilth unto you; so approach your tilth when or how ye will

Koran (4:3)  “Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four”

Koran (4:34) “Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband’s] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance – [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them” 

The Hadiths, the words of Mohammed and therefore almost as ‘holy’ as the Koran, are even worse.

Sahih Bukhari (6:301)  “[Muhammad] said, ‘Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?’ They replied in the affirmative. He said, ‘This is the deficiency in her intelligence.’

Sahih Bukhari (6:301)  continued “[Muhammad said] ‘Isn’t it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?’ The women replied in the affirmative. He said, ‘This is the deficiency in her religion.'”

Sahih Bukhari (2:28) & Sahih Bukhari (54:464) Women comprise the majority of Hell’s occupants. This is important because the only women in heaven mentioned explicitly by Muhammad are the virgins who serve the sexual desires of men. (A weak Hadith, Kanz al-`ummal, 22:10, even suggests that 99% of women go to Hell).

Sahih Bukhari (62:81)  “The Prophet said: “‘The stipulations most entitled to be abided by are those with which you are given the right to enjoy the (women’s) private parts (i.e. the stipulations of the marriage contract).”

Sahih Bukhari (62:58) A woman presents herself in marriage to Muhammad, but he does not find her attractive, so he “donates” her on the spot to another man.

Sahih Muslim (4:1039)  “A’isha said [to Muhammad]: ‘You have made us equal to the dogs and the asses’ These are the words of Muhammad’s favorite wife, complaining of the role assigned to women under Islam.

Given all of the above, is it any wonder that the Muslim world is particularly toxic for, and brutal towards, the female half of humanity?  Is it any wonder that when Muslims come to the West, they bring these attitudes with them?  Is it any wonder then that our girls have fallen victim?  It was as inevitable as night following day.

Our leaders have known this for some time, but so committed to mass migration are they, that they have chosen to discount the rape victims as insignificant in the grand scheme of things.

Every girl being gang-raped in a Muslim-driven taxi at this very moment is in that situation because her government has chosen to allow it.  Despite 900 arrests of Syrian asylum seekers in 2015 (some for rape and sexual assault), the Conservative government is still fully and completely committed to bringing more Syrians to the UK.  If they rape girls, so be it.

Open-border globalism has brought brutal savagery to our country, the kind of which we have never known before.  The Conservatives know this.  They know they’ve allowed people to come here with attitudes that we left behind in the stone age, but they do it anyway.  The victims of that stone-age attitude will be our young girls, and our government doesn’t care.  It has chosen to allow this in the name of mass migration, just as governments across Europe have knowingly allowed the same.  Western women and girls have been thrown to the wolves, and will be again, because the result of yet another cover up will be yet more rapes.  The Muslim gangs know that they are still untouchable, they know Islam will never be criticised, so more and more rapes will take place and the British government will cover them up again.

The only way out of this is to replace the British government, and for the sake of our girls, we intend to do just that.


Anne Marie Waters 


For Britain 

The Foundations of it All – Our Education Policy

Anne Marie Waters 

February 17th 2020


If you had enormous influence over the minds of the young, how would you use it?  Would you teach them to be positive and self-respectful, or would you fill their minds with shame and self-contempt?  The former is a gift to a child, the latter is nothing short of abuse, and it is incredibly cruel.  But it is the latter that is happening in our classrooms, and For Britain is determined to bring it to an end.

It is no exaggeration to say that British children are taught to hate their own country at school.  There is simply no doubt about it.  Whether it is encouraging children to see things from the perspective of an anti-British terrorist, or promoting mass migration and multiculturalism (i.e. all cultures are better than ours), the message is consistent and clear; Britain is bad and you should feel ashamed to be British.  It is terribly damaging, both to the individual child and to our future as a nation.

The reasons are not hard to understand.  The teaching profession is dominated by “progressive” leftists.  The National Union of Teachers (now the National Education Union) in 2020 proposed motions at its national conference condemning “Islamophobia” and supporting transgender teaching in schools (disguised as “inclusivity”).

It has also called on the government to abolish the Prevent strategy, aimed at restraining Islamic extremism.

This is clearly a left-wing organisation, and it is free to promote its destructive left-wing ideals to Britain’s children while the government stands by and does nothing.

This has to end.

As usual, For Britain has the policies that the country needs – they will transform our education system.  We will introduce a new curriculum to restore excellence, and to teach British children pride in themselves, their country, and their national identity.  Those who refuse to teach this curriculum will be removed from their jobs; no ifs or buts.

We will bring back the basics – strive for excellence in reading, writing, mathematics, and the sciences. Our schools and universities will be places of open debate, diversity of opinion, and facts.

We will prevent universities expelling students because of their political views, and will oblige discussion and debate with all perspectives represented.  A University Bias Board will be established, to which students can appeal if their event of is cancelled as a result of left-wing bullying and intimidation.

The Conservatives have spoken about this, but as so often with mainstream parties, speaking is all that they’ve done.  No real action has been taken or will be taken until we replace mainstream politics with a pro-British alternative.

That is our role, and we will succeed.  We must succeed, for the children of Britain and the future of Britain.


Anne Marie Waters 


For Britain 


Fair Cop’s Day In Court

By Mike Speakman; Retired Deputy Chief Constable, Policing Spokesman

15th February  2020

In recent years, it has sometimes been said, with a sense of irony, that George Orwell’s 1984 was written as fiction, not an implementation manual. This message did not get through to many establishment organisations, including Humberside Police. I served in Humberside Police from 1995 to 2000 as both Assistant and Deputy Chief Constable. This forces behaviour as recently highlighted is nothing short of appalling and I am quite distressed at what they have become. But I should acknowledge that the problem is not confined to Humberside alone, the country’s police forces are infected with the same virus.

Harry Miller, an ex-Humberside police officer, under the umbrella organisation which he set up called “Fair Cop” was in court yesterday to hear judgement passed on a case he brought last year challenging the way Humberside Police implemented the College of Policing’s Hate Crime guidance, and also challenging that Guidance itself.

Harry had shared a tweet and written some himself which called into question the latest craze of multiple trans identities. One woman/man/it complained. The police went to Mr. Millers workplace and subsequently interviewed him and told him that the incident was being recorded as a “none crime hate incident” in accordance with College of Policing guidance. Such findings could subsequently be disclosed to potential employers in a DBS check, even though no offence had been committed. There is no objective test to a “Hate Crime” it only needs one person to perceive it as such.

In common with most police officers. Harry has a strong sense of justice and took exception to the action of Humberside police. He founded Fair Cop and using his own money and crowdfunding took the case to court. In delivering Judgement in favour of Mr. Miller, Justice Knowles actually quoted George Orwell and compared Humberside Police to the Stasi and the Gestapo. He concluded that Humberside Police were unlawfully trying to restrict Mr. Millers freedom of expression. He did not however find that the College of Policing’s guidance in itself was unlawful. He has fast tracked the issue to the Supreme Court, so we are not at the end and there is a way to go yet.

Many of us in our party have been subjected to constraints on our freedom of expression, whether it be being de-platformed at universities, venues surrendering to the threats of violence from the left and police forces refusing to protect our right to hold meetings to name but a few. So, this issue goes to the very heart of our democracy and a right to express views that others disagree with. It’s probably one of the most important issues of our time.

The role of the Police in all this is very troubling. Police forces are actively siding with various extreme groups against others whom they do not support. The police service is not impartial in this debate and there appears to be some centralised coordination across forces which favours some groups over others.

The Police role in social media also needs examining. I do not believe the police should be responsible for what goes on Twitter or Facebook. The police role in monitoring communications goes back to a time when messages were written on paper, put in an envelope, addressed, a stamp was purchased and a trip to the post box was involved. Any such message had thought, and energy expended on it. Now a casual drunken few thumb presses can convey the same words, even though there is no requirement on the recipient to actually read it. We are also now entitled to take offence at anything. I think the Police involvement in social media is a perversion of the role and does indeed take sources away from issues that really matter and used to be at the core of policing activity. It cannot be right for the police to refuse to attend a domestic burglary but will turn up if you are thinking “wrongly” in their opinion.

Now we shouldn’t blame all police officers for this, although it seems some have become religious zealots in pursuing people who express a different opinion. The problem lies in the management levels and the mechanisms that have been put in place to centralise thinking across the service. The college of policing and the Home Office being the prime drivers.

I still have faith in the basic bobby, who understands right from wrong, still has a sense of justice but is pressured to follow the politically correct orthodoxy that infects all public services. I know harry Miller has the support of thousands of serving and retired officers who have helped fund him and supported him with information. Harry’s campaign has only just started, he has other organisations in his sights who are using their charitable status to pursue political agendas, and this is illegal. This campaign has a long way to go.

Across the country beacons of resistance are being lit, whether it be about grooming gangs and corrupted policing, University de-platforming or promotion of transsexual migration in schools.

For Britain will play its part.

Mike Speakman
Retired Deputy Chief Constable
Policing Spokesman
The For Britain Movement

[email protected]

“Wokeness” will spell the end of the Labour Party

Anne Marie Waters

February 12th 2020


Rebecca Long-Bailey, a front-runner in the race to be the next Labour leader, has given her backing to the expulsion of “transphobic” members of the party.

Obviously Labour still has its finger on the pulse of the British working class!  (Or not).

A new group, comprised of people who are so self-indulgent and narcissistic that they will not countenance other people having the freedom to disagree with their dictats, has formed within the Labour Party, and its specific purpose is to ‘rid the party of transphobes’.

The “Labour Campaign for Trans Rights” has made a list of requirements that it feels fully entitled to demand.  It wants absolute authority over what people are allowed to think, and knowing the Labour Party, it will get it.

The first tactic is to pretend that there is a threat to trans rights, but where is it?  Who is arguing that transpeople shouldn’t have the same fundamental rights as everyone else?  Nobody that I’ve heard and if I did, I’d disagree; transpeople should have all their rights in tact, just like the rest of us.

But this approach tends to work, it turns the trans lobbiests in to the victims, and disguises what many of them truly are – cowardly bullies demanding control.

The requirements are clear: “transwomen are women, transmen are men”.  That’s the starting point and if you disagree, you will be expelled from the Labour Party.  All in the name of inclusivity and tolerance.

Furthermore, if you point out that there are clashes between the best interests of “transwomen” and of actual women, that too is transphobic and will mean you’re no longer welcome in the party of the marginalised and demonised.

The fact that there are obvious clashes, and that actual women always lose out when these clashes occur, is completely irrelevant.  Women are losing sporting contests to much larger men, men are violating women’s refuges and rape crisis centres, women’s toilets are handed to men on a daily basis; this is a clear clash of interests, but point it out, and you’ll be expelled from the Labour Party.

There is going to be an exodus of people from that shambolic party, and For Britain will be waiting to welcome them on board.  Labour has become a Titania McGrath-like parody, even indulging the utter, mind-bogglingly absurd “non-binary” farce with full gusto.  “Non-binary” is someone who doesn’t identify as a man or a woman.  If you find that silly, or even slightly odd, or completely pointless, or the tantrum of an attention-seeking narcissist, or even remotely confusing, you’ll risk expulsion from the Labour Party.  It’s staggering.

This is the party that once stood for the working folk, the coalminers, the factory workers, the road sweepers… now it is a party that will expel you for not appreciating the nuances of gender fluidity.  Give me a break.

It’s over for the Labour Party, this is its death knell, it will never win back its core vote with this nonsense.  This is the end, and nobody deserves it more.


Anne Marie Waters 


For Britain 

The NHS Race – Can You Speak Fast Enough?

Anne Marie Waters 

February 11th 2020 


This morning I read the most fascinating string of tweets on the account of Telegraph journalist Allison Pearson (@allisonpearson).  It’s something I haven’t previously been aware of, and reveals to us, yet again, the shocking state of the NHS – it’s even worse than I thought.

The tweets refer to NHS GP services.  People are sending messages to Pearson describing the speed at which their GP appointments must take place, and the apparent ‘rule’ that doctors will now only deal with one ailment at a time.

This isn’t medicine.

I last saw an NHS GP a couple of years ago, and I learned for myself that these services are not patient-centred.  This is all about getting people out the other side as fast as possible.  There is no real discussion, no inquiry as to general well-being, and you will be very lucky indeed to see the same doctor twice.

The tweets shared by Pearson however are genuinely shocking.  These are life and death situations.  For obvious reasons, I can’t vouch for the validity of any of these statements, but if I’m honest, I’d well believe them.

Here are some, beginning with the initial tweet from Pearson herself.

@allisonpearson Two friends in different parts of the country say their GP now limits patients to raising one ailment only. Surely it’s often the second or third “minor” twinge that helps make the diagnosis? This is dangerous.

@wendmyway Diagnosis of ovarian cancer is often involving swollen stomach, tiredness, bladder or bowel frequency, difficulty eating normal quantities, if those were limited to one it explains the nearly 70% death rate from ovarian cancer.

@mummyJo46 It’s been that way at our local surgery for a while. I’ve often thought that surely if they hear all of your ailments it may help them more accurately diagnose

@JeunesseLon We always had that – second ailment book a second appointment – they had to achieve 7 minute per patient target

@remindme2smile Ditto…exhibited symptoms of lymphoma (so we found out) but not spotted by any of the docs at my GP. Took a locum who I saw quite by chance to identify it. I owe him my life. All it took was a simple blood test.

@ChipsEgg  Same in ours. I even had a discussion with the doc that it is more efficient, saves time and admin, to discuss everything in one visit. Not interested. It’s all about getting patients through asap.

@peteharry23  After real horror stories from a number of friends , one of whom has terminal cancer due to late and misdiagnosis, I took out private medical insurance 2 months ago. No party is allowed to reform the NHS as it needs .

The final tweet from @peteharry23 is particularly interesting.  This is a person who has taken out private health insurance to avoid the NHS; the very reason the National Health Service was created was to ensure we didn’t have to pay for healthcare.  Now, people are paying for healthcare because the NHS isn’t working.

I’ll respectfully disagree with final point from pete, it’s not because parties aren’t allowed to reform the NHS, it’s because they simply don’t have the courage.  The NHS is sacred, and if you dare criticise it, left-wingers will go for the jugular.  Our politicians are terrified of left-wingers.

For Britain will keep the NHS, but not in its current form.  It isn’t working, and when it isn’t working, it must be fixed.  Part of the problem is people draining its money straight in to their own pockets. Virgin for example is making millions from the health service, and nothing has improved for patients – quite the opposite.

The top-heavy and completely unnecessary management and consultancy culture has turned the service in to a nice little earner for professional bureaucrats.  Millions are wasted on ‘diversity’ and other nonsensical political correctness that has nothing to do with healthcare.

The NHS can be reformed, of course it can, but it will take a party of genuine courage who will not play the political game, and will put the people first.

That party is here.  A party for the NHS, for health, and For Britain.


Anne Marie Waters 


For Britain 



MPs Spring in to Action

Anne Marie Waters 

February 10th 2020 


MPs are rarely as vocal as they’ve been for the last few days.  Some have stood up in Parliament to speak out, others have made television appeals, and 170 have gathered together to write to the Prime Minister to demand action.  What’s happened?  The Government is due to deport 50 offenders to Jamaica, so MPs have sprung in to action.

For Britain is clear that the vast majority of foreign offenders, particularly those who commit violent crime or are reasonably suspected of involvement in crimes such as rape, should be removed from the UK if they are not British citizens. That is our policy and it won’t change.

The details of the offenders to be deported aren’t known to me, therefore I will not comment on them.  However, what is notable is that while our MPs argue to keep convicted criminals inside the UK, they’ve said nothing at all about the record number of foreign criminals currently walking our streets.  I include Boris Johnson in this.

Johnson is clearly trying to look tough by pushing this deportation, but let’s not forget this is the same Boris Johnson that called for an amnesty for illegal immigrants; people who have also broken UK law.

What has Boris got to say about the record number of foreign criminals on our streets?  Nothing.  Where is the letter to the Prime Minister from 170 MPs regarding the obvious danger posed to the British public by this?  There is none.

The Daily Mail reported today that 7,300 foreign criminals are currently free on British streets.  These include killers, rapists, and class A drug dealers.  Since the start of the year, as many as 5 foreign criminals per day have been released from prison.  They are supposed to be deported, but this hasn’t happened in 1000s of cases.  They clearly pose a threat to the public, and yet, silence from MPs.

It really is rather obvious.  Our MPs care far more about people from other countries than about British people.  We’ve known this for a long time.

What we want is competence, justice, and a system that works.  Yes, people were unjustly deported during the Windrush scandal and this should not recur.  But the British people want to know why our MPs become so animated about foreign nationals, but we don’t hear a peep from them when our people are assaulted in the streets.

Political correctness utterly dominates our political scene, and the Tories are every bit as bad as Labour.  It’s “woke” to care about foreign nationals, and “racist” to care about our own… that message has been roundly reinforced by every MP jumping up and down about this issue while staying silent about the victims of crime.

For Britain will turn this around.  The real scandal isn’t rare deportations, the real scandal is the number of foreign criminals on our streets.


Anne Marie Waters


For Britain 

Boris’ Promise: PCs or SJWs?

Response to Boris Johnson stating an additional 20,000 PCs will be recruited.

By Andy Thomas

6th February 2020

Andy was a serving officer in a Northern Force for 25 years, uniform, Support Group, CID, Drugs and latterly Intel.

Housing officer for 10 yrs working ASB cases in various high crime estates.

Married with two children and mad England RUFC supporter!

Hats off to Boris…

A great soundbite, a fantastic promise and er……well…..a great soundbite. How are you going to turn this into something useful? How will you make any difference? 20,000 extra officers sounds, on paper, a lot. However, the 20,000 at best, merely returns officer-levels to the pre-austerity period or probably less..

Social media is now being filled with ‘passing-out’ photos by proud parents of the new officers. The determination on their faces are both touching and also strangely evocative. Mainly because we dinosaurs know full well the frustrations and disillusionments to come.

Most of us know that mere numbers will not change a single thing. You could make the number 40,000, 50,000… won’t make an ounce of difference to the society we have deliberately engineered and foisted on us by stealth.

The British public have had more than enough of cultural Marxism and the Emperor’s New Clothes World this has engendered. And why? Because it has failed miserable. The Police being forced to swallow the nonsense of Scarman and MacPherson. In 2019 the public want Gene Hunt – they’ve been lumbered with George Dixon and they’ve had enough!.

Boris purged the Party of Remainers, now he MUST purge the Home Office of the anti-Police/Left wing cadre there. If not, they will water down each and every reform you try to make about law and order. They will, of course, tell you otherwise. Already many of us can detect the whiff of house-training. Poor Teresa May was eaten alive by the cop-haters in the Home Office and turned her into the worst Home Secretary in history. Having Tess on a butty was a doddle.
Does the British public need another 20,000 Social Justice Warriors or minority political activists masquerading as Police Officers, preening, prancing and dancing and openly relishing their lack of impartiality? While their kids are being poisoned by drug dealers and subject to industrialised and organised rape. Or butchered in the streets in the name of ‘Multi-culturalism’?

Preening, prancing and dancing, of course, is great PR for the Police and why not? On the promotion stakes – Gold dust. As for Joe Public, who probably and rightly applaud ‘Diversity’ but may be more concerned about the return of their stolen lawnmower/bike/car. Or could be unhappy about the all- pervading smell of cannabis smoke everywhere. Because the Woke Generation think it is fab, groovy, harmless and will result in the end of ‘Gangsterism’.

What they really mean, of course, is that they don’t want the Old Bill paying unwelcome visits when they hold their Cocaine, Chablis and Quiche evenings in Islington. The fact that the urban mental health system is overflowing with Waynes, Waynettas and Shaniquas is not relevant.
Until the same institutions overflow with Hugos, Tamsins and Nigellas…..

Boris, how do you propose to recruit and train your street cleaners? Labour closed most of the Regional Training Centres. Where will you train your recruits – sorry ‘students’? And who will train them? It is well-known that (with the very odd unpopular exception), the vast majority of Police trainers were notorious street-dodgers on the career carousel. Whose ballistic upward career is dependent on avoiding REAL policework as much as possible. They’re mostly back in post, pushing the woke garbage forced on them by the Home Office via their acolytes in the ‘College Of Policing’ (College of Policing for God’s sake!)

Hint: – They call it ‘street-tainting’. At one time the name ‘Thief-taker’ was a name given by reputation with pride.
The SJWs now snigger at this title and use it as a term as abuse.

‘PC X….he’s only a thief-taker’.

This attitude pervades through Police Headquarters and even up to the Home Office.

How can Boris put right this obvious dichotomy? As a former proud street-cleaner I would respectfully offer up several strategies and tactics..

1) Get rid of Police Commissioners – useless expensive baggage. Exactly what have they achieved? Answers on a postcard….
2) Ramp up the pay of CPS lawyers – make sure only the best apply to be prosecutors as their first choice
3) Bin the Graduate Entry nonsense idea for Police Officers and in fact bin the National Police College – or whatever it calls itself
4) Bin Graduate entry to higher ranks – didn’t work in the 1930’s – won’t work now. Does the British public REALLY want failed supermarket managers running the area where they live.
5) Return proper pay grades.
6) STOP listening to people who call themselves ‘Doctor’ – a medieval scholastic moniker which induces people to think they know where to put a thermometer- whereas the reality it’s just another meaningless academic title.
7) Start building prison space for 200,000+ offenders and be prepared to keep most of them there.

1) Rule 1. Teach recruits the law and how to enforce it
2) There is NO rule 2
3) Rule 3 in case of confusion/debate/argument, Rule 1 applies
Will it work? Is Right On PC policing working?
You decide. When you hear the noise of someone sneaking around the back of your house at 3 am, who do you REALLY want to speed up and protect you…….It’s up to you. Do you want action, empathy and a report to Social Services because the offender is disadvantaged? Or the prevention of you and yours becoming another meaningless crime Stat? It’s THAT simple

Your call Boris

Our First Priority – Law and Order

Anne Marie Waters

February 6th 2020


It is fairly uncontroversial, or should be uncontroversial, for a government’s number one priority to be the safety and well-being of those who elect them.  One could make this assumption, but would not always be correct.  Today, in the United Kingdom, law and order has quite simply broken down; the law has become irrelevant.  Even the police ignore it.  It is a shocking reality.

For Britain’s primary promise to the British electorate is this – we will keep you safe, and we will do so by applying the law.  There will be no exceptions to this rule.  All British people, of whatever race, religion, sexuality or gender, will be equal in the eyes of the state and in the eyes of the law.  We are firm in our commitment to this fundamental democratic principle.

Law at present is sporadically applied as politicised police forces enforce it arbitrarily and on the basis of race, religion or sex.  Police also enforce the law in accordance with so-called ‘progressive’ ideals and in doing so, have trampled upon our freedom of speech.  For example, people have been arrested or threatened with arrest if they state openly that they do not believe people can change their sex.  This must end.

Furthermore, certain cultures and beliefs are given impunity, regardless of the seriousness of the crimes involved.  Female genital mutilation, forced marriage, honour violence, child marriage, and other horrific crimes are taking place across Britain while police and elected leaders do little to stop it; in effect therefore, allowing terrible crimes to occur.  This is evidenced most notoriously in the ‘grooming gang’ scandal that continues to blight our nation.

For Britain is committed to changing policing culture away from absurd political correctness and back to justice and order.

We will de-politicise and de-centralise the police, restore the authority of the law, and punish people for serious crimes.  We will reform our sexualised culture and reinforce the adult nature of sexuality.  We will raise the age of sexual consent to 18.

We will oblige police to prioritise violent crime and do away with the “hate” aspect of criminal offences.  All “hate speech” laws will be abolished.  The police and Crown Prosecution Service will be directly accountable to the public, to whom they will explain their decisions.  Early release, suspended sentencing, and the court system will be completely reformed; all with the safety of the British public as the first objective.

The British public is crying out for law and order.  The decent law-abiding taxpayer is confused at best, and distraught at worst, at the total breakdown of the social order that the law is intended to provide.

We will restore the law.  No exceptions.  As always, we will do so For Britain.


Anne Marie Waters


For Britain  

Streatham Attack: The Motivation is in the Koran

Anne Marie Waters

February 3rd 2020


“I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them”

“And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion is all for Allah” 

“Fight against them so that Allah will punish them by your hands and disgrace them and give you victory over them and heal the breasts of a believing people”

“Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth”

“O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination”

“O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness”

“Therefore listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them with the utmost strenuousness with it”

“Those who disbelieve follow falsehood, while those who believe follow the truth from their Lord… So, when you meet (fighting Jihad in Allah’s Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them”

“Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves” 

Gavin Boby, the infamous “Mosque Buster”, once told me that a person can open any page of the Koran, at random (he had tested it), and find condemnation of the unbeliever.  Every single page.  He’s right, test it for yourself.

The above verses are all taken from the Koran, the very book that devout Muslims believe to be the perfect, unchangeable, and unchallengeable word of God.  So seriously is the Koran taken that criticising it carries the death penalty in many Muslim countries, and can have fatal consequences even here in the UK (ask any British ex-Muslim if they feel safe enough to be open about their apostasy).

And yet, in the coming days, as the UK ponders its latest jihadist terror attack, these verses will not be examined or considered or discussed in any way.  They will be completely ignored as they always are.

Isn’t it possible, even probable, that a person who strongly and passionately believes that he ought to fight the unbeliever, will go out and fight the unbeliever?

Sudesh Amman thought he ought to fight the unbeliever (“smite at their necks”) and in Streatham on Sunday, he followed through.  Amman is the latest example of jihad running amok in the street with knives.  The last one was in London just 3 months ago, when Usman Khan murdered two people with a knife, and injured others.  He too was convinced he ought to fight the unbeliever.

Usman Khan and Sudesh Amman have something else in common as well; they were both in jail on terror offences and released early.  Reports today claim that Amman was freed only days ago, and that authorities had received warnings not to release him.

But they let him walk away freely anyway, because in the grand scheme of things, the safety of the British public is considered low on the list of priorities.  “Sensitivity” and “dialogue” and “interfaith” are all very high on the list however, and the British people stand no chance up against all that..

Priti Patel has given a weak “package of measures” response.  Not good enough.  “Measures” are nothing when nobody implements them.  I’ll also bet the “measures” pay no heed to the ideology behind these attacks, or in closing the borders to this ideology.  That won’t be addressed by the Tories any more now than it has been for the past 10 years.

That’s why we need to change the political landscape.  Labour is beyond redemption and the Tories need to be held to account.

All of the things that I warned about, that Tommy Robinson warned about, are playing out in front of us.  This isn’t going to go away, it will get worse and worse.  All over Europe.  We’ll get so used to it that we’ll forget that it’s new, that it’s imported, and that we can drive it out if we choose to.  But to do that, we have to vote for a party that will follow through.

We need to vote for a party that will do what needs to be done.  We need to vote For Britain.


Anne Marie Waters


For Britain 

2020 | We Go Again!

2nd Feb 2020

As Party Chair, I enter 2020 with a sense of excitement and anticipation. Brexit (although it may not be perfect) has finally happened. The country feels like it has taken a breath, and all of us can reflect on where we are at. Britain is now an independent nation again, free from the control of the EU monster. We all hope trade deals are going to be as good as possible, but Brexiteers craved sovereignty above all else, and we now are on an irreversible path to that.

For me, however, we can’t take our foot off the gas. UKIP and the Brexit Party have now effectively gone. And while Boris is being slapped on the back for getting Brexit through, he cannot be trusted on all the other big issues. The Tories have been in power for 10 years, and society has taken many steps backward in that time.

For Britain needs to be the political home for all the people who have concerns about our basic freedoms, including freedom of speech. People who worry about the fact that whilst EU immigration is falling, immigration from outside the EU is rising and how that is changing the fabric of our society. Islam continues to bully to get it’s own way and the left have enabled this religion to tighten it’s grip on the establishment.  Trans madness isn’t going away. Left wing indoctrination is on the rise in education, and animal welfare won’t improve under Boris as we continue to slaughter over 100 million animals a year without stunning. Last but not least, we have been proven right as the police admit they have been wilfully ignoring the mass rape of white girls across the country.

The de-platforming of Katie Hopkins, whilst not a surprise, is a reminder of the grave situation we are in. Katie has never incited violence, yet a group of left wing and muslim activists managed to call a meeting with Twitter to demand her right to speak be removed. They obliged without any pushback from our politicians or media. The story was published in the left wing press within minutes suggesting collaboration, and a hit job was placed online later in the day, so she had no right to reply. Katie was insulting a muslim couple who are in prison for plotting to behead her during a speech, but this was of course edited out so a one sided version of events could be presented to the world without right of reply. North Korea would be proud.

The only way we can change things is through political power. We have to win more council seats in May because that is the foundation to ultimately win parliamentary seats. UKIP didn’t manage this, and neither did the Brexit Party. But we will, as we have a strategy, all we ask is you back us in the long term.

If that sounds dull to you, then become an activist. We will lobby MPs to address the Stasi style tactics of the far left / Islamic activists. We need to make a noise so the mainstream media simply cannot ignore us. Help us with this. This is your party, we are representing all the people who crave a return to sanity. Yes, other groups will come and go, with figures who may strike a chord on a certain issue. But it isn’t an either / or. Keep supporting us by being  a member and let us get on with the serious business of delivering a plan to win us political power. People are jaded, I get that – but we can’t afford to be. We can’t afford for For Britain not to succeed, I am deadly serious.

It’s so urgent. So important.

If your friends, family, neighbours show concern about the direction of our nation, tell them to join. The bigger the party grows, the louder our voice. The left are terrified of us, it is why they lie about us constantly. They know a strong For Britain voice will resonate with millions. Stifling our voice and spreading lies are all they have.

We are launching a fighting fund for the May elections. Give what you can. Raise what you can in branch meetings. We also are launching a 20 for 2020 campaign in Feb – new members can join for £20 in this momentous year. Do what you can – speak to us if you are able to do more. Talk, encourage, educate and bring new people into our family.

The time is now, 2020 is the year that we kick on.

Happy Brexit Day!

Anne Marie Waters 

January 31st 2020 


Well, here it is.  The day we’ve been waiting for.  But before we get to the celebrations, let’s answer the critics.

It’s true, this isn’t the Brexit we wanted.  It isn’t a clean break, and Farage is right to say that Johnson’s deal is little different to May’s, but the British people made their voice heard in December, and that’s that.

People had had enough of the Brexit to-ing and fro-ing, and Boris knew it.  His entire general election campaign centred on three words: Get Brexit Done.

It worked.  The people wanted it over with, even if it wasn’t the Brexit they necessarily voted for.

My views on this are clear.  I don’t believe a clean break from the EU is genuinely possible for any European country.  It is a mammoth political and financial institution and region and it is right on our doorstep.  We must deal with it.

But now the cause for celebration.  The United Kingdom is taking an enormous stride away from the EU and its burdensome bureaucracy.  Control is coming back to the UK.

The glass is definitely half full!

I believe the EU will interfere in the life of nation-states for as long as there is an EU, but we have just made this undemocratic scam a lot weaker, and our success outside of it will inspire others to follow suit.

In the not-too-distant future, the EU could well be gone, and Europe a free continent again.  But for now, let’s celebrate this giant leap towards the restoration of the United Kingdom.

Happy Brexit Day Everyone!


Anne Marie Waters 


For Britain 


Grooming Gang Cover-Up: Now in Scotland

Anne Marie Waters

January 30th 2020


A ‘grooming gang’ consisting of around 55 people has been “taken down” in Scotland, and the case covered up by police.

According to the Scottish Sun, the gang was comprised of Kurdish, Afghani, Egyptian, Moroccan, Turkish, Pakistani and Iraqi men.  Needless to say, these are all Muslim countries, which means we cannot blame it on “Asians” or “Pakistanis”, despite the best efforts of both police and press to do so.

To add insult to injury, these men were all asylum seekers; offered a safe place to stay by the generosity of the Scottish people, and repaying this generosity by raping Scottish girls.  It’s a familiar story.

All over Europe, asylum seekers rape local women and girls with utter impunity.  Governments know this, but continue to welcome them to Europe regardless.  Authorities are therefore choosing to allow European women to be raped in order to accommodate the economic aspirations of Muslim men.  Rapists from the other side of the world are given priority over and above our own girls and women.  Can a betrayal be any greater than this?

Back in the UK, the rape gang in question is believed to have victimised at least 44 girls, and most of the rapists are still living in Scotland.

Operation Cerrar, which brought down the gang, was kept under wraps by police in Scotland, and only revealed via a Daily Express investigation.  When asked why this information was not released to the public, police replied; “We need to be very clear that we always carefully consider when and what information to release in relation to ongoing investigations to protect vulnerable victims and the integrity of the inquiry.”

Rubbish, and we all know it.

These rape gangs are protected, the truth concealed, and the victims betrayed, for the sole reason that the rapists are Muslims.  The reputation of their deeply misogynistic religion is prioritised.  The British people  are denied the truth about what our government is inflicting upon us, knowingly, via mass migration from the Muslim world.  Police are no longer interested in truth or justice, but in political posturing.  The police are protecting government policy at the expense of Britain’s daughters.

The only political party in the UK that will stand strong on this is For Britain.  This we know for sure.  We have devoted our energies to exposing the treachery of mass immigration, and bringing it to an end once and for all.

For Britain is clear: all who are reasonably suspected (yes, suspected) of involvement in grooming gangs will be thrown out of the UK permanently.  We will not risk British girls or women for the sake of foreign rapists and their economic prospects.

For absolute clarity, British girls are more important than immigrant rapists, and it’s shocking that we even have to say so.

The country is angry, and getting angrier. They have an option, they have a choice, they can join the party that really will fight this, or they can settle back and wait until their daughter is the next victim.

Stop this now.

Join us.


Anne Marie Waters


For Britain 


Policing Muslim Rape Gangs

By Mike Speakman, Law & Order Spokesman

28th January 2020

As a retired Deputy Chief Constable, I hang my head in shame at the emerging scandal which must be the worst and most damaging to the Police service in my lifetime. It seems that several Police forces and other public organisations have been complicit in ignoring and even covering up most blatant cases of rape and abuse, amounting to at least a neglect of duty at a corporate and individual level. Some individual officers may be criminally guilty and there may also be a corporate liability on some forces.

It is hard to keep track of all the forces involved, but it seems

South Yorkshire,

West Yorkshire,

Greater Manchester,

Thames Valley,

West Mercia,


West Midlands

have been a party to this stain on the integrity and trustworthiness of British policing. There are probably more exposures to come. Conscious decisions were taken not to investigate or pursue numerous allegations against gangs of Muslim men abusing young white and some Sikh girls. Overwhelming evidence is emerging of a consistent pattern in England and also recently in Scotland.

How has this happened?   I suggest there are several factors which have led to this situation.   In my day (I retired in 2000) Chief Constables were fiercely independent people, principally accountable to their local police committee. Policing was predominantly a local function and national government, whilst involved, was a secondary player. This has changed. Chief Officers had their own national association (ACPO) which coordinated and constructed policy in cooperation with government in the form of the Home office. The independence of Chief officers always sat uneasily with central government and over the years they have tried to curtail it. They have been successful. ACPO has been abolished and replaced with a government quango, the Police Chiefs Council.  They also took control of the Police College, the premier research and training national unit and restyled it the “College of Policing”. It is this unit that has produced amongst other things, the guidance on “Hate Crime recording” which is being challenged in court. The independence of Chief Constables has also been usurped by the creation of Police and Crime Commissioners. If you look at the job description of a Crime Commissioner, you will see that they are totally accountable to the Home office. Crime Commissioners are also political animals and introduced an unwelcome party-political element which was less evident in the former multi-party police authority.

It is no surprise that almost exclusively the Police Forces involved in this scandal are from Labour controlled areas. It has become evident in recent years of how dependent the Labour party has become on the Muslim bloc vote. There does not appear to be the will at a local level to tackle crime in the Muslim community. Indeed, in South Yorkshire they have had to bring in the National Crime Agency to do the investigation into the Muslim rape gangs. There are allegations that some local police officers were close to these gangs.

On top of this there is legacy of the McPherson report which branded the police service as institutionally racist. I personally never accepted this finding as it did not fit with my experience, but it seems to have a had a very damaging effect on police activity as it created a climate where any enforcement against ethnic minority groups, no matter how justified by their criminal activity was at risk of being called “racist” and could destroy an officers career. This damaging effect has pervaded the whole criminal justice system and we now have the situation where we have two legal systems, one of which favours minority groups, both in terms of conviction and punishment. This effect is not going away, we have some ethnic minority politicians who insist that that that arrest figures should reflect the population demographics, as if crime was uniformly distributed across the population, which it isn’t.

A further factor is the famous alleged Home Office Circular. There are claims that in 2008 the Home office published a circular which advised police forces as follows: ‘as far as these young girls who are being exploited in towns and cities, we believe they have made an informed choice about their sexual behaviour and therefore it is not for you police officers to get involved in.’”

All Home office circulars are numbered sequentially and almost always published online. I have never seen a copy of this circular and apart from its apparent clumsy language, it seems incredible that given its contentious nature that a copy has not been posted on social media by now. I am not sure it exists. However, if someone can produce a copy, I and many others would love to see it. Another reason I am dubious about its existence is that its actually dynamite. No one, not even the government can direct any police officer or Police Force to enforce or not enforce any laws. If such a circular existed, it would be invalid if not illegal and any Home Secretary who approved it would be misusing their office.   This doesn’t mean that there might not be some other form of communication of a less formal nature. I cannot understand how so many different police forces could come to such a similar approach to really serious criminal activity if it were not for some form of central “guidance”. I suspect there is something somewhere, but it is unlikely to be a Home Office Circular.

What about the last line of defence, the individual bobby? Most Bobbies I knew had a very strong sense of Justice and integrity. If a senior officer tried to dissuade them from arresting someone because they favoured them, the bobby would be likely to give two metaphorical, if not actual, fingers. We should be singing the praises of the Maggie Olivers of this world. This woman, a Greater Manchester Detective, sacrificed her career and home to defend the raped girls of Rochdale and has only recently been vindicated. Where are the other Maggie Olivers? The widespread extent of these cover ups across several police forces means there should be more. There should be thousands of Maggie Olivers and we should be encouraging and supporting them.

No one is getting a grip of this situation. It seems it is still going on and the media and establishment are desperate to conceal it from the public. It is a national scandal and embarrassment. If we will not enforce quite sound and sensible laws for fear of producing a racial backlash we have failed as a society and as a democracy. The oath of a Constable required that the law was enforced “without fear or favour”. Our leaders are both fearful and favouring Muslims. They try to disguise the problem by not identifying offenders or describing them as “Asian”. The media hide the issue, they are burying their heads in the sand. Is it any wonder that “paedophile hunting groups” have emerged? The police have failed us, and it is inevitable that outraged communities will take the initiative to fill the gap.

It’s very difficult to see how to get out of this. The government and establishment are part of the problem, so who could conduct a national enquiry, for that is what is needed. The judiciary are also part of the problem, I wouldn’t trust them to do the job with any integrity. The whole establishment is riddled with political correctness. We have a clash of cultures which no one will address.   Do we wait until the public become so incensed that they do something about it? There are signs that is already happening. We have dug a hole and need a way out. Who is strong enough to tackle it?

I do think some form of public enquiry is required. I do believe prosecutions against police officers are necessary and also against senior people in other organisations who have turned a blind eye. Education, NHS, Social services, Probation, Local Councils. We need a clear out of leaders who have let us down. Dare I say Drain the Swamp?

The question is who could we trust to do such an enquiry?

Small changes make a huge difference – Our transport policy

Anne Marie Waters 

January 25th 2020


Decent transport in a primary prerequisite for a functioning society.  We must be able to get around, cheaply and with ease.  Our goods and products must do the same, and transport is an area in which small smart changes will make a huge difference.

Firstly, there must be investment, and it must be wise.  HS2, the notoriously expensive new high speed line connecting London with Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds, is already projected to cost around double the initial costs stated.  You can read my article on this here.

What the north of England needs however is not high speed access to London, but high speed and reliable trains to connect northern towns and cities.  I regularly travel in the north of England and know only too well about delays, crowded carriages, and increased ticket costs.

For Britain will end HS2 and invest the money in a new system for the north.  This is crucial.  In fact, with the money saved by abandoning this project, we could revitalise the railways all over the UK.

Britain’s taxi service also needs reform, and national legislation to prevent licencing fraud.  For Britain is proposing a nationwide register of taxis, that will ensure uniformity of standards across the country.  Taxi drivers must live legally in the UK for at least 2 years and be able to provide a criminal background check for at least 10 years.  Illegal immigrants must be actively prevented from working in the taxi trade.

Furthermore, drivers must speak English and hold a licence from either the UK or the Republic of Ireland.

We also believe in making life easier for Britain’s millions of motorists.  Two hours free parking in town centres will encourage greater community engagement and revitalise the high street and small business.  It will also lessen the ever-increasing expenses born by drivers.  Speeding penalties will only be applied to drivers who go over the limit by more than 5 mph, and motorway speeds will be increased to 80 mph.

These small changes will give new life to transport in the UK.  They will cost little, in fact, we will make savings.  We will allow people to travel with greater ease and at lower costs.  It’s an essential change For Britain.


Anne Marie Waters


For Britain 

VIDEO: Small Changes Make a Huge Difference – Our Transport Policy


My Response to the Daily Record – by Kadeeja Adam

Kadeeja Adam

January 22nd 2020


Something called “The Daily Record” has recently published an article about us, portraying us as some kind of Nazi militia! If there was equal justice in the UK in 2020, this would be defamatory, but we know the legal establishment isn’t prepared to listen to our argument.

The article is jaw-dropping. Not only does it place pictures of Anne Marie Waters, the leader of For Britain, on the same page as a man with a machine gun standing in front of a swastika, it repeatedly implies that she is a racist or far right.

Stephen Stewart, the writer, has clearly made no effort at all to learn about For Britain, or what we actually stand for.

Such writers simply don’t understand that criticism of Islam is not racism. They are trapped in a mental cage. Any criticism levelled at people who happen to be non-white, is automatically believed to be related to race.

But Islam is a religion, an ideology – the ideology that I escaped from.

I am the Deputy Chair of For Britain, and I am honoured to take on this role because I know that we will stand up for the former Muslims who have been completely abandoned.

I have seen the sharia council system in the UK, I know how it treats women, because I was one of those women. I am of Pakistani ethnicity and I know how women are treated in Pakistan, also from first hand experience.

The justification for this mistreatment of women is always found in Islamic scripture, it is used as a whip to keep Muslim women in line.

The party I am proud to call my family fights for me and my daughter and the daughters of countless British Muslim women who are stuck behind closed doors, controlled and abused, while their daughters (and sons) look on.

Anne Marie Waters has supported Muslim girls, often on the run from their families, for many years. For Britain currently provides a refuge to ex-Muslims, and we will continue to reach out to more.

Mr Stewart may not be familiar with the plight of ex-Muslims in the UK, and I suspect he finds us rather inconvenient; people of Pakistani background who confirm some uncomfortable truths about Islam. One of those uncomfortable truths is that apostasy carries the death penalty, and many UK ex-Muslims live in fear that this sentence will be carried out.

Nissar Hussain, for example, was almost beaten to death, here in the UK, for leaving Islam. He was escorted from his home by police for his own safety, and now effectively lives in hiding.

When Nissar reached out for help to our political and religious leaders, he was met with silence and dismissal. Nobody would hear his case.

Political and religious leaders in the UK turn their backs on people like Nissar and I because they fear being critical of Islam. They fear this because “journalists” like Stephen Stewart cause them to fear it – labelling them Nazis if they speak out.

Nissar now acts as For Britain’s spokesman on Islam, because he also knows that this party is nothing like Mr Stewart describes.  These dishonest tactics (comparing us to neo-Nazis for example) mirror those used by Hope Not Hate when they leafleted against one of our candidates using doctored photographs.  Nissar had been cropped out of a picture taken at an event we held shortly before the election.  (Our candidate won, by the way).

It is the same depressing and familiar story. The horrific rape gangs, FGM, halal, or sharia law, all attempts to help the victims of these horrors are met with cries of “racist” from people like Stephen Stewart.

It may be easier for such people to dismiss things they don’t understand as bigotry or hate, but it would serve them better to find out the truth, instead of slandering and smearing innocent people in the press.

It tells us something significant about Mr Stewart’s integrity and work ethic. Printing false information is shameful. It is deeply immoral. It therefore tells us something about Mr Stewart’s morals as well.


Kadeeja Adam

Deputy Chair

For Britain

Northern England Needs Better Rail – HS2 Is NOT The Answer

Anne Marie Waters, Party Leader

January 20th 2020

The controversial HS2, a high speed rail linking London to Birmingham and Manchester is set to see costs go up to £106 bn.  The cost was set at £56 bn in 2015.

A report leaked to the Financial Times warned of the potential rise, and also recommended that the second phase of the project, Birmingham to Manchester and Leeds, be stalled “while experts look at whether conventional lines could help link Birmingham to Manchester and Leeds instead”.

Labour’s Andy Burnham, Mayor of Greater Manchester, said that to stop the northern phase of HS2 hints at preference to the south, while Northern England is left behind.

Burnham said: “To me that would be the same old story. London to Birmingham, money is no object, and then all the penny pinching is done in the North of England”.

However, Lord Berkeley, vice chairman of the review, said “I suspect that most of the people who like to use the trains around Manchester and Leeds would rather have a really good commuter service just like there is in London, rather than get to London half an hour quicker.”

That certainly sounds sensible to me.  I use trains in the north very frequently, and it needs vast improvement.  It is never too late to rethink, save money, and provide better transport for the people who need it.  Massive investment is essential, but it cannot be wasted.

So far, £7.4 bn has been spent, from an original budget of £32.7 bn.  The current budget is £55.6 bn and if this report is accurate, that will almost double.

There are billions of pounds at stake here, and billions would be saved if this project were scrapped.  It would cost far less to completely revitalise railways in the north, and give people an affordable service that can get them to where they need to be (preferably on time and without being squeezed on to a standing-room-only train every morning).

Public money is so easy to abuse and throw around, because the taxpayer will pick up the bill.  For Britain believes that the person who picks up the bill should have a voice, and what the people want is a system that works; they do not want to pour another £100 bn in to this, when that money could pay for so much more.

It’s time to scrap HS2!


Anne Marie Waters 


For Britain 


Photo by Johannes Plenio is licensed under CC0

Not “Asian” nor “Pakistani”: These rape gangs are Muslim

Anne Marie Waters 

January 17th 2020 


We can expect little better from the press.  Once again, the nation’s “journalists” are participating in (and encouraging) racial slurs in order to protect a religion, an ideology, from the scrutiny it so richly deserves.  A report this week revealed that Greater Manchester Police allowed known rapists of children to carry on raping children for fear of stoking up racial tension.  Once again, we are told the rapists are “Asian”.  They are not.  At least, that’s not the relevant characteristic. 

The press has been referring to Muslim rape gangs as “Asian” since it was shamed in to reporting on these some years ago (having been silent for decades).  While it may be true that the vast majority are comprised of Pakistanis, and Pakistan is in Asia, so is Japan, and China, and Thailand.  Yet there are no Japanese, Chinese, or Thai men involved in these gangs.  

In the UK, the word “Asian” refers to people whose origins lie in the Indian subcontinent.  Overwhelmingly it refers to people of Pakistani, Indian, or Bangladeshi background.  So to a British audience, the press is suggesting that these gangs include Hindus and Sikhs, but they do not.  Nor are there any Pakistani or Bangladeshi Christians involved. 

Even on the right of politics, these men are characterised incorrectly.  For example, Katie Hopkins has referred to this as a “Pakistani Muslim” problem.  But she’s only half right.  These rape gangs are only Pakistani in areas where the Muslim majority is Pakistani.  In Bristol, where the majority Muslim population is Somali, the rape gangs are also Somali.  

Across Europe, rape statistics are staggering.  In Norway’s capital, 100% of stranger rapes over a 5 year period were carried out by “non-Western immigrants”, and in Denmark, a shocking 10 out of every 12 such rapists are of immigrant background.  (I’ll bet a few pounds that we’re not talking about immigrants from Switzerland). 

The rapists enjoying free rein to destroy the lives of European women in Germany, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and elsewhere are not, on the whole, Pakistani, so we cannot consider this a Pakistani issue.  They largely stem from Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt, Algeria, Libya and Morocco.  None of these are Pakistan and not all of them are “Asian”.  These are countries encompassing a variety of cultures and ethnicities, but they do in fact have one thing in common.  They are all Muslim.  

Muslim men in the Muslim world are taught from birth to see women as inferior, and as such, they are free to treat women however they please.  It says so in the Koran itself.  Clearly.  So seriously is the Koran taken in these countries that in some, criticising it carries the death penalty.  What is written in the Koran is not taken lightly.  The Koran also tells Muslims that non-Muslims are vastly inferior.  Given this, what do we expect attitudes towards non-Muslim women to look like?  

We found out in Cologne, we found in Rotherham, we are finding out again and again, and still the religion of Islam avoids blame or even scrutiny.  The media, politicians, the commentator class, still insists on smearing an entire continent to shield the real culprit; a religion that teaches contempt for us, our culture, and certainly our women.  

The police didn’t prevent child rape in Greater Manchester because the rapists were Muslims.  They chose to allow girls to be brutally raped to protect the reputation of Muslims.  Meanwhile, the establishment, police and beyond, pursued “racism” at every turn.  

The message was clear, shut up about rape gangs or we’ll label you a racist and destroy your life.  They set a stark example with their relentless campaign of injustice against Tommy Robinson.  Labour led the way politically, turning a blind eye to the rape of girls in its own voting heartlands, and manipulating party selections to elevate Muslims to positions of local authority.  Labour is at it again this week; all of its leadership candidates have promised to bow down to the Muslim Council of Britain’s demands to further protect Islam from criticism. 

For Britain will throw these rapists in jail, 20 year minimum.  If they are not British citizens, we will throw them out of this country permanently.  No ifs or buts.  

But just as crucially, For Britain will give the British people the means to punish the rotten police who allow this and other atrocities to take place across our country. 

Shame on the police, shame on the press, and shame on the Labour Party and the treacherous establishment who continue to let this happen.  

Britain’s girls have been utterly betrayed in the most horrific way, we will end this mass rape and restore justice, and we’ll do it for the girls of Britain. 


Anne Marie Waters 


For Britain 

Responsible and Accountable – Our Policy on Government

Anne Marie Waters 

January 14th 2020


The response of our leaders to the Brexit referendum result taught us a stark lesson, but a valuable one. It revealed that the majority of MPs did not wish to keep their promise and withdraw from the European Union. They felt fully comfortable in doing this, showing that they take their seats in Parliament for granted. It goes without saying that this is intolerable, and as well as holding them to account at election time, the people of Britain need a means to protect their rights from the very Parliament currently assigned to protect them.

Freedom of speech is the prime example. Laws have been passed in recent years to limit the political expression of British citizens. We are not permitted, indeed it is a criminal offence, to engage in something called “hate”. Who determines what constitutes “hate” is a public sector and Government with a vested interest in preventing free speech by labelling the proposals of their opponents “hate”. It is a totalitarian tactic as old as totalitarianism itself.

Free speech must be restored in the United Kingdom.

For Britain is proposing a written and codified constitution for the United Kingdom; combined with a Constitutional court. This will strike down laws or overturn public sector decisions if they have had the effect of limiting the civil rights of the British people.

The ability for the citizen to hold the public sector to account is limited. It should be expanded. While local councillors are directly elected and therefore accountable to voters, local government chief executives are not elected and the people have no means to remove them. For Britain will change this. Senior local government executives, NHS executives, CPS, and police are simply not accountable enough to those whose lives they affect. For Britain will introduce the Public Sector Accountability Act to (inexpensively) allow citizens to a review of the duty of their local police chief (for example), provided those citizens can provide evidence of the failure of the police chief to carry out their public role.

Reform of the House of Lords must also be undertaken, starting with a total review of who is in there, what they do, and how much they cost. The role of the House of Lords requires a full public debate which For Britain will facilitate.

The Human Rights Act has long had a bad name, and deservedly so. It exists apparently to provide protection for our rights, but left-leaning judges have interpreted it not to protect our right to free speech for example, but to protect the rights of known criminals and terrorists from foreign climes, often at our expense. The Human Rights Act has to go, and be replaced by something that works; that actually protects the civil rights of the British people.

Electoral fraud is something we can deal with simply and immediately, all that is needed is the will. We must restore police numbers, end the “hate” emphasis, and turn the police around. They must treat electoral fraud seriously, and the CPS must prosecute to set a much needed example. Postal voting should be brought to an end, it’s a breeding ground of corruption.

Overall, there are serious flaws in how Britain is governed, and these can be turned around. The policies put forward by For Britain (see my video here for more details) are the policies that the people of Britain are crying out for.

We’ll get our message out there and we’ll turn the tide, back in the direction of what is best for the people of Britain.


Anne Marie Waters


For Britain





More Police Force Mergers?

By Mike Speakman, Policing  Spokesman

13th January 2020

There is a new initiative from the Police Chiefs Council to merge police forces. The last decades have seen an increasing centralisation of policing, geared more to satisfying central government objectives which often have little to do with real policing issues. I believe the government and civil service see the Police as a tool for social engineering rather than for law enforcement and this approach has skewed policing to the point where they will not attend a burglary but will knock on your door for “wrong think”.

Yes, mergers will reduce costs in the same way as closing hospitals, courts and police stations have reduced costs. All at the expense of making these services more remote from and increasing costs on Joe Public.

In policing the underlying issue is accountability, people identify with their local forces and the more remote they become, the weaker the relationship between police and public. The reputation of the police is probably at an all-time low and will be further damaged by more amalgamations. This is definitely the wrong way to go.

For Britain policy is to oppose any more force mergers.

Mike Speakman
Policing Spokesman
For Britain

We’ll Save the NHS!

Anne Marie Waters 

January 10th 2020


I have family in the Irish Republic, which doesn’t have an NHS. I know of countless cases, including in my own wider family, of people deciding not to go to the doctor because they are stuck in the middle: they’re not poor enough to qualify for state help, and they’re not well off enough to afford the kind of health insurance they may need. I’ve known of cases, reported in the media there, of people suffering with cancer or other serious illnesses, receiving letters from the debt collector whilst they are in the midst of their treatment.

We have no idea how lucky we are.

I don’t want to see the UK return to the society it was prior to the NHS. It was always the poorest who suffered most. In countries run on private health insurance only, people often can’t afford the premiums, or they do pay them dutifully, only to find their particular illness “isn’t covered”. Either way, it places an enormous strain on those who can least afford to bear it.

The NHS was created so that people no longer had to carry the burden of healthcare bills. It was provided to all who needed it and was funded by taxation. Healthcare is something we are all going to need, and it is something therefore many people would happily pay taxes for – provided those taxes aren’t wasted. But so much of them are, and governments won’t talk about it.

Waste is endemic in the health service. Report after report confirms that billions of taxpayers’ pounds are poured down the drain by unaccountable managers every year. Procurement costs make absolutely no sense, with hospital purchasing products at way above the market price, and health service management spending billions on “management consultants” to tell them how to do their jobs. It must end.

“Health tourism” (coming to the UK just to use the health service) costs the NHS around £2 billion per year, while people must pay extortionate parking charges to visit sick relatives.

Major private companies are furthermore making a fortune with NHS contracts. The service has seen no improvement, despite millions of public pounds being paid in to already wealthy pockets. Some MPs and members of the Lords are known to be voting on proposals to extend private entry to the NHS market, while themselves making profits from these sales. This is a recipe for corruption and I don’t believe the majority of British people would be happy with MPs profiting from our NHS taxes.

For Britain knows that things must change, but throwing more money at the problem isn’t going to solve it. We need new and accountable management, we need to target waste, we need to stop health tourism, and we must use public funds in the best interests of the public.

Hospitals are saddled with enormous debts, so finances must therefore alter in the future. Training of new nurses and doctors should be prioritised because we cannot continue to open our borders to more and more people to staff our services.

The NHS can’t continue to be a bottomless money pit. If it does, we will lose it. Only by genuine reform and spending re-prioritisation can we have our NHS.

For Britain can, and we will.


Anne Marie Waters


For Britain

WATCH: Anne Marie Waters – We’ll Save the NHS!

NHS Waiting Times “Unacceptable”

Anne Marie Waters

January 9th 2020

The Royal College of GPs has spoken out about delays now experienced by patients waiting to see a doctor. The College calls waiting times “unacceptable” and said that patients were often waiting as long as three weeks for an appointment.  Furthermore, doctors are under heavy workloads, which could mean that their service will suffer – putting patients at risk.

According to official figures reported by the BBC, there were just over 28,000 fully qualified full-time GPs in England as of September 2019. This is a down by 3.7% since September 2015.

Further figures reveal that there were 160.8 million GP appointments in the 12 months to November 2019, 450,000 more than the previous year.

Like nurses, doctors in the NHS are increasingly overworked as patient numbers go up, but doctor numbers go down.

The solution to the problems of the NHS, offered by every major party in British politics, is one thing – more money.  In the recent general election, both big parties promised just that, but as so often, there was no discussion of how the money will be spent.

For Britain knows that there are problems in the NHS that can’t be solved with more money.  Mismanagement and absurd procurement costs drain money from the health service.  This means that giving more and more cash to the NHS is simply throwing good money after bad.

The shortage of doctors is not being addressed for the longer term.  The Conservatives propose to make it easier to come to the UK if it is to work in the NHS, but more people coming here also means more patients for the already overburdened health service.

Furthermore, young Britons struggle to find training places in the NHS every year, why?  If more money is to be spent in the health sector, then training young British doctors and nurses must be a priority.

We must also admit and address the huge levels of immigration that are changing the face of NHS GP surgeries – personal care is limited as surgeries are simply too busy.

We must also act on “health tourism” (people coming to the UK to solely to use the health service) and find better use for the £2 billion it costs the NHS every year.  To do that, we need better management.

There must now be fresh thinking on how the health service is run.  More and more money will not solve the problems.  We must first acknowledge what the issues are, without fear of the usual accusations, and then apply common sense to solve them.  It really is as simple as that.


Anne Marie Waters 


For Britain 

Convicted of Patriotism? We Must Defend Free Speech

Frankie Rufolo 

January 9th 2020

Based Amy: Guilty of Patriotism

Amy Dalla Mura, a passionate Brexiteer, was recently sentenced to 28 days in prison for shouting at Anna Soubry. This should be a national outrage as it sets a dangerous precedent for freedom of speech in the UK.

Soubry is gone from Westminster, her uninspiring failure of a party humiliated and disbanded, but she has left a dangerous legacy of political censorship. At the beginning of 2019, her encounter with the anti-EU yellow-vest protesters had the mainstream media exaggerating to the point of hysterics, after she was unfortunate enough to be labelled “a Nazi.” There was no media outrage when the hustings in the Lewisham East by-election was shut down by far-left protesters determined to stop Anne Marie Waters from speaking, and all the candidates in attendance evacuated. Soubry’s hoo-ha in Parliament Square had the far-left and the anti-Brexit lobby blaming the social media presence that Tommy Robinson had at the time, as well as newspapers’ use of words such as “enemies,” “surrender” and “traitor.”

Saying “traitor” got Amy Dalla Mura (AKA Based Amy) imprisoned in December. She saw Soubry being interviewed – live on BBC Newsnight – and shouted at her. The word ‘traitor’ has been subject to criticism from the far left and EU advocates, arguing that this “toxic language” is causing ‘far right radicalisation’ and encouraging violence, with the murder of poor Jo Cox constantly hijacked by shameful MPs.

As well as “racist,” “fascist,” and “Nazi,” “incitement” is another term which has been overused and devalued to the point where it has become almost meaningless. As for the word ‘traitor’, why shouldn’t we level this accusation at the powerful? Free speech means we have to be able to shout it from the rooftops if we feel betrayed, and politicians have let us down. Let’s not hold back: if an MP lies, goes back on their promises, goes against the wishes of their constituents or the wider country, and votes on a fundamental issue that sells out this country to a foreign power, they’re not a nitwit, they’re not a silly billy. That MP is a dishonest, shameful, fat-faced, back-stabbing traitor!

Amy Dalla Mura never called for violence, never threatened to hurt Anna Soubry and was probably never within an arm’s reach her, yet still the MP shouted “get the police!”  It shows that someone like me or you can have the establishment scared, but the establishment’s reaction can be scarier still. By the time the “harassment” case was taken up in court, Amy Dalla Mura was a rival parliamentary election candidate in Anna Soubry’s constituency of Broxtowe. The Brexiteer’s bail restrictions meant she was banned from the entire constituency – excessive when it includes three towns – and prevented any mention of Soubry in Dalla Mura’s election literature. It could certainly be argued that the law was hindering the pro-Brexit candidate’s election campaign.

Despite this major setback, she still secured 432 votes, beating an obvious joke candidate and an independent. This court case not only shows Anna Soubry to be cowardly, but it perhaps raises concerns about political bias in our judiciary.

Amy Dalla Mura was found guilty of harassment and sentenced to 28 days in prison. Needless to say, this sets a particularly dangerous precedent. Whilst Marcus Meechan (AKA Count Dankula) was arrested, and after his conviction could have been imprisoned for what was clearly a joke on the internet, this lady has actually ended up behind bars.

Heckling politicians has been a tradition of working class protesters for centuries. Whilst it should be acknowledged that the likes of suffragettes were forced to take more extreme direct action because they didn’t have the vote, Brexit brought democracy itself into question. Remoaners have tried to prevent the result of our referendum being enacted, even though Leave won by more than a million votes, many seriously suggested that the elderly should be disenfranchised. Leavers felt their votes no longer meant anything at all. By standing up to MPs like Soubry, we’re only fighting back, democratically with words, not terror. It’s clear that the laws against harassment have to be reined in to protect free speech, as well as our right to protest – to boost morale, to raise awareness of issues, and make ourselves heard… to scream and shout and let it all out!

Having met Amy myself, I have commented on her dreadful situation before but I feel guilty about how long it has taken me to write this blog. Perhaps because I am guilty of what she has done, the crime of campaigning for Brexit!

On May 22nd, my friends and I turned up in Bedford Square to counter-protest a Labour Remain rally in Exeter. I called my local MP Ben Bradshaw a traitorous cow, exposed Lord Adonis as a racist and for a laugh, called Luke Sills, who represents St David’s ward on Exeter City Council, a soyboy. Am I guilty of harassment? Was my language toxic? Does calling a politician names amount to dangerous rhetoric? What about the politicians who speak out against our democratic vote?

On a footbridge in February last year, I was assaulted and threatened with death by someone who called me an “ignorant racist,” – an incident which was recorded by chance and quickly went viral. I still fight on and defend my opponents’ right to say something that I consider to be flat-out wrong, because I know they’ll expose their ignorance.

Boris Johnson has said nothing. Almost no one is defending this poor lady. I should maybe prepare to join Amy in the cells but for now, I’ll keep advocating for free speech, challenging the Labour and Tory hypocrites who speak of imaginary incitement and toxic language, and standing for election as a For Britain council candidate in May.

I’ve always enjoyed the experience and highly recommend it if you’re a member or are thinking of joining our exciting party.

You may feel you can’t commit to becoming a councillor, or fighting an election, but there are many other ways that you can help.

People must be able to vote for our party, as many as possible.  The 2020s could be another decade of political revolution, the option of that vote is needed!


Frankie Rufolo

For Britain Exeter



The Truth Behind The Australian Bush Fires

By Paul Burgess B.Sc., M.Sc., C. Eng, Spokesman for the Environment.

8th January 2020

I so wish there was no need for this but there is a need to start to provide a truthful news outlet to the mainstream media distortion.

I am currently in new Zealand sitting under an amber haze as a result of the bush fires in Australia so in this news article I am dealing with the truth behind those fires and just who is responsible for them.

Today there are many very brave firefighters battling the fires in Australia. There is no doubt the fires are huge and widespread.

The fire chiefs in Australia blamed climate change but this has baffled the bush fire experts. It seems to have also confused the actual fire fighters themselves. They published this:-

David Packham is an expert on bush fires and was frankly staggered by the ignorance of the fire chiefs.

You can listen to what he has to say – a link is posted at the end of this article. Much of what I write here comes from that source.

First what is this ‘fuel load’. The answer is very simple – it is the amount of combustable material on the ground. If you look at the videos of the fires spreading you will see they spread through the ground cover. Not always, but most of the time they pass the trees just charring them. Only intensive fires damage the trees. Fires are a natural occurrence in nature and without going into detail many plants rely on the occasional fire to propagate and stay healthy.

So why is this expert backed the actual fire fighters, claiming that this fuel load is the problem?

The answer is because green movement has pushed and pushed to introduce legislation that has now stopped frequent, controlled burning to reduce fuel load and they have succeeded. It is called ‘Green Tape’. Even before Europeans arrived the aborigines did controlled burning and always in the wet season. So these fires are simply down to lack of land management.

Look at what David Smith a resident fighting the stupidity of the ‘green tape’ has to say:-

“I have a small 60 acre property in central Vic and the local CFA told me I could not do any hazard reduction burning and they had no resources to supervise a burn. I will re-apply this winter when cooler heads might prevail. I have two fire pumps and a 1,000 ltr tank mounted on a pallet, plus a backpack, clothes and shovel. I was told not to do anything and a permit would not be approved. slashing and bulldozing are my only resources apart from poison and ploughing. All have draw backs, all are harmful one way or the other, most are too expensive. Very frustrated small holding farmer wanting to reduce fuel loads”

David Packham points to the well established science on this matter and what he has to say really make the cause crystal clear.

The science has been worked out. The fuel load is well understood and the limits of fire fighting control are equally well understood.

Hot, dry, windy conditions, ignition and fuel are needed to start a fire. Without the fuel you cannot start a fire. In central Australia you have very hot, dry and windy conditions but little to no fuel. It can take years to build up enough fuel to have a fire. 37% of the land area above the tropics in Australia burns every year.

Of those five factors for a fire to begin the only things humans can control is the fuel. Fuel was controlled well by the aborigines but they did not have the ‘green tape’ to cope with. They had frequent small fires that never reached the crown of the tree and it made the land very healthy. They also always left spaces for the wild animals to go to to, in order for the fire to pass. Insects and bugs simply bury themselves a bit and let the fire pass. Intensive fires however, burn all the carbon in the soil and kill animals by the hundreds of thousands. There is a huge difference between controlled burns and what is happening in Australia today.

The Ability to Control Bush Fires
A Douglas DC6, bulldozers or any other method of putting out brush fires can only do so, to a maximum of up to 3 to 4 megawatts of fire per metre. Ignore those units, just think of them as a number. Yet the fires in Victoria are 70 megawatts per metre and in New South Wales about 30 megawatts per metre – ten times greater than the limit of any fire fighting method. The only thing that can stop the fires is rain or running into the ocean! That is just a physical fact. There is only a show at fire fighting the fires are not controllable but those in charge do not want to admit it.

This fact is simple – you should never allow a fuel load to pass the point where, when on fire, it cannot be controlled. Australia like much of the western world has been brainwashed by a green movement that often does much more harm than good. It is no longer a science but a cult religion.

The green movement in Australia campaigned against these small, frequent
controlled fires. There is so much ‘green tape’ in the way that effective fire control is no longer possible.

We have a responsibility to care, not just for humans but for wildlife that has been slaughtered by their millions because of ignorance by those who claim that they have our interests at heart.

There is a history of ignoring these facts so the fire chiefs have to blame someone and who? Well, climate change is the scapegoat. Previous inquiries into massive bush fires wiping out towns and cities have concluded that the reason was simply too much fuel load and not enough controlled burning. Lessons have not been learnt. Top officials are not telling the truth. Climate change has nothing to do with it. The fuel load was allowed to build up pure and simple.

In response to fire chiefs stating climate change was the issue, David Packham stated:-

“I find it incredible that such dedicated intelligent people can talk so much stuff that is absolutely dangerously wrong.”
Had the fuel not been allowed to build up and had there been a proper land management policy carried out ,this tragedy could have been avoided.

If you wish to listen to an expert explain what I have just written, here is the podcast.

As the For Britain spokesman on Climate Change and the Environment my job is to keep up with the news and provide the truth behind the torrent of misinformation and simple lies that we are all subject to every day. It does not require degrees or anything other than common sense to appreciate the real truth behind a story. The fuel load should not have been allowed to build up pure and simple.

Paul Burgess B.Sc., M.Sc., C. Eng (retired)

The Low Expectations We Have Of Iran

 8th January 2020

Imagine for a moment that in Trump’s America, schools started their morning by chanting ‘death to Iran’.

There would rightly be a media uproar, and ‘the left’ would be apoplectic with rage.

For years, Iranian schools have demanded that pupils chant ‘death to America, Israel and Great Britain’ each day, brainwashing another generation to hate the West and Israel.

We don’t hear this in the current discourse though do we? Why do we have such low expectation of Islamic nations, that we just shrug our shoulders at this behaviour? It seems that any group of people in the West stating they are ‘against hate’ are merely against the West, and Western values, as they never seem to call out actual hate. Particularly religiously motivated hate, which this is.

Iran killed over 1,000 anti Government protestors recently – it’s own citizens, dumping bodies in the river like garbage. It imprisons women who remove their veil, and shot in the head a 16 year old girl for dancing in the street.

People are currently taking their side.

For many the focus of their anger is on America,  a country that has never, ever carried out these types of acts, and never would. There is absolutely no disadvantage in America to being a woman in 2020, but feminists spend all their time ranting about Trump, as their ‘sisters’ are beaten and sent to jail in Iran (or worse).

When Iranian General Mohammed Reza Naqdi stated earlier in 2019 that Iran will annihilate Israel, and threatened to attack American bases, should everyone assume these people just lie all the time? Do nothing, because they’re just crazy fanatics and they don’t actually mean it? Is that how the left and apologists view muslims? Liars that fantasise about genocide but won’t act it out?

Or should we believe them and act accordingly?

Not once has Corbyn denounced this sort of rhetoric from Iran, but he can’t wait to tweet his criticism of President Trump. He won’t call terrorists that kill Westerners ‘terrorists’. In any book, it makes him a traitor.

Boris Johnson is wholly correct not to share any information with him.

Iran has spent the last year boarding American ships, shooting down drones and attacking the US embassy. Neutralised terrorist Soleimani is known to be behind hundreds of American deaths, and atrocities across multiple regions. If Trump wanted war, he has had every opportunity to start one. He held back a strike in June 2019 so as not to risk the lives of any Iranian civilians, as the military couldn’t guarantee no causalities.

During the period of mourning for Soleimani, the Iranian Parliament broke out into chants of ‘Death to America’ (can you imagine that in Westminster!).

At what point to you take action?

Maybe some of those attacking America can provide a figure. How many people need to die before the looking away stops, allowing the deaths to continue?

To stage manage the funeral they kettled their own people into a tight space to make the crowd appear larger for the cameras, resulting in over 50 deaths in a tragic crush. There’s a complete lack of regard for human life, but it never gets called out. The news is just full of how bad America is, it is truly bizarre to see.

Yes, there are risks in striking back, but it is moral cowardice to abstain from doing the right thing. Leaders must take tough decisions, and as our closest ally, Britain should support and defend the US when it chooses to defend itself. We would expect (and receive) the same in return.

Both the far left and the far right seem angry, blaming Jews and offering a whole host of ridiculous anti-Semitic conspiracy theories for what is happening.  They criticise For Britain because we aren’t racists that subscribe to their warped world view. These people are abhorrent.

Soleimani’s daughter took to twitter asking for suicide jihadis to wreak revenge (what does it take to be banned from Twitter unless you are perceived as ‘on the right’?). Imams and Clerics call for American blood to the spilled, for death and for slaughter.

Where is the media questioning why Iranian religious figures aren’t calling for peace and unity? Why is all this being allowed to slide, whilst everything that happens is being twisted to attack Trump and America?

We don’t want wars. Nobody should. But we stand by our allies when they defend themselves and take action against monsters, because not to would be devastating for us all in the long run. They kill their own people because in that situation they are in a position of strength. It is illogical to suppose they wouldn’t do the same to sworn enemies if they built up the ability to do so.

End The Cruelty – Our Animal Welfare Policy

Anne Marie Waters 

January 6th 2020

Mahatma Gandhi once said that the greatness of a nation can be judged by the way its animals are treated. Britain has a long and proud tradition of kindness and respect towards animals, it was part of our greatness, but like this greatness generally, our kindness to animals is rapidly disappearing. For Britain intends to bring it back.

For Britain proposes a unique and comprehensive package of proposals to reform animal welfare in our country, and we know that we have widespread public support. Britain cares about animals, and so do we.

There is growing public disquiet for example about the terrible and unnecessarily cruel religious slaughter of farm animals, and we at For Britain demand that this is brought to an end. The law requires that animals are stunned to unconsciousness prior to slaughter, however an EU imposed religious exemption is in place – allowing both halal and kosher un-stunned slaughter to continue. This renders the law entirely meaningless. Why create a law to protect animals and then provide the very people who want to flout that law with an exemption? It makes no sense. It is political trickery.

For Britain will ban ALL un-stunned slaughter of animals without exception. We will remove the religious exemption and give the law its teeth. This is not a matter of religious oppression but of the protection of animals from unnecessary suffering. Animal welfare trumps religious belief.

Furthermore, we will take action to punish those guilty of the abuse and neglect of animals. Those found to be engaged in dog-fighting for example will be jailed or deported. There will be zero tolerance of cruelty.

We will end the experimentation on animals for cosmetics or commercial products, and severely restrict and regulate any medical testing until this can be phased out altogether.

We will transform dairy farming and end factory farming. We will incentivize farmers to return to organic and natural farming where cattle will roam freely and have access to their calves. We will also end the abhorrent practice of veal production. We will ban live exports and ensure that egg-laying hens roam freely and the caging of hens is brought to an end.

Animals are not items or objects, they are living sentient creatures who exhibit complex emotions and social practices. Animals clearly feel fear, joy, and attachment to each other. They are however entirely defenceless against human beings. The question therefore must be asked: how do we treat the defenceless? Do we act with mercy, or are we merciless? The answer determines who we are as people, and it’s an answer we should consider very carefully.

You can learn more about our unique animal policy here.

Anne Marie Waters


For Britain 

When Is It Right To Be Wrong?

By Paul Burgess B.Sc., M.Sc. C.Eng, Environment Spokesman

6th January 2020

Dr William Happer is a retired professor of physics from Princetown University  with over 200 published papers. He was an adviser to the USA government until vice president Gore cleansed the advisors of any different opinions to his own. He is probably the man who understands more about the CO2 molecule and its radiative behaviour than any man alive. He co-authored a book in 1982 on CO2 being a cause of global warming and how, because of feedback mechanism with water vapour, it would cause accelerated global warming. However he was wrong and openly admits he was wrong because the empirical data that followed did not tally with his claims. He is now a major climate change realist and I very much respect him.

He openly admits his wrong conclusions.  The fact he was wrong does not bother him one jot. He was pleased to have learnt more from the science and in taking this attitude is a true scientist. That is how most science worked, well that was until climate ‘science’ came along.

I learn, almost daily, of friends who dare not speak their views not just on climate change but on any subject for fear of losing their left wing friends. It is as if a censorship has settled on  the land and people are offended by any opinion that is even slightly to the right of Carl Marx. How this censorship came about is still a bit of a mystery to me. When I was at University, yes I was unusual at being to the right of the crowd, but this never led to anything but good robust debate without anyone taking offence.

My university years took place when the ‘consensus’ was of a coming ice age. Up until 1945, the year I was born, the earth had warmed and had just experienced the 1930’s which is the hottest decade on record or, at least it was until the data revisionists changed it. This warming was natural and CO2 levels were low. The warming was understood because we were coming out of a mini-ice age. Then as soon as I was born the climate began to cool. The cooling was against a background of rising CO2. By 1970 this worried scientists so much that they wrote to the president of the USA to inform him of their consensus asking him to prepare for the coming ice age. Thankfully, he ignored them.

The climate then taught the scientists a lesson because by the late 1970’s they were forced to change their minds and they switched to ‘global warming’. So warm periods occur at low CO2 levels as in the 1920’s ands 1930’s. Cooling periods occur when CO2 levels are rising as per the 1945 – 1970 period. This shows no  correlation between CO2 levels and warming but what about historic ice ages?

Well each ice age start when CO2 levels were high and end when  they are low. Each warming period begins when CO2 levels are low and ends when CO2 levels are high. How can this be? it is the exact opposite of what the propaganda is teaching us?

Well, let us suppose, just for a moment or so, that these climate changes are not related to CO2 levels and say some other cause like the natural cycles of the earth’s orbit, tilt and wobbles are the cause. Now add the simple fact that the atmosphere has only about 2% of the CO2 in it compared to the 98% in the oceans.  Then, as we know, the fact that water absorbs CO2 when it cools and gives it off when  it warms and an explanation  begins to emerge that explains it all.

The orbital effect cause cooling – the CO2 gets absorbed more into the oceans thus reducing the CO2 as the earth cools ending up the cooling period with low CO2 levels. Then with now low levels of CO2 the orbital effects cause warming and as the climate warms the oceans give off CO2 they raising the CO2 level ending up with high CO2 levels before the next cooling cycle starts. Does that sound a good explanation? Well, lets us check that out a bit more.

It takes a lot of energy to heat water and the volume of the oceans is incredibly high so when you have a warming period starting from low levels of CO2 as they always are the CO2 given off from the oceans would follow the warming because it is not the cause of it but the result of it. Guess what…..that is what happens the CO2 level increase follows the warming from about 600 years to over a thousand years. This is looking good…. but we need to see if those earth cycles match the historic ice age record.

Ok, so now let us plot those orbital cycles and compare them to the ice ages and warming periods and eureka they fit – there is an excellent correlation between them and the climate. These cycles were determined by a chap called Milankovic, a chap who started off as a civil engineer just like myself. There being no computers in his day, and as it needed decades of computations by a whole team of mathematicians, his problem was to recruit a team for such a thankless boring task. Well, back in those days clever women were a problem for society. There was simply no work for them so he recruited a whole gang of clever women and they set about doing the work , that took decades and it proved the correlation! Why, it seems is there always a clever women behind each clever man? Or in this case a whole gang of them? I will not even attempt to answer that question as i know which side my bread is buttered.

To make this story even stranger Milankovic was a prisoner of war at the time and was released, as was the officer code in those days, to do his work, provided he was honour bound not to resume hostilities towards his captors.

Restoring Sanity – Our Transgenderism Policy

Anne Marie Waters 

December 22nd 2019 


Every adult man and woman has the right to live their lives as they prefer. It’s our most fundamental liberty that we are able to choose our own destiny. The only restrictions on our liberties should be to prevent harm to others in the form of bodily harm, violation, or imposed servitude or containment, and more. In other words, our liberties should only be limited by the liberties of others.

Because I believe this, I believe in the right of adults to alter their genitals or other parts of their bodies, in an attempt to live life as the opposite sex. They say they do this because they believe they should have the body of the opposite sex, because they ‘feel’ like that sex on the inside. I have sympathy with people who struggle with this, and if they genuinely want to change their bodies, I have no right to interfere. But the matter of transgenderism is not as simple as this. It now encompasses harm to others, particularly to children.

Children are being introduced to a whole new fabricated “reality” of non-binary, pansexual, demisexual, and polysexual (to name just a few).  They are then encouraged to choose one of these genders and “identify” with it. The whole thing is incomprehensible.

Perhaps even more shockingly, children have been referred for medical intervention to alter their bodies at a young age. More than 800 children in the UK have been given ‘puberty blockers’ to halt their biological development, and this is funded by the NHS.

This effectively amounts to experimentation on children, it must be brought to an end.  This is why For Britain proposes that medical and surgical intervention to change sex be limited to adults.  People may of course wear whatever clothes they wish, act as they wish, wear their hair as they wish, but to prevent harm to children, we will ensure only adults can undertake major life changes such as the removal or alteration of their genitals.

Self-identification is another important element of the transgender debate.  This means a person simply needs to state that they are the opposite sex, and then be treated that way by the law.  What I and others are arguing here is not that “all transexuals are sexual predators”, but that sexual predators will exploit self-id to gain access to women’s dressing rooms, toilets etc, where they constitute a threat to women.  Therefore, we must prioritise the safety of women and disallow ‘transwomen’ accessing areas intended for women. For Britain therefore will ensure that self-ID never becomes law in the UK, and convicted sex offenders may never “identify” as a woman and gain access to women’s prisons or other areas intended for women.

Women’s sport is also off limits.  People who were born male may not compete in sporting contests intended for female competitors.  Full stop.

Finally, we will make sure that the police, and the judiciary, remember our fundamental right to freely express our opinions on this matter.  We have no right to threaten transgendered people in any way, and we do not.  What we are calling for is our right to disagree that transwomen are women or transmen are men.  Currently this legitimate belief has been pushed in to the realm of “hate speech”.  Police have arrested people, interviewed them under caution, warned them about their “thinking”, and told them what that thinking ought to be.

This is not a free country.

For Britain seeks to restore sanity, and this starts with restoring speech.  We will lead by example and have the courage to say openly what so many of us are thinking.  Join us.


Anne Marie Waters: Restoring sanity – Our transgender policy

Anne Marie Waters: Cash for child abuse – the Lib Dems’ exploitation of children


Barbara Wood: Why We Need For Britain’s Trans Policy

Why We Need For Britain’s Trans Policy

Barbara Wood

December 22nd 2019

In my speech on Freedom, Justice & Democracy at The For Britain Conference 2019, I spoke about the fear that many of us now feel when all we want to do is express an opinion. For those of you that haven’t seen the speech you can watch it here.

In the light of the transgender issue, it might come as a surprise to many people that we actually do have the right to not only express an opinion, even if it offends, but we have an equal right to refuse to express an opinion in which we do not believe. One is free both to believe and not to believe. For example, I do not believe that transwomen are women. I uphold the right of any individual to dress how they wish and call themselves what they wish but I will continue to believe that transwomen are men. Our freedom of expression rights are enshrined in law under Article 10 of the European convention on Human Rights which was incorporated into UK law via the Human Rights Act 1998.

However, as far as transgender activism is concerned, the level of fear is such that we’ve reached a stage where only one side is able to speak, no dissent allowed, the debate has been shut down. Speak out, express a different opinion and you put yourself at risk. And that creates fear which in turn shuts down freedom of speech.

The fact is that the police are knocking on doors, interviewing people under caution, recording a tweet or speech as a ‘hate crime’ while at the same time acknowledging that no crime has been committed. People are advised by the police to refrain from expressing political opinions on social media and told the police want to ‘check their thinking’. People are losing their jobs, academic careers are under threat. Whatever happened to Article 10 protections?

Fear is a great silencer so I am in awe of people who are fighting back. My speech mentioned people who have lost their jobs and I had in mind one particular case. There wasn’t the time to go into more detail at conference so I’d like to give some more background in this blog.

This case involves a researcher and tax-expert for a a non-profit think tank in the field of international development, whose contract was not renewed after complaints that her views made people feel ‘uncomfortable’. This is the article that got her fired, seems all very reasonable to me, what do you think?

She decided to fight, crowd funded for legal fees and raised over £60,000 in just a few days. Her case was heard at the Central London Employment Tribunal in front of Employment Judge James Tayler in November 2019. The claimant’s case was based on her belief that:

  • Sex is biologically immutable
  • There are only two sexes, male and female and this is a material reality
  • Men are adult males
  • Women are adult females

Judgement was given on December 18th 2019, and she lost. Interestingly, her crowd funding total has shot up since the judgement, an indication of the fury with which people have reacted to the judgement and the hope she will appeal. It now stands at £97,000+.

I made the comment in my speech that “it’s a very short step from loss of freedom of speech to compelled speech, but that is where we are heading. Recent events indicate we may have already arrived”. I think this judgement shows very clearly that we now live under a judicial system that compels speech. Some of the judge’s comments are just astonishing:

“The core of the Claimant’s belief is that sex is biologically immutable. There are only two sexes, male and female. She considers this is a material reality. Men are adult males. Women are adult females”. And “The Claimant’s position is that even if a trans woman has a Gender Recognition Certificate, she cannot honestly describe herself as a woman. That belief is not worthy of respect in a democratic society” (my emphasis).

I would suggest that this judgement shows contempt and disdain for a woman with an opinion. The judge didn’t like her ‘absolutist’ approach and it showed when he said: “The human rights balancing exercise goes against the Claimant because of the absolutist approach she adopts (my emphasis). What he’s really saying is ‘be a good girl and do as you’re told, if only you’d been kinder’. What about her dignity and intellectual integrity? Out the window, apparently, when the pronoun police come calling.

If you would like to read the full judgement it is here:

I noted he made reference to the Supreme Court ruling in Lee v Ashers which I referred to in my speech (Para. 91 in the judgement). I’m no lawyer, but even I can see a difference between what he is saying and what the Supreme Court said, and it centres on protecting people and protecting ideas. There’s a difference and from my reading he seems to be denying her the right to hold ideas and opinions, in favour of someone feeling hurt by the wrong pronoun. In this case the hurt parties say they are non-binary, which apparently means they identify as neither male or female, and use the pronouns ‘they/them’ instead of ‘he/him’.

So, the outcome is that if, in your opinion, no one can change sex, not only can you lose your job, but don’t bother taking your employer to an industrial tribunal because you will lose that as well.

Anne Marie and I recently had a great chat about the whole transgender issue and the podcast is here.

In my next blog, I’ll cover more examples of people fighting back against insanity, some are seeking judicial review of how current legislation is interpreted by the police and schools. Watch out for it.

Let’s make 2020 the year we start fighting back and reclaim our freedom of speech. It’s too precious to sit back and do nothing. I’m feeling braver than ever, who’s going to join me? You can email me on [email protected]

Barbara Wood 

Transgenderism Spokesperson

For Britain 

Confronting the Lies – Our Media Policy

Anne Marie Waters

December 21st 2019

When you have been on the receiving end of the mainstream media, it changes your life. It changes you because you learn firsthand just how corrupt public life can be. People often believe “there’s no smoke without fire”, they believe that the press simply isn’t allowed to lie – they are wrong, and it’s a hard life lesson to learn. The press openly and repeatedly lies. It does this unashamedly. I can’t recall the number of times I’ve taken part in interviews with journalists, only to read the resulting article and scarcely recognise it.

Journalists will take a single line and completely transform what was actually said. They’ll try to make you look and sound ridiculous and crass, they’ll find the worst possible photos, it’s public humiliation and it’s all based on lies. I’ve had journalists attempt to spill water on me, tell me to “calm down” while blocking the camera showing that I was perfectly calm, and I’ve had journalists imply that I agree with the “far right” label they affix to me. For example, a newspaper has reported that I intended to form a “far right” party to take the place of the BNP. This was written despite the fact that I have never said I want to take the place of the BNP, and I deny, with evidence, that I am far right. But the journalists say whatever they want to, and I have no right of reply.

In a demonstration of the weakening of the journalistic trade, reporters and writers no longer investigate or ask questions. They simply copy and paste from Wikipedia, or present the biased position of Hope Not Hate as fact. Hope Not Hate exist, and are paid, to fight “fascists”. When they can’t find real fascists, they invent them, and the press facilitates it.

So what is to be done?

For Britain has a refreshing and unique policy to make the media fair. In a free society, we should only impose regulation on the press for a justifiable reason, and any regulation must promote rather than restrict free speech. For this reason, For Britain proposes that all political candidates, during an election, are given a right of reply to any articles written about them. This is particularly the case when the coverage portrays the candidate in an unflattering light.

Furthermore, the right of reply must be of a similar length and prominence to the original article.  Candidates must be contacted about articles to be published about them, and there must be justification of any labels attached to that candidate.  If a journalist will call a candidate a “fascist” for example, they should explain what fascism is, and why or how the candidate meets that definition.  This should be based upon the candidate’s own words and not information from Hope Not Hate or a similar group.

It can never be deemed to be fair that a person can be smeared and slandered in the national press without right of reply.  All just-minded people can see this isn’t fair, and they will help us right that wrong.

Finally, we will fight any attempt to restrict our rights online.  The internet has provided unprecedented liberty in communication; everyone can make a website and have their voices heard.  It’s a profoundly important development in our public lives and it has given a platform that no government should be permitted to take away.

Social media is openly biased towards left-wing politics, and this must be confronted and opposed.  For Britain will take all opportunities to fight back against media tech, and the British people know the importance and the justice of this fight.

For Britain will put an end to the lies that are so poisoning our democracy.  Join us.


Anne Marie Waters


For Britain 

You can watch a video on this topic here.



The Worst of ‘Remain’

Frankie Rufolo

December 19th 2019


As soon as Boris Johnson’s victory was declared, the chattering classes of anti-Brexit politicians, journalists and commentators from the Remainstream media, as well as D-list celebrities among the Twitter mobs, repeated the lie that everyone who wants a real exit from the EU is a racist bigot. We’ve been told this was a win for the rich, the elite, and the establishment. Whilst the Tories are an old party who have improved nothing in their time in power, and are nothing to get excited about, it’s worth a reminder that big banks, big business, and the international corrupt establishment supported Remain (which had more than its fair share of bigots and racists as well). Here are a few examples of the worst of Remain:

 1: John McCain

Yes, Senator John McCain endorsed Remain in the referendum. Remember when the mainstream media praised this never-Trump Republican because he wasn’t racist to Barack Obama? Meaningless tripe. John McCain is known for saying “I hate the gooks.” So not all old bigots are Brexiteers. On top of that, having suffered the horrors of war himself in Vietnam, he inflicted them on others by voting for needless foreign intervention such as the Iraq War.

2: BAE Systems

This giant weapons dealer, that has been arming the Islamic tyrants of Saudi Arabia, endorsed Remain in 2016 when chairman Roger Carr wrote a letter to The Times. As well as assisting some of the worst human rights abusers on the planet to commit war crimes in the Middle East, this bloodstained business has been accused of ripping off poor developing countries in Africa, and investigated and fined by the Serious Fraud Office for corruption. Hopefully the arms manufacturer will be very disappointed when The For Britain Movement and our allies on the continent prevent the formation of an EU Army.

3: Shell

The Remoaners often argue that we need the EU for environmental protections, but some of the endorsements for Remain are not as green as anti-Brexit fanatics would like. This fossil fuel company is responsible for oil spills all over the world from the Gulf of Mexico to the River Niger. Like BAE systems, this pro-EU company has been accused of assisting human rights abuses, and collaborating in political executions in Nigeria.

4: Joko Widodo

You probably won’t have heard the name but this man is the president of Indonesia. Once praised as a “progressive” Islamic country, Indonesia’s human rights record has been getting worse and worse since this man took power; executing people for drug crimes and subjecting homosexuals and adulterers to corporal punishment in public. On a visit to Brussels to solidify Indonesian relations with the EU, this tyrant also said he’d like Britain to remain a member.

5: Richard B Spencer

Whilst it is true that the tiny and insignificant real far right in the UK was pretty much united behind Brexit, the story was quite different internationally. American alt-right leader Richard Spencer wrote an article in the lead-up to the referendum arguing that leaving the EU would not be good for Britain. He defended the EU regarding the migrant crisis, despite the fact that EU agreements like Schengen effectively meant that Merkel’s invitation to a million migrants affected the rest of the continent. He also that the EU had the potential to be “a white racial empire.”

6: Tony Blair

It’s no secret the former Labour Prime Minister has been trying to keep us in the EU. While he’s widely despised for starting an illegal war in Iraq, George Galloway’s film “The Killing$ of Tony Blair” exposes  his corporate sabotage of Britain’s public sector . Whilst the Remoaners are scaremongering about Donald Trump privatising the NHS, it was their criminal mastermind who got Richard Branson involved in the NHS, started the dodgy contracts with huge companies, and even privatised our airspace.

7: Richard Branson

This brings us on to Margaret Thatcher’s poster-boy who more recently has been donating to Gina Miller’s campaigns, as well as trying to sue the NHS because he can’t privatise it quickly enough. Conservative newspapers have been banned from sale on his trains, and Breitbart censored for those who use his broadband. Remoaners are frighteningly happy with the Orwellian Brave New Matrix direction our country is going,  but one thing that may inconvenience them is the fact he has previously been arrested for the tax fraud the EU is supposed to prevent. Other controversies include skimpy sexualised uniforms on female staff, and profiting from trips to Seaworld and other parks that keep dolphins and orcas in featureless tanks. It just shows that the elites care more about money than they do about freedom.

8: Change Nothing UK

Stopped laughing yet? This breakaway group from the UK’s political establishment, founded to fight for the EU’s political establishment, seems to have been pretty short lived. Perhaps there was potential for a new centrist party but this one was dropped as a baby in the European elections that should never have happened. You may struggle to remember but Chuka’s chums spent much of their campaign attacking Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party, trying to demonise them as racist. They probably should have been more careful not to throw bricks from within a glass house: The “Independent Group” got into a race row on the day they launched with former Labour MP Angela Smith appearing to describe ethnic minorities as “a funny tinge” on Politics Live (before issuing an apology). Then when these flashy neo-liberals unveiled their candidates, three of them were forced to step down for derogatory remarks such as “crazy black whore.” Not the best start. Now Anna Soubry is gone and they have no MPs, it looks like good riddance.

9: Xi Jinping

The president of China told David Cameron that he wanted to see “a united EU.” The Communist Party leader tends to support tyrannical super-states that suppress islands of democracy, as the brave and courageous people of Hong Kong know all too well. When the EU has the support of this dictator with an appalling human rights record, it casts doubt on the notion that Britain’s membership makes us any safer from dangerous superpowers – are we supposed to stop them by doing everything they want? It’s also somewhat ironic that the Leavers were demonised as racist and Nazis when the Remainer Jinping is erasing non-heterosexuals from the media, and condoning electric shock gay conversion therapy, whilst putting thousands of China’s Uighur Muslims in concentration camps – a travesty that looks like a build-up to genocide.

10: Anjem Choudary

Although Choudary couldn’t endorse either side because he sees voting as un-Islamic, he did say that he would prefer it if Britain remained in the EU because of European legislation that protects the so-called rights of terrorists. It should be no surprise, as Choudary has influenced countless Jihadis. Specifically, the EU protects against deportations, but the EU’s own agencies admit that the weakened internal borders are also enabling terrorists and human traffickers. When Theresa May said that Britain is safer in the EU, she was wrong. It’s time to take our country back and stamp out this Jihadist problem. Remoaners may cry about the ‘Breaking Point’ poster and push the “hate crime” hoax, but Anjem Choudary is the perfect face of hate for Remain.

Frankie Rufolo

For Britain Exeter

The Only Credible Party | Our Five Year Plan

16th December 2019

We now have 5 years of a Conservative government with a large majority. Brexit, even if not the pure form we would prefer, is happening and so it is time for the UK to start focussing on other issues. It is time for a patriotic party to fill the vacuum left by Labour.
Labour has been driven out of Scotland, and it can happen in the rest of the United Kingdom too.

To drive our collective agenda we must all come together behind one common sense and patriotic party which can represent us politically. I urge both UKIP and Brexit Party members and supporters who are now politically homeless to join For Britain without delay. I also urge Labour members who have lent a vote to Boris for Brexit to join us, as we have a plan that will deliver the change that we urgently need. Greens, Tories and everyone else, we represent important issues that transcend traditional politics, and I urge you to look at what we stand for and be part of our growing movement.

We have spent the last two years working incredibly hard to establish our party, battling the entire system to do it. We have been waiting for resolution on Brexit to detail our longer term plans. We acknowledge the national focus on Brexit, and the general political fatigue for other issues, but it hasn’t stopped us working away in the background to be ready for this moment.

Everything is in place.

Now is the time to tell you our strategy.

We have a 5 year plan, because success is about serious politics, not street marches or rallies, but changing things through the ballot box. This takes time and patience as history shows.

Last year we won Council seats, beating both the Tories and Labour in the process. We will build on this, standing more councillors and winning more seats, starting in May 2020. This is the cornerstone of our strategy.

We will use our influence to lobby this new Tory Government about dangerous and divisive extreme left wing and Islamic groups that attack our freedoms and poison our education system. If you were equally appalled by the students wishing death on Boris Johnson after his win, you will understand what we mean. A toxin has entered society, spreading anger and intolerance, and has been allowed to grow. For Britain will be doing everything we can to reverse this trend, and a large Tory majority means that we now have more options to make that happen. Get involved, your country depends on it.

As our local election successes increase, we will in parallel implement our plan for parliamentary seats, meaning by the time of the next election For Britain will not only be standing candidates, but standing candidates to win. We are working on that strategy now.

The biggest difference of all that we can make is having people inside Westminster.

We are established, and listed by the Electoral Commission as a ‘Major Political Party’. Don’t split support across fly-by-night groups and parties, get behind the one party that is serious about politics and will actually make the change across all the important issues. We can, we have the structure to do it, and we will.

Five years seems a long time away, but a credible plan needs to be built on solid foundations. In that five years we will be making a difference through activism nationally as well as community work locally, and we will be relentless in representing the issues we all care deeply about.

As an example, surveys show that the vast majority of Brits would ban the burka, yet the media and politicians try to convince you this is an extreme minority view. The vast majority of British (and European) countries wish to see immigration reduced, and are concerned about Islam and the effect on our culture. Again, you are made to feel extreme for holding these views that are in reality mainstream. This election showed again just how out of touch both the media and the political class are with the general public. We have our finger on the pulse of the country, because our party is made up of the normal people of the country. It’s our greatest strength.

The Tories won’t ban non-stun slaughter on their own, they need pressure and we are already running our campaigns to this end. And if the EU For Britain is now a member of the prestigious pan-European Identity & Democracy Partyis still your priority then know this – we believe the whole EU project must be brought down, and we won’t stop working with our European friends and allies in the Identity and Democracy Party to make this happen.

We will represent you, we know how you feel about the direction of this country. Read our manifesto, unite behind us and For Britain will be the party that deals with all the critical issues beyond Brexit.

The first step is joining, do it now and let’s all come together.

The time is now.

A Fairy Story

By Paul Burgess, Environment Spokesman

12th December 2019

Are you sitting comfortably?
My story is about two men, Paul and John sitting on a bench in a park. Paul is the dreamer of the two but occasionally comes up with a good idea, whilst John is much more down to earth.

Paul: “Looking at those nuisance birds John, I have a great idea on how to get rid of them pretty quickly. There will be less bird droppings and I hate all that flapping of wings. My idea will make landowners richer and the poor poorer because its about time somebody stuck up for the rich instead of the constant harping on about the poor. I reckon the government will support my invention and finance it. Sound good so far?”

John: “Sounds absurd. Not everyone objects to birds like you. I can see no benefit in getting rid of them.?”

Paul: ‘Well, besides birds, some people are scared of bats and insects. So as a bonus the idea will kill hundreds of thousands of bats a year and decimate migratory insect populations thereby cutting down the food supply for many life forms as well as threatening the survival of some. Does that make better sense to you? “

John: “Not really, OK for those who do not like flapping birds, bats and insects it gets rid of a lot but I do not think the idea can fly on what you have told me so far. There must be more to it?”

Paul: “Here is the clever bit. The idea will actually add to global CO2 output but we can fool folks into thinking that it reduces global CO2.
You see the public will not understand that the manufacture, transport, erection and maintenance of them will in practice produce more CO2 than they save but I am confident we can fool them on that. Further I think we can fool the government on it as well and so they will pay for it.”

John: “But the government only has the money that it takes from its people so will not the people be paying for this idea of yours?”

Paul: “John, you are spot on but the simple fact is that a large proportion of the public have never understood that. They think that there is government money.”

John: “OK, seems stupid to me, really stupid so what is this great idea of yours?

Paul: “Glad you asked. It is to construct large quantities of huge windmill type structures with blades turning at speeds of 150 m.p.h. so that even insects cannot avoid them never mind birds. Bats do not even have to touch them get killed because the pressure differences around the blades would cause their lungs to explode. Birds that are killed fall to the ground to be spotted by birds of prey who come to investigate and get the chop themselves.

We will call them wind farms under the guise that they generate green energy with the aim of reducing plant food in the atmosphere called CO2.

You see there is all this talk about reducing CO2 but nobody seems to realise that it was at a dangerously low levels for plants before mankind started pumping more in to the atmosphere. What’s more nobody has ever defined the right level of it but there is a drive to return it to pre-industrial drought levels and that is where my wind farm invention comes in. In practice of course my wind farms will produce more CO2 from building, transporting, erecting and maintaining them. This produces more CO2 than they save but we got away with that on solar panels so it should be easy to convince the public yet again that we are doing well for the planet.”

John: “I still do not get it. I can see benefits to those who want to kill birds, bats and insects. But past that what is the benefit to others of this crazy idea of yours?” I can see the benefits in increasing this plant food thing you call CO2 but that would not even be understood by most folks because they think we have to reduce it.

Paul: “Of course there are benefits to some. Landowners will be paid large sums of money for the installations on their land. The industry that produces them, contractors who erect them all gain from the idea. I accept that someone has to pay for all this because I feel the public would not want to voluntarily pay, we will have to convince the government to force it on them. So large subsidies as well as large increases in energy bills would be the way to go.”

John: “But that would mean that in effect the rich landowners would become richer at the expense of everyone else including the poorest. It would also mean that the higher energy bills would put our economy at a huge disadvantage in relation to the other countries that do not adopt your idea. No Paul, the idea seems bonkers to me and is not one of your best. I do not believe any sensible government would fall for it. For a start it would mean almost brain washing the entire public that this is the right way to go….”

Paul: “Hold on John.The government control the education of the children so they could brainwash the young arming them to lead the fight for the idea. We can even have teenagers striking from school in support of my idea. The mainstream media, I am sure will join in on the game.”

John: “Paul, give in, nobody and I mean nobody would fall for such a stupid idea that costs so much achieves nothing but harm to the environment and the looks of the country side whilst not even achieving what it pretends to achieve – a lowering of plant food in the atmosphere.

Then you have to set about brain washing the public let alone teaching fake science to kids in school. Just think about all those pylons and wires stretched across the country side let alone these huge bird chopping machines. The whole idea is so crazy that no modern, educated civilisation could fall for it.”

Paul: “Well I suppose it was a big ask and you are probably right. It was just an idea and thinking about it, yes, a stupid one that could never fly, it was just that I do not like birds flapping around. Thanks for bringing me down to earth John.

But I do have another idea based on my new mathematical model. In fact I have proven what causes global warming and they all have it wrong.”

John: “sighs…. What is that Paul?”

Paul: “I have modelled my data with warm weather and it fits perfectly, far better than any model out there today. It proves beyond any doubt what causes warm weather.

John: “And it is?”

Paul: “Ice cream John, every time sales increase it is hot weather, and every time they decrease the weather cools!.
Nobody seems to have noticed this before but it is a better fit than the CO2 models, which show we get ice ages when CO2 is high and warm periods when CO2 is low. What do you think John?

John…. John, where are you?”.

Left Wing Terrorism is the Real Threat

If you read the mainstream press or listen to the police you could be persuaded that so-called Far-Right terrorism is a growing and very specific menace facing British society. But is that true?

Well there are two major points to make on this. The first one is that the term Far-Right has been so widened, that it includes anyone essentially who isn’t on the Far-Left! If you have any objection whoever reasonable or moderate to mass immigration you will be labelled Far-Right. If you don’t believe that men should be competing in women’s sports, you’ll be labelled Far-Right. Or if you have any criticism at all or even any questions about Islam you will be labelled Far-Right. So no matter who you are if you have any objections to the mainstream rhetoric that you’re supposed to accept without question, you will be labelled Far-Right.

“You will then be unpersoned and have your rights taken away.”

So the term Far-Right is huge, it includes decent ordinary reasonable people who just object to the status quo so that’s far right and that’s point number one.

Point number two. I’m not suggesting that there is no Far-Right in the UK, there is as there is in every country. But the fact is, it’s tiny and it’s perilous. The chances of the real Far-Right coming to power anytime soon are well minimal at best. So what about Far-Left terrorism? Can the same be said for that?

Well first of all unlike Far-Right, the Far-Left isn’t labelled as such. You won’t hear the press call Jeremy Corbyn for example Far-Left or communist or even talk about communism at all. They’re not labelled Far-Left to start with. They’re certainly not labelled terrorists despite the evidence that members of the Labour Party and associated groups are engaging in political violence. Secondly the Far-Left, Antifa,  hope not hate, UAF, stand up to racism and all these various groups which i have personal experience of who engage in criminal activity and many of them are members of the Labour Party.

It’s not just Conservative voices, this applies to anyone regardless of political affiliation.

Recently on Twitter; George Galloway has been unable to secure venues as he’s standing in the general election in West Brom. According to him he’s unable to secure venues to hold public meetings because left-wing thugs associated with the Labour Party.

George Galloway Tweet

For Britain knows this of old tactic. We also know that women’s groups are having their events closed down. They’ve even been subject to bomb threats by hard left groups.

We need to replace the spineless disgraceful politicians who are allowing this country to turn from a democracy into one of left-wing mob rule join us and fight back!
Read my full article here:
Anne Marie Waters: Left Wing Terrorism is a Growing Menace

How We Freeze Immigration

Anne Marie Waters 

December 9th 2019 

In our unique immigration policy, For Britain proposes radical reform. We know that migration concerns many Britons, and we also know that an important aspect of this concern is culture, or way of life. Cultural compatibility is vital, but is ignored in mainstream politics. Instead we are told that we now live in a multicultural society, and that this is entirely positive.

We do not accept this, we know that multiculturalism has caused serious and long term damage to the rule of law, cohesion, and a unifying British identity.

Furthermore, immigration has simply been too high, running at 100,000s of people per year added to the population. This is affecting the economy, particularly the government’s welfare bill, in a variety of significant ways. Housing costs are high, NHS spaces are sparse, and people are sending their children to schools bus rides away. We can’t turn a blind eye to the realities of mass immigration any longer.

Contrary to their scripted rhetoric at election time, the Conservatives intend to make immigration to the UK even easier. Boris Johnson has encouraged amnesty for illegal immigrants and in doing so, sent a dangerous message to the world; that Britain’s immigration laws are meaningless and don’t need to be adhered to.

Labour would open the borders to unlimited numbers.

A significant element of our immigration policy is to freeze immigration for 5 years. This is not a gimmick, it can be done, and it is necessary. Decades of dysfunction in migration must be called to a halt, and we must know exactly where we stand. We are clear that this will not impact the economy as work visas will still be issued, but we are also clear that dependence on foreign workers will be reduced in the near future, as we will invest in Britons and improve their options in the jobs market.

So what do we mean by “freeze immigration”? Let’s start with looking at immigration and how it happens.


The highest number of visas issued is to those coming to work – current rules say they must have a job offer.  While For Britain understands the need for foreign workers, and we will issue temporary work visas for that reason (including during the 5 year freeze), what cannot be accepted is the hiring of foreign workers at the expense of Britons.  The NHS is a good example.  While we consistently hear that the NHS couldn’t survive without foreign workers, 80,000 British students were unable to secure nurse training places in 2014, despite the health service hiring thousands of foreign nurses.

We are told that young Britons don’t want to work, but how can this be true when so many are refused opportunities?  It isn’t true; it is an excuse for cheaper labour at the expense of young Britons.  It must end.

The NHS must be obliged to offer training places for both doctors and nurses to British citizens first.  If it cannot afford this training, then funding should be re-prioritised.  For example, if the billions spent on ‘health tourism’ were instead spent on training young Britons, there would be little medium to long term need for foreign workers.  Similarly, young British aspiring doctors struggle to find medical school places, even while there is a shortage of doctors; a shortage that is filled with temporary doctors from across the world.  This presents enormous problems in terms of language and cultural differences between medical staff and patients.


In 2016-2017, there were more than 400,000 foreign students in the UK.  Most of these students make enormous contributions to our education system and economy and are welcome.  However, there is evidence to suggest that illegal immigration by those pretending to be students is a specific and significant issue.  In 2012, the National Audit Office reported that 50,000 people had entered Britain illegally the previous year by pretending to be students. For Britain will prioritise bringing illegal immigration to an end, while continuing to welcome legitimate students from across the world who bring huge assets to our country and economy.

Indefinite Leave to Remain

Applications for indefinite leave to remain are open to family members of British citizens, or those settled in the UK.

For Britain proposes calling a halt to both indefinite leave to remain and the granting of British citizenship for a period of 5 years.  This is both a radical and effective proposal that will transform migration to this country.  Britain needs time to get a grip on the entirely chaotic immigration situation as it is today.

We also propose a freeze on the numbers of workers and students coming from outside the UK, in order to incentivise the creation of greater opportunities for Britons.


Immigration via marriage and family is enormously important and needs a considered political response.  We don’t seek a situation where British citizens with foreign husbands/wives cannot live in Britain, but there are elements of family migration that need frank discussion and urgent reform.

According to Migration Watch:

“as late as 2001, it was estimated that 60% of Pakistani and Bangladeshi marriages in Bradford were with a spouse from the country of origin”. 

A rule to ensure that marriages to spouses from outside the UK were not solely for the purpose of arranging admission to the UK (the Primary Purpose Rule), was abolished by Labour in 1997.  Migration Watch states that “Since the abolition of the rule, the number of fiancé(e)s and spouses admitted to the UK has increased significantly”. 

For Britain will re-instate the Primary Purpose Rule.

It was reported in late 2018 that forced marriage of young British-born girls (primarily) is being used to facilitate migration to the UK. This must end.

Another route of family migration to the UK is via the asylum system – therefore this too must be transformed.  The current rules state that families may join asylum seekers in the UK if they were separated at the time of seeking asylum.  Families of migrants who have been given asylum or 5 years’ humanitarian protection, but do not yet have British citizenship, may come here. This invites entire families to Britain, and given the rather loose definition of asylum seeker, it’s an even bigger concern.

For example, when the mass exodus from Syria towards Europe began, along with Syrians came people from all over Africa and the Middle East with no discernible grounds for asylum.  Even the European Union admitted that only 1 in 5 “asylum seekers” were actually coming from war-torn Syria.  Therefore, For Britain proposes reform of asylum.  Only those who meet the strict definition of asylum seeker should be considered, and only when local government can afford to house such asylum seekers.  Asylum will be temporary and family reunification will end.

Marriages that are not recognised by UK laws, such as polygamous or child marriages, should not be considered valid in the UK.  Cousin marriage should also be prohibited.

Following a period of 5 years, migration will re-open, but For Britain believes that the cultural compatibility of migrants must be considered.

If migration to Britain is necessary, it should only be available to those with similar cultural values.  Europe, the United States, Australia, New Zealand and other countries with similar cultural values should be prioritised.  But even with this in place, individuals from within those societies will also be scrutinised, and those found to actively reject British culture, or our majority way of life, will be refused.

In summary, For Britain will bring an end to mass immigration.  We do not accept ‘net migration’ figures as an appropriate indicator of migration problems in our country.  If, for example, 1 million Middle Eastern migrants were to enter Britain, and 1 millions Brits leave, that would equate to 0 ‘net migration’.  It would also equate to a replacement of the British people in Britain.  Therefore, ‘net migration’ targets will cease and our migration policy will aim to keep Britain British.


Anne Marie Waters


For Britain

Well done Hull branch!

Well done to our Hull members who attended last night’s BBC Question Time.

It is wonderful to see genuine people with genuine concerns grill the current crop of inept politicians on issues that the general public faces.

Hull members on BBC Question Time
Hull members on BBC Question Time

Hull is a great city full of real down to earth people, who are friendly and full of life and have always thought and acted independently, not suffering fools gladly.

The Hull Daily Mail captured the evening perfectly in this article. 

One of the areas they highlighted is the attitude of the Left wing activists and Cosmopolitan elite of cities such as London. Not only do their unpleasant tweets reveal many on the Left for the angry, petty and vindictive trolls they are. But that the Middle Class “luvvies” in these cosmopolitan areas care more about their own shallow lives than the life affecting issues that normal working class citizens face on a daily basis.

As soon as it became apparent that the audience wasn’t packed with pro-remain Corbyn worshippers, the snide remarks starting appearing on social media. These obnoxious individuals seem only to care about remaining in the EU at any cost (even democracy), no doubt to ensure that their favourite coffee shop can continue with what amounts to a slave labour force of Eastern Europeans. A Mocha Light Frappuccino to go is always high on the priority list.

The show and subsequent reaction is a good barometer of how out of touch these people are. They know nothing of the North or anything about the culture outside of their little bubble. I’m glad Hull was made the capital of culture and I’m glad the residents of Hull get the chance to show the rest of the country the unique character that makes Britain such a wonderful diverse country. These patriotic people valued sovereignty and freedom from the EU above all the Project Doom & Gloom thrown at them pre referendum.

So many politicians and so much of the media have failed to grasp this simple fact in over 3 years. A risk to economic growth is a price worth paying for long term independence. If Labour had understood this, maybe they wouldn’t be losing so much support. But they’ve shifted away from patriotic working class Brits. They’ve settled for other demographics and now look down their noses, so the truth is they will never understand it. Patriotism and pride in your own country is an alien concept to them.

For Britain plans to stand candidates in Hull in May and we would like our members to stand as candidates. Hull is a great city and we intend to show the rest of the country what Hull can do. If you are a member in Hull please continue to spread the word and keep up the good work.

Nick Ryder & The For Britain Team

Most UK supermarkets have made a commitment to end the sale of caged hen eggs by 2025

Supermarkets made a commitment to stop selling caged hen eggs by 2025.

For Britain believes this is not enough!

The onus must be on the government to create tougher animal welfare standards, rather than the foolish dreaming that corporations will ignore higher profits and do the humane thing.

Which companies are doing what?

Asda, Lidl, Aldi, Tesco, Morrisons and Iceland have set a 2025 deadline to stop selling eggs from caged hens. This is to permit a transition period to cage-free production. Many popular restaurant chains, including Frankie & Bennie’s, Café Rouge and Pizza Express, have also made cage free commitments.

However a leading farm animal welfare charity – Compassion in World Farming has discovered the UK’s three largest discount retailers – Poundland, B&M, and Home Bargains are still sourcing eggs from caged hens.

IMG: Farm Watch
CC 2.0 Licence

At a time when the market is shifting in the direction of greater animal welfare standards, it’s deeply disappointing that Poundland, B&M and Home Bargains continuing to source eggs this way.

Compassion has written to the retailers on a number of occasions over the last year. But all have failed to make a cage free commitment. Sixteen million laying hens within the UK are presently kept in cages. These animals will spend virtually their whole lives confined, with barely sufficient room to unfold their wings.

Research data has found that animal welfare is a significant concern for UK shoppers.  81% of the general public believing that cages in farming is a cruel practice. Over two-thirds feeling that this methodology of farming is outdated and needs to be replaced.

“These so called ‘low-cost’ eggs might appear to be a superb deal, however they come at a high price to the tens of millions of hens confined in cages.”

“We must guarantee there isn’t any market for caged eggs anywhere in Britain. Major UK food companies have already committed to a cage-free future – it’s high time for discount retailers to do the same.”

“Caged eggs on any retailer shelf will mean tens of millions of hens will continue to live a lifetime of distress, year after year.”

For Britain leading the way in political intervention

For Britain is dedicated to ending all caged fowl farming. Not waiting on companies to implement purchase guidance which could be dropped at the next board meeting.

For Britain looked at the impact such policies would have on  the agricultural industry in drafting it’s own commitments. As well as following reports produced by the BFREPA and other industry leaders in the field. We have concluded that ending the practice wouldn’t have an adverse affect on our agricultural industry. But rather a positive in levelling the playing field for farmers. In addition to actually increasing growth in the free range and barn hen markets.

Copyright Philip Halling and licensed for reuse below Inventive Commons Licence.

Shell egg export figures from HM Revenue and Customs for August 2019 were 109,000 cases, 67 per cent up in comparison with the same interval in 2018. While egg product exports were 13,000 cases, up 7.9 per cent in comparison with August 2018.

Recent trends in free range production are in keeping with a report produced in 2017 by Jason Gittins of ADAS on behalf on the BFREPA. A report which is now reflected within the latest trends. Suggesting this would not have the negative impacts some individuals had feared.


Retailers reported a gradual increase of their percentage share of free range egg gross sales over cage eggs in recent years. Forecasts for the longer term are mixed. Some suggested an increase of 10% or more.

If 5% free range growth is realised before 2025 by the six retailers who have announced a non-cage purchase policy, then the aggregate capital cost is likely to be around £58 million.  With an additional 112 houses (16,000 fowl capacity) being needed.

If it was a 10% free range growth forecast, the total capital cost increases to £86 million. With an additional 169 houses needed.

For a 15% increase, the equivalent figures are £122 million and 237 houses. These costs are easily off set in current purchase intention trends and export figures. As detailed in the latest HM Revenue reports of Shell eggs.

Girls Must Eat After Boys. Ofsted Grilled For Raising Issue.

Ofsted has come under fire by Government committee for trying to protect girls rights.

For Britain supports the actions and reports carried out by Ofsted with regards to the line of investigation taken with “all” schools, regardless of faith or those of a secular nature. Ofsted is committed to protecting children and ensuring they receive a balanced education in line with the modern values of Great Britain today.

We can empathise with those at Ofsted who feel like they are being attacked for highlighting wrong doing by certain communities. It is something we are accused of often. But highlighting abhorrent practices is never wrong and we will continue to call out those who reject values of decent British citizens.

Equalities Select Committee

Committee chairman Robert Halfon and Labour MP Ian Mearns raised concerns from Islamic pressure groups “that Ofsted is now delivering an anti-faith agenda”. The chairman also raised the issue of ‘questioning the wearing of the hijab’, and proposals that faith schools be inspected under the latest Education Inspection Framework. Also the inspection of unregistered faith classes and Sunday schools“.

For Britain is disappointed that the Government Equalities Select Committee embarked on this line of questioning. There is clear evidence from Ofsted that certain faith schools refuse to change their policies.

The Chairman also told MPs that Ofsted had been accused of “the repeated calling out of faith schools who have not met the standards, while at the same time apparently turning a blind eye to a quarter of state schools which are allegedly failing to deliver religious education, as required by law”.

Defection tactics

Again we see the usual tactics of trying to deflect criminal wrong doing by suggesting others also act inappropriately. It is good to see that Ofsted made it clear they treat all schools equally and are not focused on faith schools. The report viewing tools on the Ofsted website clearly show the same standards are used across all schools.

When Mr Tryl of Ofstead addressed the Equalities Select Committee, he stated that Ofsted inspectors are trying to stop discrimination. However inspectors feel “isolated” because ministers won’t support Ofsted’s findings.

Mr Tryl explained that his inspectors are going out and having to make some quite difficult judgements. Judgements that would potentially clash with religious freedoms.

He stated that Al-Hijrah school was imposing a “very strict gender segregation”. Which included “denying the female students to have their lunch until after the boys have had theirs”, along with “very discriminatory texts encouraging violence against women“.

The school has previously been criticised over its extreme policies of censoring textbooks that showed pictures of women’s knees. The policy mandates references to homosexuality to be blacked out and a photo of Hollywood actors be covered up.

The Equalities Act, does it mean anything?

For Britain stands beside Ofsted in welcoming the Court of Appeal’s ruling that gender segregation throughout the school was in breech of the Equalities Act 2010. The school has still not removed its segregation policy since the case ending in 2017.

Al-Hijra School Birmingham

Whilst Ofsted inspectors can shine a spotlight on these issues of segregation in their reviews, enforcement action falls to officers at the Department of Education. Which is clearly not happening. For Britain questions if the Equalities Act has any meaning when the Government chooses to ignore it when dealing with certain communities.

Mr Tryl informed MPs: “The Court of Appeal rightly said that schools needed a transition period where they were segregating and yet still we have not just Al-Hijrah but we have countless other schools, mixed schools which are segregating on the basis of sex.”

Mr Tryl went on to explain that many other Muslim schools were refusing to teach about sexual orientation issues.  That these findings had been recorded in reports that were sent to the Government. He explains that it is his inspectors that go out and highlight these issues for which they take a lot of unfair criticism over and then see no enforcement action take place after all their hard work.

For Britain supports all rights in line with British values

For Britain has made it clear that intolerant views must never be indulged. We support the right for ALL religious groups to teach their faith to children in their community. However we will not tolerate abhorrent teachings that go against the values we in Great Britain hold dear.

As stated in our Manifesto, For Britain will protect the rights of faith schools to teach their faith so long as criminal values are not taught. Ofsted has highlighted shocking findings in it’s reports. The current Government is choosing to not only ignore these finding but berate Ofsted for highlighting them. This needs to change and clearly the Labour and Conservative Parties are not the right choice to do this.

Left Wing Terrorism is a Growing Menace

Anne Marie Waters 

December 6th 2019 


If you read the mainstream press, it will attempt to persuade you that “far right” terrorism is a growing menace in Britain. The same press will then describe objection to mass migration, nation-state democracy, and Islamic radicalism as “far right”. On the other hand, Antifa, a group that Donald Trump has expressed support for banning, is routinely portrayed as “anti-racism”, and of course “anti-fascism”. No further explanation is needed; “far right” = bad, “anti-fascist” = good. The mainstream press, in other words, has taken sides with the left, as it almost always does.

So what is the truth? Given that the “far right” gets so much press condemnation, what about the far left?

Firstly, what do I mean by “far left”? At the moment, in the UK, I mean the Labour Party and its street minions. Whether members of Antifa, or a similar group, the crossover is there; Antifa members are also members of Labour, of Momentum, of Stand up to Racism, or another of a number of groups with similar virtuous sounding names that the press gladly repeats again and again. Their tactics amount to threats, intimidation, and thuggery. They behave in historical terms exactly as Hitler’s Brownshirts – closing down events and discussions that threatened his rise.  These hard left groups intend to do the same for Corbyn, and their reach is getting wider.

The characterisation is not difficult; the far left is open border, “progressive”, and fervently pro-Islam. It will shut down anyone who dares to swim against the tide of insanity that the far left promotes. If you have any objections to mass migration, however mild or reasonable, you will become a target. If you believe that women’s sport should be for women and not men, you will become a target. If you believe that Islam is less than an entirely pleasant religion of peace and tolerance, you will become a target. Now, more increasingly, if you pose any threat to Labour, you too will become a target.

George Galloway recently complained that venues had “blanked” him when he tried to secure public meetings for his current Parliamentary campaign in West Brom. He wrote on Twitter:

“Having been blanked and even refused school venues (as is our right under election law) now TWO pubs we’d been forced to book for election meetings have cancelled citing “complaints”. Labour are determined that @sandwellcouncil remains their “Rotten Borough”

I have very similar personal experience. When For Britain was first founded, we attempted to hold a public (i.e. publicly advertised) meeting in Plymouth. Two venues cancelled because of far left intimidation. This continued in Hartlepool at our next attempt, and has continued since. We must now hold our meetings, our conference, our events, in secret locations and must go to great lengths to make sure these aren’t leaked. This is no way for a party to operate. To add insult to injury, the far left then portrays For Britain as a party with secrets to hide, despite the fact it is they that force us in to hiding.

When I stood in a Parliamentary by-election in Lewisham East, I was forced to stay away from the only public hustings organised. Dozens of hard left activists had gathered outside the venue shouting hysterical lies about my character, and physically intimidating and even assaulting those in attendance. Police on the evening appeared to decide that I was the problem, not the dozens causing trouble, and it was me who was kept at bay. The group Stand Up To Racism was openly the ringleader at this event; a group headed by none other than Shadow Home Secretary Diane Abbott. Just imagine if the Tory Home Secretary was head of a group that closed down a hustings using intimidation and violence. We know the response of authorities would be very different.

Recently, I was hounded out of Whitechapel by an Antifa group, who bragged about their exploits on Twitter. Once again, no response from politicians and no arrests by police.

It doesn’t end here.

Far left activists are increasingly attacking both people and venues who won’t toe the line and agree with their radical politics. Women’s groups are among the victims.

Last year, a group called A Woman’s Place, which was formed to add the voice of silenced women to the transgender debate, wrote to Leeds City Council following its cancellation of a booking they’d made to hold a perfectly lawful discussion. In its letter, A Woman’s Place wrote:

“our meetings have been constantly subjected to intimidation and harassment from activists opposed to women’s voices being heard. These have included a bomb threat when we met in Hastings and aggressive protests from masked activists at other meetings. We are unable to announce the venue of our meetings in advance, to avoid activists bombarding the venue with threats and intimidation to force them to stop hosting the event”.

Police take little notice of these disruptions.  Actually, that’s not entirely true…

A group named Lesbians on Chairs was formed in 2018 following the outrageous removal, by police, of lesbian women from an event on transgenderism. One of the women, Dr Julia Long, was physically manhandled by police out of the venue. Their crime? Sitting on chairs (hence the rather clever name of the group). It seems then that police can be bothered to protect events and ensure they go ahead, it just depends on who is hosting it and what they have to say. Seven officers removed Long from the event as she was “causing disruption” by being a woman who believes that men are not women.

Inside the Labour Party, things are no better. That party is being purged of moderate voices. Stalwart MP Frank Field quit Labour in 2018 citing a culture of bullying and intimidation, and attempts to replace with MPs with those aligned with Corbyn’s hard left beliefs. Luciana Berger, a Jewish MP, also quit citing antisemitism. A new Labour Party is therefore emerging, one that will not tolerate the democratic process being extended to its opponents.

Terrorism is essentially the use of violence or the threat of violence for political means. Therefore, these hard left groups, Antifa and beyond, are engaged in acts of terrorism. But you’d never know this by reading the press, which continues to focus solely on the so-called “far right”. There is a far right in the UK, as there is everywhere, but it is tiny and has no power.

By contrast, left-wing terrorism is carried out by people who are very often members of the party comprising Her Majesty’s official opposition, and they carry out their criminal acts in the pursuit of the power of a potential Prime Minister.  There is nothing comparable on the far right.  Left wing terror is an imminent and genuine threat, but press and authorities look the other way.

For Britain will continue to fight this and continue to demand our rights. We are descending in to mob rule and our great democracy will be the ultimate victim.


Anne Marie Waters 


For Britain 

Lancashire Council bans “Non-Stun Slaughtered’ Meat for Schools, Branded ‘Islamophobic’

For Britain wishes to provide you with an update on a case that has been in and out of the news in NW England for some time. It is regarding a long battle over the supply of Halal food to schools in Lancashire (that finally ended in 2018 due to the Council’s action) but has some points for us to note. There is also a warning for the future.

The case saw multiple attempts by Muslim groups to exploit loopholes, setup boycotts and challenge the Council’s decision to ban non-stun slaughtered meat from schools in the Lancashire region.

After the first vote was ruled to have not met the legal requirements of having a public consultation, the authority was forced to open one in which Muslim pressure groups mobilised their community to respond to the consultation.

The Council still voted to cease supplying Halal meat from “some” animals killed without stunning, but the move was described as “discriminatory and Islamophobic” by local Muslim leaders.

It is reported that this is the first local authority within the UK to rule that meat provided to pupils by its supply chain must be from suppliers that stun animals prior to slaughter. This closes a loophole that Muslim groups have exploited to enable the supply of Halal meat, often unwittingly, on all pupils at schools within the region.

Under UK regulations, livestock should be shocked before slaughter – though there are religious exemptions for the Jewish and Muslim faiths.

Councillors at Lancashire County Council argued that un-stunned slaughter induced needless stress and suffering to the animals.


St Gregory’s Catholic Primary School. Chorley

The authority supplies school meals for 27 schools. From September, these schools will have the opportunity of ordering stunned meat from the council or seeking their own alternative suppliers of un-stunned Halal meat on a school by school basis as detailed in this PDF release of the change in policy.

Muslim opposition

However Muslim Labour opposition councillors Azhar Ali and Abdul Hamid Qureshi, chief executive of the Lancashire Council of Mosques, condemned the choice as “undemocratic and vastly discriminatory”. They allege animal welfare claims weren’t the main factor in this decision.

He stated the group was offended and upset, and that members would contemplate legal action and explore independent catering services for affected schools.

In a statement made on the move he said: “This is dictatorial – two-thirds of the people surveyed stated they didn’t desire a ban. It doesn’t matter what individuals say – the council leader had made up his mind!”. He claimed the choice was not based on animal welfare grounds, but as “…a political whip to kick individuals, particularly Muslims and Jews”.

Council Bosses

Cllr. Geoff Driver, leader of Lancashire council made the following statement. “There was a lot debate about what constitutes halal” and noted that in some international locations “all animals must be stunned before slaughter”.

Cllr G Driver
IMG: Councillors section of the Lancashire Council Website

A council spokesman stated the move was not a “ban” because faculties were free to cease using the Council catering service. They also stressed that its policy was completely based on animal-welfare grounds.

As much as 180 million chickens killed last 12 months with out efficient stunning.

When Mr Driver was asked why the choice was made in opposition from two in three respondents. he stated the session was not about whether or not to implement the policy. But rather for the impact it would have on animal welfare.

Mr Driver stated: “We accept a small number of schools might choose to make use of completely different suppliers for halal meat. Nevertheless, we hope that individuals perceive how the council has arrived at this determination, which has been taken solely on the grounds of animal welfare with due consideration for the impacts outlined within the responses to the proposed policy.”

“We want to work with the Lancashire Council of Mosques to make sure that the meals we provide to the affected faculties in future present a variety of nutritious choices which fulfil college students’ dietary needs and are acceptable to LCM, parents and governors.”

Another council spokesman stated: “Now we have excluded the stunning of poultry as a result of it [stunning] can kill the fowl earlier than it may be humanely slaughtered in accordance with halal and kosher requirements.”

Mr Qureshi stated that they had asked to sit down with council leaders to debate stunning processes. He stated his group would not compromise on its no-stun stance.

He also made the bizarre and unscientific claim. That stunning animals was “unhygienic” as blood is believed to hold illness so needs to be drained from a carcass.

Support from other groups

The Humanists UK group strongly backed the council’s position. Declaring that polling by the British Veterinary Affiliation revealed that 64 per cent of vets believed that welfare in the slaughter process, particularly a requirement for stunning, needs to be a priority.

In response to the move, the group stated: “By offering non-stunned meat in its faculties, Lancashire county council is arguably performing as an adjunct to a breach of the regulation, because the exemption from the requirement for animals to be stunned is explicitly solely ‘for the meals of Jews’ or ‘for the meals of Muslims’, and some meat would be eaten by pupils not from these communities”.

For Britain reached out to Mr Driver for comment on this story and he replied with the following:

Thank you for your e-mail.

The reason for LCC ceasing to provide meat to any of our establishments unless the animal was stunned before it was slaughtered is easily expressed. A majority of council members believes that it is cruel and barbaric to slaughter an animal whilst it is conscious and modern methods of stunning can guarantee that the animal is still alive (but unconscious) at the point of slaughter which should comply with religious requirements.

That ban remains in force and will do so whilst I remain as leader of the council but we have to keep this subject before the electorate because it is a fact of law that no council can commit its successor.


Geoff Driver

We applaud Mr Drivers stance and wish him every success in this issue. But it is clear that Labour opposition would reverse this policy the moment they gain a majority. Which is why we ask you, our readers to share this story with family and friends in the Lancashire area. Labour cannot be allowed to win the upcoming election this month.


Nick Ryder

The Greens and animal welfare

The Greens and animal welfare

Yesterday I published a blog about Jonathan Barclay, the co-leader of the Green Party. He said on radio that he would ban halal slaughter. I even wrote in my blog; “Good for him”.

Well I take it all back, because unsurprisingly he has now apologised for the deep hurt feelings that he has caused.

If anyone thinks I would ever apologise for defending animals think again, not in a million years! Now the Greens animal welfare policy on halal is to label it and they put this in with their animal welfare policy. But this is not an animal welfare policy labelling it is is achieves absolutely nothing for the animal. It’s a cop-out! A cowardly political trickery cop-out policy.

The animal doesn’t care if it’s labelled or not. The animal is still going to be tortured to death. The label isn’t going to make that any easier and I wonder how many animals were tortured to death while Jonathan Bartley was apologising for defending them? This is animal welfare. It is a huge issue in this country and politicians sit up and take notice they make all the right noises or at least they do at a convenient time to a convenient audience during election periods.

When we started For Britain, my policy was to end non-stunned slaughter. For as long as I am active in politics my policy will be to end non-stunned slaughter!

I’m not concerned about people’s hurt feelings, I’m concerned about the animals being tortured to death. I will stand my ground on this for good! There is never ever going to be any bending from For Britain on this and our animal welfare policy isn’t just about halal or kosher. Read it and see for yourself.

For Britain animal welfare policy




Our Policy on Islam & London Bridge Attack

Our Policy on Islam

Over the coming weeks I’m going to be taking you through in some detail this the for Britain manifesto for 2020.

Now given that we have just been subjected to yet another Islamic terror attack where two people were murdered a few days ago in London, I want to start by talking about a policy that makes this party unique. That shows who we are our courage our strength and our determination to defend British culture and that issue is of course Islam.

Now others will talk about lack of police, they’ll talk about sentencing and and letting people out early and these are all pertinent points. But they do not address the ideology behind these attacks both labour and the Conservatives have turned Britain into a country where twenty-three thousand known jihadis are walking our streets. More importantly the borders are open and will stay open to the same countries that brought 23,000 jihadis to Britain. It’s insanity and no one is discussing this in terms of immigration either so immigration will be up next.

Anne Marie Waters: The Leaders’ Debate and London Bridge

Huge scale of terror threat revealed: UK home to 23,000 jihadists


Halal and Muslim victimhood

Anne Marie Waters 

3rd December 2019 


Labour can always be depended upon to defend the indefensible. Birmingham Labour MP Khalid Mahmood has accused the Green Party’s co-leader Jonathan Bartley of “Muslim bashing” because he expressed sympathy for animals who are tortured to death in the name of medieval superstition and bloodthirst, i.e. halal slaughter.

For those who aren’t aware, halal means torture for innocent and defenceless animals. It means animals are not stunned to unconsciousness (despite the propaganda that says they are, they are not) prior to slaughter. They die in pain and in terror and if you object to this, you’ll be the bad guy.

I have been passionate about animals all of my life. I have deep sympathy and compassion for them, and cruelty towards the defenceless is what the word ‘evil’ truly means in my view.

I understand the food chain. I understand that death is part of life, that animals hunt and eat each other, and I am not, and never have, advocated the end of meat production. But this, this is different. This is cruel and completely unnecessary and I would ban it in an instant.

My party’s policy is to ban all un-stunned slaughter, including Kosher.  It’s the animal that matters, not religion.  Religious communities have many times changed their traditions, and they can do it again now.

Khaled Mahmood however doesn’t believe that I, or Jonathan Bartley, are actually motivated by concern for animals. He can read our minds apparently. Mahmood did what some Muslim loudmouth always does when there’s a complaint about the many disgusting practices of this religion; he played the victim. He said “This is nothing to do with the green agenda. This is purely to do with scapegoating the Muslim community.” What remarkable insight. I’m fairly certain he doesn’t know the inner thoughts of Mr Bartley, but he’ll make this assertion anyway, as if it’s a fact.

Mr Bartley, or myself, have no ability to effectively respond, because our actual views are dismissed and we’re told what we really think by someone who knows nothing about us.  What we say doesn’t matter, because Mahmood knows better. This is the beauty of this despicable devious victimhood.

The implication of racism is there of course (it doesn’t need to be named), as well as a nod to the myth of Islamophobia. This victimhood turns reality on its head; the person standing up for defenceless animals becomes the immoral actor, while the person defending the torture of defenceless animals becomes the moral. It’s a complete inversion of morality.

The Greens are a weak party on this, it is not their policy to ban halal or Kosher, so I must admit I reluctantly admire Mr Bartley for telling Nicky Campbell on radio that yes, he would personally ban halal. Good for him.

I do not know if he has backtracked on this, but I have no doubt that millions agree with him, and they are afraid to speak out. They are afraid to speak out because people like Mahmood will implicitly accuse them of bigotry. Meanwhile, millions of animals are tortured to death.

For Britain would ban both halal and Kosher, but we’re also fully aware that British Jews have made no attempts to impose Kosher on the whole of society, and the Kosher market is relatively small. Halal, on the other hand, is served in schools, hospitals, and across the public sector. If you object, you know what will happen.

For Britain is currently campaigning for a ban on all un-stunned slaughter. You can find a variety of videos on our YouTube channel and further information on our site

Animals have no voice, let’s give them one.

Join us.


Anne Marie Waters


For Britain



The Leaders’ Debate and London Bridge

Anne Marie Waters, Party Leader

December 2nd 2019 

Nigel Farage is in a sticky situation. The leaders’ debate that took place on December 1st proved this. Farage spent much of the debate criticising the Conservatives, despite stating only weeks ago that he was standing down more than 300 of his candidates in favour of the Conservatives; yet more inconsistency and lack of clarity from our politicians. Farage however was aiming to win the points on Islam. In the opening question about how our leaders intend to keep us safe in the wake of the latest Islamic terror attack in London, Farage was the only one to mention jihad. However, those of us who are acutely aware of Farage’s record on this issue, know that he is playing the game for the sake of the game. In other words, saying something controversial at a convenient time, but backtracking on it when the time is less convenient. It is called ‘playing to the gallery’ and it is cheap political trickery. Farage is absolutely happy to label other people racists, just so he can take the “jihad” points for himself. But cheap politics has a way of revealing itself, and it will reveal itself once again. Only For Britain is consistent on Islam. Only For Britain has maintained its courage, even while under fire from Farage, and as we go forward, the British public will increasingly seek this courage and consistency – For Britain will never bend or break on this issue.

With this in mind, now is a pertinent time to remind readers of our robust and unique policy on Islam. We are experiencing these terror attacks because our leaders have been weak on this issue. Both the Conservatives and Labour have turned Britain in to a country where 23,000 jihadis walk our streets. Crucially, both parties still allow, and will continue to allow, mass immigration from the same countries that provided us with 23,000 jihadis. It is absolute madness, and nobody, including Farage, dares to address it.

For Britain has the most robust policy on immigration, we must stop people coming here from countries with large populations intent on doing us harm. But that’s not the end of the matter; we must also deal with the problems already here. That will not be easy, but it can be done. All that is required is a reversal of our weakness in the face of Islamic terror – weakness no better demonstrated than in our refusal to name the problem.

The problem is in the scriptures of Islam itself. Until we acknowledge that, we are condemned to a fate of burying our heads in the sand while more and more people are murdered, raped, threatened, or have their free speech curtailed.

For Britain will stand firm. We state clearly that the problematic aspects of Islam will be opposed. We will not allow Islamic doctrine to run roughshod over our rights. Muslims are free to be Muslims, but only insofar as their religion does not conflict with the law. When it does, the law wins. This message must be repeated and repeated until it is understood.

Words however are not enough. We must take tough action, and we must stick to our plans irrespective of how many times we are labeled racist or Islamophobic. Our policies of tough action include:

  • Close sharia tribunals
  • Ban the burqa
  • Close mosques where child marriage is performed or the incitement of violence is preached
  • Deport non-British members of ‘grooming gangs’ and apply penalties of at least 20 years in prison for others
  • Ban halal slaughter
  • Support ex-Muslims loudly and vocally and highlight the threats and violence they face in the UK
  • Do not allow those in child or polygamous marriages to live in the United Kingdom
  • Deport known jihadis who are not British citizens
  • Deport those convicted of female genital mutilation and remove the evidentiary burden from the victim
  • Ban madrassas
  • Hold a public inquiry in to the teachings of Islam

This is just the beginning, but if each of the above were applied, the entire culture of the UK would change for the better. The UK would show itself as a strong country, unwilling to tolerate medievalism. It will also make us safer by removing and punishing those intent on destroying our society and civilisation. It will provide an unequivocal defence of Britain, its culture and its people.

Only For Britain has the courage to go forward and implement the tough policies that are needed. Our strength will grow greater and greater as the British people become aware of this. We will make history and turn the tide that will otherwise envelope us.

Join us now.

Anne Marie Waters


For Britain

Terrorist on a tag

By Paul Ellis, Legal Officer

30th November 2019

Yesterday’s terror attack on London Bridge brought us images that are now depressingly familiar: Londoners and tourists attacked by a knife wielding jihadi, tales of heroism and tragedy, and the suspension of general election campaigning.

Little was more formulaic than the statements of thoughts and prayers from people who clearly give neither, with Katie Hopkins wryly tweeting that Sadiq Khan could easily have reposted his 2017 London Bridge attack statement as his response to London Bridge #2, without changing a single word. The killer’s body would still have been warm as Twitter filled with faux anxiety about the ‘far right’ and ‘islamophobia’, by those desperate to shut down analysis of what had occurred and why.

The attacker has now been identified as Usman Khan, a former member of al-Muhajiroun the terrorist organisation founded in Saudi Arabia in 1983 by Osama Bin Laden’s brother in arms Omar Bakri al-Mohammed.

The UK’s attitude to this group from the start to the present has been marked by extraordinary naïvity. When the Saudi’s expelled al-Muhajiroun in 1986, the organisation found a hospitable new home in London where it became the centre of a complex web of terror, based around Finsbury Park and Brixton Mosques, with links to 9/11, 7/7, the shoe and underpants bombers and many more attacks.

Omar Bakri Mohammed was never prosecuted in the UK for any offence although he was refused re-entry after making a foreign trip in 2005 (he currently languishes in a Lebanese prison). His successor Anjem Choudhary was allowed to take his place and continue to preach jihad for another decade to the likes of Lee Rigby killer Michael Adebolajo and London Bridge 1 leader Khuram Butt, until 2016 when he was sentenced to a derisory five years for inciting support for ISIS (to be released last year after just two). Incredibly Khuram Butt and Anjem Choudary even starred in a Channel 4’s documentary The Jihadi Next Door.

So it is with a sense of despair rather than shock that we discovered last night that Usman Khan, who had been given an indeterminate prison sentence in 2010 for a plot to establish a terrorist training camp in Pakistan and/or plant bombs in a range of possible targets in the UK (local pubs and the London Stock Exchange had been discussed) had had this sensible sentence reduced by the Court of Appeal to a fixed sentence of sixteen years, of which half would be served on licence; that is to say eight years.

Raffaello Pantucci comments in ‘We Love Death as You Love Life’ that at the time of the trial, the British media ridiculed Khan’s cell for their amateurism and compared them with the hapless jihadis of the then recently released comedy Four Lions. A hint of this arrogance can be seen in Lord Leveson’s reasons for granting the sentence reduction, as he described them as ‘novices’ and commented that there was no evidence that had received training or were in a position to put their plans into immediate effect ‘however keen they might have been to do so and however much they might have talked up their prospects between themselves or to others whom they sought to influence.’

It does not seem to have occurred to them that any idiot can stab people.

Never such innocence again. The first and most important lesson to relearn is one that was known to our ancestors from medieval times. The common law, possibly these island’s greatest achievement, with safeguards and procedures designed to carefully balance the rights of the individual against the requirements of public safety has evolved to govern misbehaviour within society. It is utterly unsuited to the task of protecting that society from a group of insurrectionists in its midst; fanatics who kill for the love of killing and fear death less than capture.

In past centuries, treason was treated outside the normal criminal processes by a special court, the Star Chamber. It is time now to recognise the distinction between law and war by establishing a special court to deal with acts of jihad. Those accused of wrongdoing of any sort must of course always be entitled to challenge the evidence against them before a fair and impartial tribunal: anything else would be tyranny.

The public must be trusted with as much information as it is safe to reveal about what is being done in their name, to avoid the distrust that has dogged the secretive US military tribunals of Guantanamo Bay. Basic human rights must be respected or we destroy what it is that we seek to preserve.

But charges of treason are not to be dealt with as though they were ordinary crimes. The same rules of disclosure and evidence are not warranted, and the adage that the punishment must fit the crime has no application to those who are ideologically committed to launching more attacks.

Most importantly, once convicted, an active jihadi – whether a British-passport holder or not, whether personally guilty of violence or not, should lose forever the right to be released back into the society they have declared war upon. Never again should innocents lose their lives to a terrorist on a tag.

London Bridge and our non-existent rights

London Bridge and our non-existent rights

Yesterday two people were murdered in central London and others injured there. Obviously our hearts go out to all of those affected and we all feel the deepest sympathy for anyone affected by this atrocity. But unfortunately sympathy is not enough! We all know that this man had a terrorism conviction – he was convicted of terrorism jailed and allowed out early because he has rights. You on the other hand… well yes technically on paper you have rights, but when weighed up against the rights of jihadists, terrorists, rapists, foreign criminals and whoever it may be your rights are essentially worthless!

The British state is making a decision. It’s deciding to let you walk the streets unsafe it is deciding to prioritise known terrorists over and above your safety. It has been doing it for a long time, 23,000 known jihadists are walking the streets of the UK. We know who they are because they’re under surveillance. So why are we allowing them to continue walking around the UK and more importantly why are the borders still open for more and why won’t we address the ideology behind these attacks and speak openly and honestly about it?

Because we are governed by cowards that’s the only reason this all comes down to how this country is run and by whom.

London Bridge: Who was the attacker?

Huge scale of terror threat revealed: UK home to 23,000 jihadists

The Terrorism Betrayal

By Anne Marie Waters, Leader

November 30th 2019

Two people have been tragically murdered in central London by a jihadist.  Usman Khan, a 28 year old from Stoke on Trent, stabbed two people to death, and injured three others, near London Bridge, before being shot dead by police.  Shockingly, though not surprisingly, Khan was a convicted Islamic terrorist who had been released from prison early.

In 2012, he was sentenced to an indefinite term for plotting terror attacks.  This conviction was later quashed, in April 2013, when he was sentenced to 16 years.  He had served less than half of this term before being released in December 2018.  He then went on to murder and maim innocent people on the streets of our capital.

These terrorists are responsible for their heinous acts, but they do not alone bear the blame; those who decided to free him should hang their heads in shame.  Our politicians, completely ineffective in the face of these threats, should do the same.  Our legal system is broken and justice has been turned on its head.  The innocent are placed in harm’s way as the system concerns itself only with the rights of attackers.  Why on earth was a known terrorist released only half way through his sentence?  What is the reason for this?  The British people deserve to know why violent criminals are deemed so much more important than their safety.

Reductions in prison terms have got to stop.  There is clearly a reason for the sentence, so why does it turn out to be meaningless?  How can a 16 year sentence become a 7 year one?  It’s something that people simply don’t understand, and they deserve an explanation. A “life” sentence often ends up being 10 years or so, it’s pointless, and an insult to law abiding people.

For Britain will  bring it to an end.

We can now expect the usual platitudes from politicians.  “They won’t divide us”, “our values will prevail” etc. etc.  It’s like cut and paste.  We can be certain our leaders will not discuss the religious beliefs that drive these men to carry out these murderous acts; in fact, the only mention of Islam will be to defend its name.


The British people are growing more and more aware of this extraordinary betrayal.  They know that politicians have placed them in danger, and continue to place to place them in danger, now and in the future, by keeping our borders open and ignoring the threat that Islamic doctrine presents to our safety.

For Britain will not run and hide from this.  We’ll bring the change the country needs.  We’ll end the threat posed by the 23,000 jihadists that roam our streets, remove those who should not be here, and close the borders to anyone who endangers our people.

We can only do this with your help.  Join us.

Anne Marie Waters 


For Britain 



Don’t let Silicon Valley determine our future

Don’t let Silicon Valley determine our future – Anne Marie Waters

Keep going persevere that is our mantra

Now we know that Silicon Valley likes to interfere with politics and we know that they do that because the leaders, founders and bosses of these big tech companies are on a particular political side. We know for example that they were openly opposed to Donald Trump and tried to do all they could to bring him down to prevent him from winning in the first place and then to stir up nonsense about him afterwards and they’re doing the same for his election in 2020.

But it’s no different here whether it’s Facebook or Twitter as you may know I personally was flicked off Twitter for criticising South Yorkshire police. Big tech is is trying to dictate our political life. It’s so crucial now so many people get their information from Facebook or Twitter that these companies have become supremely powerful to the point where they are instrumental in deciding who governs us.

We cannot allow this to happen we can’t allow this to continue why should it be that tech giant’s determine our democracy do not let them do it!

Join us and protect your democratic rights!

Anne Marie Waters

Freedom | Justice | Democracy

Please watch my review of the leaders debate. Share with your friends and family.

My Review of the Leaders’ Debate – Anne Marie Waters

Anne Marie Waters: The Great Immigration Bluff

Please watch my review of the leaders debate. Share with your friends and family.

Corbyn’s hatred of Britain and its children

Corbyn’s hatred of Britain and its children

Jeremy Corbyn wants British children to hate themselves even more than they already do. He said that under a Labour government British children will learn about the evils of the British Empire.

He will introduce a new national curriculum for this he’ll also of course open the borders to people from poor countries and offer them the world and so millions will come here. His aim of course is eventually to outnumber native Brits so he no longer has to pretend to care about them at election time. Because the destruction of Britain and turning it into a communist hellhole isn’t happening fast enough for the Labour Party they need to speed it up a bit and just to make sure there is no resistance, there is no fight for Britain in the future from future generations.

He will brainwash children early on to despise the colour of their own skin, their ancestry that the very land that they come from he wants them to hate themselves in order to control them better and so they don’t put up a fight for this country.

Don’t vote for Labour!

General election 2019: Labour plans to teach British Empire injustice in schools


The Police and the Election by Mike Speakman

Mike Speakman

27th November 2019


Policing issues are of some relevance in this election, now only two weeks away. Parties are making commitments which they may or may not keep, but the trend is generally in the right direction. As we all know, police numbers have been cut drastically since 2010, at the instigation of the worst Home Secretary and Prime Minister in the last 100 years. Those who know me will be aware that I believe the Tory party set out to destroy the police service in revenge for being thwarted in their attempts to control it for their own ends, and I speak with some personal experience.

The Conservatives have now committed to an extra 20,000 officers, perhaps by 2022. In practice, to achieve this they would need to recruit about 54,000 officers in that period to replace retirements and wastage. The police consensus is that they do not have the capacity to train that many. And in case you thought they would be uniform officers on the beat….no! Some are going to the National Crime Agency, controlled by the Home secretary and others to specialist units.  (There is another story to be told there, but for another time).

Many of Theresa May’s disastrous changes are now likely to be reversed, such as impeding Stop and Search, the curtailing of which is partly responsible in the spiralling level of knife crime. They are also going to look again at the bail system. Theresa May changed the nature of Police bail and limited it to 28 days. In practice many investigations take longer than this, so many offenders were “Released Under Investigation” (RUI). In practice, not on bail or subject to any restrictions at all, and as a consequence, some serious offenders involved in offences against children and murder fled to the Indian sub- continent.

The reversal of May’s damage is being led by Priti Patel who has all the hallmarks of being a pretty good Home Secretary (presuming she is re-appointed) and recovering the trust of the police service.   However, she is not an entirely free agent and I think she is constrained by cabinet collective responsibility. I expect Boris to win the election, but the Tory party hierarchy is full of barely disguised socialists who would be more at home in Tony Blairs Labour party.

There are many issues that are being ignored in this election. All parties are paying some lip service to policing, but the hard issues are ignored.

There is no one looking to re-establish the Forensic Science Service, no one looking to get rid of the ridiculous concept of hate crime, No one looking at the way the Criminal Justice system now favours minority groups over the indigenous population, no one looking to stop the political control of police forces through Police and Crime Commissioners and the Government Inspectorate.

No one is trying either to make sure the Crown Prosecution Service (known in the police as the Criminal Protection Service) becomes something other than an agent for implementing central government diktats. (If you want to understand the culture of the CPS, remember they were once led by Kier Starmer, Labours Brexit spokesman). No one is looking at the inequal application of the law across different communities. No one is proposing making policing more accountable locally, indeed there are even pushes for further centralisation.

This election is significant for the policing and criminal justice issues that are being ignored. It is said more often now, but we really do need to change politics for good. Our politics is broken and not fit for purpose.

Mike Speakman

Policing Spokesman

For Britain 

AMW: We must never be frightened of Antifa

Anne Marie Waters

November 25th 2019

Today I produced some videos showing an ambush on myself and other For Britain members by Antifa on Saturday night. The videos are at the bottom of this article, as well as some of the mugshots of the mob we are looking to identify.

We started the evening at the Blind Beggar pub in Whitechapel (infamous for its Kray twins connections!) where we met with Eddy Butler, an expert on the East End, who had arranged a walking tour around the area.

Around halfway through the tour, a group began to form behind us and I was told we had to get a move on. It’s always a bit of a shock to the system when things like this happen – they are thankfully rare – but my immediate concern was our safety, as we were considerably outnumbered. In front of us was a Tesco store, so we went in there to find a safe place to call the police. The staff were excellent, and kept the thugs at bay.

Antifa were soon on Twitter boasting of their exploits (@slamtifa).  No surprises there.

We’ve today followed up with a formal report to police, as well as letters to London Mayor Sadiq Khan, and the Member of Parliament for the area, Rushanara Ali MP. Further information will follow.

The most important things to take away from this are to recognise the reality of Antifa, and to remember what they are – cowards. We must never be afraid of this crew, they are bullies and they cannot dictate our political life.

Despite our manifesto, our constitution, as well as my repeated and consistent statements that we believe in the equal rights of all people, they still call us racists. Despite the fact that we passionately call for the voice of the people to be elevated to power, they still call us fascists. Despite our consistent opposition to the very ideology, as well as our consistent condemnation of anti-Semitism, they still call us Nazis. There is simply no reasoning with them, no debate, just thuggery… but we will not give in.

I want to remind members that this is extremely rare, and that our candidates have enjoyed previous campaigns in complete safety. These people are bullies, and we won’t indulge them. What we will do is fight back in the most effective way we can. We know that Antifa’s worst nightmare is our success at the ballot box, so let’s make sure they have some new nightmares next May! I am more determined than ever and I want you to join me. Think about standing for local government in May, it’s the best possible way to stand up against this thuggery.

We will also of course be pursuing the matter with the police. This was criminal behaviour and we will insist it is taken seriously. The Metropolitan police investigated when Anna Soubry was called a Nazi, so we demand the same. You will hear on the video that we are repeatedly referred to as neo-Nazis. If it matters when it happens to Anna Soubry, it matters when it happens to us.

The core problem here is that nothing is done about left-wing violence. It’s been going on for years now and yet the press remains silent… we don’t hear much from so-called ‘leaders’ either. Politicians only seem to care about political intimidation when left-wing or pro-Remain people are on the receiving end.

Antifa are mindless zombies, and their only aim is to shut down free debate. We will not let them. For Britain aims to bring change via the ballot box, because we believe in democracy. We know that millions agree with our message, and we will reach them, no matter what the street thugs of Antifa throw at us. When they are your enemy, you must know you are on the right side. You are, and we will win.

Anne Marie Waters

Leader, For Britain 


Letter to the Mayor of London on Antifa harassment

Sadiq Khan

Mayor of London

City Hall

London SE1 2AA


November 25th 2019



Dear Mr Khan,

I write to inform you of an incident that occurred in London on the evening of November 23rd 2019.

On this evening, a group of my colleagues and I were engaged in a walking tour of the East End/Whitechapel area. Midway through this event, a group of menacing looking people began to follow us, shouting insults in our direction and telling us they were there to drive us out of the area.

We have filed a criminal report with the Metropolitan police.

What took place was clear and criminal harassment of innocent people behaving lawfully. The reason for this criminal behaviour is political; this group attempted to hound us out of Whitechapel because of our political views.

We call on you to publicly condemn this appalling behaviour and to make clear that such conduct is not acceptable in London. We call on you to condemn criminal harassment and public disorder, and to affirm your belief in the right of British citizens to hold a variety of political views and to be able to do so without being subjected to harassment or threats.

We call on you to take public action to prevent further such incidents and to promote a culture of political tolerance in London.

Please inform us of what action you intend to take to ensure that British citizens and London residents may carry out lawful activities in our capital city without being subjected to criminal harassment on political grounds.

This letter will be published, along with any response you may provide.

I look forward to hearing from you in the near future.

Yours sincerely,


Anne Marie Waters

Leader, For Britain

Letter to Rushanara Ali MP re Antifa harassment in Whitechapel

Rushanara Ali MP

Houses of Parliament

London SW1A 0AA


November 25th 2019


Dear Ms Ali,

I write to inform you of an incident that occurred within your constituency on the evening of November 23rd 2019.

On this evening, a group of my colleagues and I were engaged in a walking tour of the East End/Whitechapel area. Midway through this event, a group of menacing looking people began to follow us, shouting insults in our direction and telling us they were there to drive us out of the area.

We have filed a criminal report with the Metropolitan police.

What took place was clear and criminal harassment of innocent people behaving lawfully. The reason for this criminal behaviour is political; this group attempted to hound us out of Whitechapel because of our political views.

We call on you to publicly condemn this appalling behaviour and to make clear that such conduct is not acceptable within your Parliamentary constituency. We call on you to condemn criminal harassment and public disorder and to affirm your belief in the right of British citizens to hold a variety political views and to be able to do so without being subjected to harassment or threats.

This letter will be published, along with any response you may provide.

I look forward to hearing from you in the near future.

Yours sincerely,


Anne Marie Waters

Leader, For Britain

Time To Act! Islam Spokesman Nissar Hussain Blog

From Nissar Hussain, Islam Spokesman

22nd November 2019

Here’s to Sharia Enforcement! Halal – ujah!

“We have suffered a total and unmitigated defeat… and I do not suppose that this is the end. This is only the beginning of the reckoning.”
Churchill on Munich

What Churchill had to say on Chamberlain’s appeasement is quite appropriate today. The reckoning will come and the weakness and delusion of New Labour, the LibConnners and the feeble Tories in the face of the Sharia enforcers will haunt them. When new parties like ours will replace this tired old guard of time-servers and self-serving naifs.

Their gutlessness in failing to enforce our widely-regarded animal protection norms, allowing the daily mass slaughter of terrified and un-stunned livestock across the country will not be forgotten. This abject failure clearly demonstrates their lack of resolve in the face of an intransigent group whose long-term objectives are the eradication of all such legal constraints, and our eventual subjugation to the halal/haram continuum.

Be under no illusion about the strategic focus of Islam’s governing class; their jurists known as the Ulema. The famous strategist Liddell Hart made the point that if you had to define strategy in one word that word would be concentration. And the Ulema understand strategy as they have the knowledge, born of a Millenia of expansion, to view matters over the very long-term – they are in no rush.

They are happy to allow the centuries-long concentration of their compounding efforts to eventually bring about their aim – a Muslim dominated UK state with subject peoples living under their laws, the Sharia.

Ridiculous, you think. No. Ask the remaining Hindus in Pakistan and Bangladesh, or the remaining Christians there such as Asia Bibi, or those who only recently resided in Iraq and Syria. Better ask them soon, as soon there won’t be many to make enquiries of. There are none left across North Africa after their expulsion by the Almohads back in the day. That day being 800 years ago in the time of the vaunted Al-Andalus Caliphate, reputedly of toleration unbounded – which you will no doubt have heard so much about from mendacious supremacists or ignorant useful idiots).

Schools, supermarkets and countless other institutions are busy serving up halal products with the recipients being in absolute ignorance of the horrific demise of the donor. The ready acceptance of this situation encourages the Ulema in their assessment of the weakness inherent in our fading culture. All they have to do is shuffle us towards the exit, murmur comforting noises and let demographics and spinelessness do the rest.

The childless politicians and highly educated women who now predominate in the professions will see to the decline whilst quietly acceding to the calculated salami-slicing by the Ulema (all men of course) of our norms and freedoms.

Like the South African rugby team, the Ulema have a simple strategy. The South Africans relied on their scrum and everything resulted from this simple focus. For the Ulema, their intransigence will trump the vacillation and wilful ignorance of the arrogant new elite before, they hope, the mass can replace them with a group more on their mettle. Time will tell, but the cost will probably be great. It was after Munich, and it could well be this time too.

Both left and the supposed right are complicit in this failure. The left after winning the culture wars and the right the economic ones. Both now feed on the carcass of our past achievements and have ready excuses for their acceptance of new values which make a mockery of their past “beliefs”.

White working-class males for the left are now simply white supremacist bigots, rather than the down-trodden workers of the past; and work-shy girls happy to pump out new bairns to keep them housed and catered for from the public teat, are now for the right the mental health casualties of the money-grubbing elite. And all bow obediently to my fellow “people of colour” with their strong religious faith and readiness to assert it.

How to turn this around swiftly? Support our simple strategy. Take up the noble cause of the ex-Muslims and remove all threats to them as this will begin the de-fanging of Islam and kick-start its rapid decline. Without retaining the threat inherent in the mass-murdering decrees so prevalent in all the Sharia manuals, the religion’s leaders will be exposed for what they are: a cabal of macho theocrats with sociopathic tendencies who love to wield their power over the cowed masses they so enjoy “leading”.

If these are respectable community leaders, then Stalin, Mao and Hitler were wonderful yoof-club mentors. Ask the Hindu historians in India of the centuries of Hindu-culling by the Islamic invaders and Mughals – they knock all the above into a cocked hat. Time to call “Time!”.

Take the fight to the halal merchants who profit from the trade. Take the fight to the Ulema in their haunts. Take the fight to your MP. Use the Legalise Apostasy campaign petition to demand the release of the unwilling flock. Amend the apostasy laws and watch as Islam collapses as the herd rushes for the gates as there will be no genocidal statutes to bring them to heel by terrifying them and turning them back to face the Imams and the rabid Sharia-enforcers.

The Ulema will be crushed in the rush and the halal laws will be trod into the dirt along with them.

As the Yanks say, do the math. If hundreds of millions of Muslims become ex-Muslims, the daily painful killing of millions of animals will reduce in line with the open wound through which ex-Muslims find their freedom.

Then, truly, we can cry “Hallelujah!”

For Britain National Conference 2019

Well we did it. We improved on last year!

The For Britain Party (FBP) returned to Merseyside for our 2019 National Party Conference.

As last year, the event was a sell-out, with members bringing guests from other parties to sample what the For Britain family is all about. Tables were decorated with balloons, union flags adorned each table and rousing music played to set the mood. Right from the start, the atmosphere was positive and upbeat, with everybody socialising and getting to know each other. It was great to see returning faces, as well as faces new.

Across the stage a banner proclaimed “Punk Rock of Politics – For Britain” confirming FBP as the anti-establishment, rebellious political party that dares to say it as it is. Just after 10am, with people still queuing at the entrance, a screen at the front displayed a video of lady looking at her watch as though waiting for something, and a countdown clock started. At zero, and with a bang, a video launching the conference played, summarising 2019 and announcing the launch of the new party manifesto for 2020.

Party Deputy Chair Kadeeja Adam introduced our host for the day David Vance, returning for a second year to manage proceedings. Kadeeja had the audience laughing when she said that we nearly did not have the venue, as The Labour Party tried to book it for the same day. However, luckily for us, Diane Abbott tried to place the booking, and when asked to confirm numbers arrived at a figure of several hundred thousand!

First up, Katie Hopkins on video from America. She apologised for not being able to attend this year, but sent best wishes and a message of support for all attending. She also announced that to compensate, she is holding an event with For Britain in Birmingham called ‘Offensive’ on the 3rd December. It will be a relaxed fun evening and a chance for people to have a bit of a laugh and let their hair down.

David Vance followed with a good humoured speech, summarising all the political parties and their various states of chaos. He stated his belief that the FBP are uniquely poised to take advantage of the general unhappiness from the public with all the parties, who are failing them on just about everything!

After David, we had a very moving talk from a military veteran, himself campaigning for veterans, and seeking change to their appalling neglect, from issues such as homelessness and suicide. He ended his speech with an extremely moving poem, which gained an ovation from the audience. Unfortunately the speaker does not wish to be named due to intolerance from the left wing, who he believes will hamper his cause.

Next up was Damien Ryan, who spoke about his persecution from Rotherham Council, following on from his speech last year. Incredible to know that a council which failed countless children over many years are focusing their efforts on hounding a father because he had the temerity to speak out about issues that they’d prefer remain unspoken. The video cannot yet be posted due to an upcoming employment tribunal, but to give you an idea, one of the charges against him is that he ‘showed dislike for Jeremy Corbyn’.

A break followed allowing attendees to browse the For Britain shop, bursting with a great new range of merchandise. Popular amongst guests was the tee-shirt as worn by Morrissey, proclaiming dislike for The Guardian!

After refreshment, the audience settled down to a startling video from Dr Bill Warner entitled ‘Civilisation War’. Bill had just returned to the US from a trip to Europe, otherwise would have attended, but he addressed the conference via the big screen and his hard hitting message gave everyone something to think about.

After Bill, FBP spokeswoman Barbara Wood gave an incredibly detailed and fascinating speech on issues of gender (though we should not use that term) and “trans” issues. Barbara had dozens of members ask her afterwards for more information, and we will add her speech in documented format to the site. Her info sheet on the law around these issues will also be made available, as people have requested that this too is made available.

Before lunch we had some awards – the For Britain Britannia awards, with Nominations Officer Mike Speakman and Anne Marie giving a medal and certificate to members who have gone above and beyond with their work for the party. The Britannia will become a regular award each year at conference. A special award was given to Morrissey, in standing up for free speech, and will be sent to him. We’ve let him know that he won!

Other worthy winners were:-

Delroy Noel

Richard Taylor

Jim Miller

Frankie Rufalo

The reality is, so many of our members could have been nominated, it is a shame to limit it to just four.

Lunch followed, and for the non-vegetarians and vegans, a delicious meat and potato pie with mushy peas was served up! The giant pies were cut up and served and seemed to go down well, along with the trifle and cake! The atmosphere continued to be extremely positive, everyone getting along well and the feeling was one of a large family. Some guests who visited from UKIP remarked just how refreshing it was to feel such positivity, and to hear such a diverse range of topics being discussed.

Anne Marie then took the stage after lunch to talk about the issues that have shaped the manifesto for 2020. She reiterated her belief that the FBP has the best manifesto of any political party in the UK. Without constraint from right wing or left wing thinking, it can simply reflect common sense, moral and correct policies across all subject matters. From trans issues to climate, from education to immigration, these are the issues of our time in the UK and the party has a stance in line with the British public, not the politicians in Westminster. Anne Marie’s rousing speech received a standing ovation.

Watch it now…

Following Anne Marie, Julian Leppert delivered a good humoured talk on how he became elected as a Councillor in Epping Forest. He referenced the local media who proclaimed a headline ‘no place for this party in Epping Forest’, shortly before he won. Clearly there is a place as he pointed out to laughter! It highlighted the positive effect on our popularity from counter campaigning; how far left rhetoric is generally disregarded by the normal people of the UK and in reality pushes people the other way.

Julian was followed by one of our ‘For Britain Youth’ members, Frankie Rufolo. He had the audience in stitches with a passionate speech about his worldview and how he believes the youth are rebelling against establishment narrative. Frankie has stood for election in the past and is standing again in Exeter in December 2019. Julian was followed by by another youth member Jack Rockett, who echoed many of Frankie’s sentiments. Jack confessed to nerves beforehand, speaking to hundreds of people, but did a great job and was applauded off the stage.

Another break was followed by another video from America – this time Pamela Geller. Pamela and Anne Marie discussed many things, from the jihadi attempts on her life through to the fact that she will be coming to the UK to celebrate a For Britain political victory in the future (this led to cheers and thunderous applause).  Incredibly, Pamela is currently banned from entering the UK thanks to Theresa May, an astonishing situation for someone who helps victims of Islam and has never once promoted anything violent or dangerous. The audience was engrossed in Pamela’s story and the video is well worth watching.

The formalities of the day ended with an amusing raffle hosted by Mike Speakman, and formalities were brought to a close by David Vance.

Members and guests continued to mingle and the feedback post event has been overwhelming in positivity. Thanks for all the kind comments, it is greatly appreciated.

Download our manifesto for 2020 

Offensive: An evening with Katie Hopkins

Katie sadly couldn’t make it to our national conference this year, though she did send us a video message from the USA, which you can view below.

To make up for the fact, we have arranged an evening with Katie in Birmingham.


The intention is a relaxed evening of socialising, a few drinks and a good old fashioned laugh. What’s not to like?

There are a limited amount of tickets for this event, and you can purchase yours here.

Don’t miss out – Katie promises to live up to the title of the event, so the faint of heart should probably give this a miss!


Explaining the IPCC

By Paul Burgess, Spokesman on the Environment


A short Note

Explaining the IPCC: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

This is assumed to be a scientific body but it is not. It organises scientists from many counties to produce reports on this basis:-

  1. Each scientist must conform to its own government’s rules and policies. They are appointed to uphold their government’s policies.
  2. Each IPCC report is produced from a panel that includes many non-scientific government and UN people.  It is, after all, an inter-government organisation and not an independent scientific body.
  3. Reports are edited by non-scientists who overrule scientists and have the final say.  All reports have to be passed by all governments before being published.
  4. The results are that many scientists have left and protested against the reports.
  5. Many governments see it as a transfer of wealth from the Western countries to the underdeveloped countries.

So it is not what people think that it is, but there is also one very important aspect to it’s charter that renders it useless anyway. It is confined to only studying man-made climate change.

It is a simple fact that throughout the history of the earth there has been climate change, sometimes really huge changes such as the ice ages. So in order to understand any effect by humans on climate change, you must understand the natural cycles and these are totally ignored.

Otherwise how can you tell what man does without knowing what is there naturally anyway? That simple fact renders all the work useless.

Today we live in a world that assumes all natural climate change has stopped. A world where, as ClimateGate showed, scientists try to manipulate data to remove things such the medieval warming period and the mini-ice age.

In this new brave world the only thing that controls climate is a single factor – CO2. They act as if the climate is controlled by this one dial, like a thermostat. Governments argue in conferences how to control the future temperature of the earth by this single trace part of the atmosphere- just one molecule in every 2,000.  All based on ignoring all the natural cycles of the climate – truly absurd.

The IPCC is an organisation of world governments promoting government policies and not what many think it is – a scientific organisation based on science. 

Book review: ‘The Testaments’ by Margaret Atwood

By Anne Marie Waters 

13th November 2019

People who criticise the ideology of Islam can usually report that they have lost friends as a result. I certainly have. But there is another loss; the loss of heroes and heroines. It’s not controversial to point out that the vast majority of celebrity and public figures are pro-Islam. They condemn critics as far-right and signal their “I’m not racist” virtue (even though Islam is not a race) at any and every given opportunity. If this is someone whose work you’ve long admired, you’ll be left disappointed and wondering how someone so otherwise talented or intelligent can be so blinkered on this issue.

This is the case for me having read the latest book of one of my previous literary heroines Margaret Atwood. Atwood is the author of the horrifying classic ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’. This is, without doubt, one of the most disturbing books I’ve ever read. It portrays a futuristic era in which the United States has transformed in to an Old Testament theocracy, where science, evidence and reason have been replaced by dogma, and brutality is the norm.

As is to be expected in such a society, women particularly suffer; reduced to property and valued only by their ability to give birth – something entirely controlled by their male masters. It is the subtlety and simplicity of this book that makes it so frightening. Reading it, you believe it, and Atwood takes you right there, right in to the midst of this medieval nightmare scenario.

She has done it again in the sequel entitled ‘The Testaments’, which I have just finished reading. Once again, the horror is laid bare in this brilliantly written novel. But as I read, I had to wonder; does Margaret Atwood realise that what she is describing is not fiction, but fact? She is describing life inside numerous Islamic states to this day.

In both books, Atwood describes how women are forcefully covered, forced in to marriages and killed if they refuse. In her dystopia, a woman’s word is worth less than a man’s, women are stoned to death for being raped, and face constant fear or violence or death for any expression of independence or autonomy. In one example, she refers to a grown woman needing permission from a young boy to carry out a fairly standard task.

Does she realise she is describing life for women in Saudi Arabia, or Afghanistan, or Pakistan? Only she can answer that question, but the sleve of ‘The Testaments’ provides us with one or two clues.

It states:

“Her 1985 classic, The Handmaid’s Tale, went back in to the charts with the election of Donald Trump, when the Handmaids became a symbol of resistance against the disempowerment of women…”

 The implication is quite clear: Donald Trump, and what he stands for, threatens to turn America in to a country resembling what is described above.

If this is the view of Margaret Atwood, she has gotten this spectacularly wrong.

Atwood must realise that the enslavement of women she is describing is nigh-on word-for-word sharia law. It isn’t Donald Trump promoting sharia law in America, it is the very leftist organisations, and “feminists” that are apparently showing resistance to his presidency. It is the Democrats that have gone out of their way to appease and to welcome all things Islamic to America, including sharia law. Forced marriage, child marriage, FGM, are all now realities in the land of the free, thanks not to Donald Trump, but to his opponents.

It is of course Trump who has pointed out the dangers of bowing down to the demands of this highly illiberal creed, and who has called for mass immigration to be brought to an end, because only by stopping mass immigration can America hope to halt the ever growing power of sharia.

It’s an extraordinary reality. The world upside down. So-called feminists protest against Trump at every opportunity, while elevating the genuine and deeply-held misogynistic beliefs of Islam.

I hope that Margaret Atwood understands this, and more importantly, I hope she finds the courage to say so.

Anne Marie Waters


For Britain

For Britain Will Honour Our Troops Every Day, Not Just Armistice Day

By Anne Marie Waters 

11th November 2019

It’s no surprise that career politicians talk the talk but rarely walk the walk. Today, on Armistice Day, both Labour and the Tories have announced plans to support Britain’s Armed Forces. But this is talk; we know them by their actions.

Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour party promising support for service men and women is particularly galling. In 2016, Corbyn supported investigations in to troops that had served in Iraq, and called for the Armed Forces to be dramatically scaled back. He is quoted as saying that the country should no longer have a “huge land-based defence force”.  He also argued that MI6 should not be allowed to recruit new spies, even while the terror threat against the country was at fever pitch.

We know how much Corbyn sympathises with Britain’s enemies, from the IRA to jihadists, Corbyn is always on their side. In his first memorial service as Labour leader, he refused to sing the national anthem, and this year, neither he nor John McDonnell bothered to turn up to a Festival of Remembrance to honour British soldiers.

However, we mustn’t let the Tories off the hook either.

Over the last decade, soldiers have been prosecuted (and persecuted) and the Armed Forces utterly decimated, and all of it while the Tories were in Government. Why only now, on Armistice Day, have they changed their tune?

In 2018, Sir Mike Penning, former Defence Minister, said the UK was on the verge of “no longer being taken seriously” because defence had been “cut to the bone”.

He only spoke out after standing down from his role, but when he did, he stated:

  • The SAS and SBS are leaving in large numbers as they are deployed on missions almost continuously
  • Royal Navy Frigates can only stay at sea for six days because they are short staffed
  • The Navy does not have enough ships to mount a pirate fighting operation off the coast of Africa
  • Troops were sent to Eastern Europe to fend off Russians with light desert vehicles because it was so hard to deploy tanks

He also declared that the Army is now too small. At 82,000 troops, the country is not ready to defend itself.

Added to this is the pittance that serving troops are paid, and the appalling abandonment by the state when they return from active service.

It really is a shocking betrayal by our politicians, on both sides of the house, over and over again.

I have spoken with countless service and ex-service people since For Britain was founded, and it is nothing short of heartbreaking. Left to fend for themselves, shoved to the back of healthcare queues, and often living in awful home conditions, the British Armed Forces deserve so much better.

That’s why in our manifesto for 2020, For Britain will produce our most comprehensive defence policy portfolio to date. Not only will we raise defence spending, but we will outline exactly how we will make our troops safer, and show them the respect they so richly deserve.

We will build a party for our Armed Forces. We will honour and respect them, not just on Armistice Day, but every day.

Join us.

Anne Marie Waters 


For Britain

Jeremy Corbyn – Dangerous, But No Hero

By Anne Marie Waters 

7th November 2019

Tom Bower has given his book an interesting title: ‘Dangerous Hero’. I would say he is half right. Dangerous yes, but no hero, certainly not to the majority of British people.

I recently finished reading this astounding book, and while the contents are known, they are nonetheless shocking. Jeremy Corbyn’s political history is one that should frighten the British public, and frighten them enough to never allow this man to take the country’s helm in 10 Downing Street.

His career is a festival of anti-Britishness. He (and his comrades) come from the tradition of the extreme Left; anti-Western, anti-America, and anti-Israel. Such sentiments shape his thinking and he seeks nothing more than the complete destruction of the Britain we know and love.

A consistent supporter of open border migration, Corbyn has long sought to open Britain up to all comers. During his years as a Labour councilor in London, he promoted the building of council blocks, often on rare green spaces, and if local people objected, he dismissed them as racists. He was particularly keen on building in middle class or ‘upmarket’ areas, again dismissing all resistance as prejudice or bigotry.

Corbyn likes to call himself a pacifist, but not where the IRA is concerned. He invited its leaders to the House of Commons within weeks of the bombing of the Tory party conference in Brighton in 1984. Five people were murdered in this IRA attack, with 31 injured, and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher narrowly escaped with her life. Corbyn’s “pacifism” however did not extend to keeping the IRA out of the UK’s Parliament buildings.

He became a “pacifist” again however following the Islamic terror attack on New York City in 2001; his “pacifism” wasn’t invoked to condemn the attack on our friend and ally the United States, but to condemn any potential US retaliation. Following 9/11, Corbyn and some of his comrades founded the Stop the War Coalition – a group which would go on to include some of the nastiest Islamist groups in the country, and it is here that his romance with Islam began.

Corbyn is fervently pro-Islam and no matter the issue, no matter the cause, he will take the side of Muslims. In doing so, he has turned his back on Hindus (in the case of Kashmir) and of course Jews. Anti-semitism is something that Corbyn had in common with Islamist groups, and where they found their most fertile common ground.

Bower’s book confirms what we already know – that Corbyn has serious discomfort with Jews. A champion of minorities and immigrants throughout his career, Jews have long been a notable exception to this rule. Bower states clearly that in Corbyn’s eyes, all Jews are “guilty”. Whether they are in north London or Tel Aviv, to Corbyn, they are all the same.

Furthermore, like so many on the Left, in his dalliance with Islam, Corbyn is more than willing to turn his back on women and gay people. Anyone who knows Islam knows it’s horrific attitude to women (whom it views as property) and of course of homosexuals. A majority of British Muslims believe homosexuality should be criminal, but Corbyn is silent, despite pretending to be a champion of equality. He is silent too on sharia law, the appalling system under which women are treated as worth half of men, and which is practiced informally across the UK without objection from Corbyn or any of his Labour front bench allies.

Speaking of which, those who would take major offices of state should Labour win a general election, have views almost as alarming as his own. Two of Corbyn’s long term allies are repeatedly referred to in the book: John McDonnell and Diane Abbott.

Abbott’s anti-British views have been well publicized. The book quotes her as stating “every defeat of the British state is a victory for all of us”. McDonnell is little better. An avowed Trotskyist, he was a supporter of Trotsky’s “permanent state of unrest” philosophy. What this means in short is that in order to bring down a society, one must create endless problems, stir up division and hatred, pit one against the other until the system collapses, then rule over the rubble.

Corbyn is distinctly unimpressed by European culture as well. In one example, he is described as standing in view of Vienna’s iconic Ringstrasse, and denouncing it as “capitalist”. His economic views are every bit as extreme as his anti-Westernism. He is a supporter of all things communism-like, seeking to end private ownership, and seize private wealth.

In short, Jeremy Corbyn and his allies present a serious and major threat to the UK’s well-being and prosperity. There is no doubt that they would happily bring Great Britain to its knees if given half the chance. Let’s not forget either, that Corbyn was elected Labour leader by a significant majority. We must learn a vital lesson from this: Labour is now an extreme Left-wing party and there is no way back. The working class people once represented by Labour have been abandoned, in favour of mass migration and niche minority causes.

The people of Britain need an alternative. They need and deserve a party that will stand up for them, that cares about them, and that intends to act in the best interests of our citizens and their children. That party is here. That party is For Britain.

Anne Marie Waters


For Britain 

A Message For UKIP Members

Dear UKIP Member,

As an ex member of UKIP myself, it gives me no pleasure to see the party destroy itself with ever increasing internal warfare. Like so many others, I left due to the politics within the party, and the inconsistency of views from top to bottom.

Gerard Batten helped UKIP financially with a high risk strategy that alienated some members but brought in many more. Rather than stick with this strategy they have attempted to return to the days pre The Brexit Party, and this is a fatal flaw. Like him or loathe him, Farage and The Brexit Party owns ‘hard Brexit’ and the new UKIP membership is disillusioned at the NEC’s behaviour and leaving in droves. UKIP will never ‘out-Brexit’ The Brexit Party.

The latest leader Richard Braine has now gone and it is hard to see how the party can continue in any form. Certainly not with any credibility. As I said, this isn’t pleasant to see, but it seems there is a huge self destruct button in UKIP that a succession of people are intent on pressing. There’s no future there – it may be harsh to say it, but it is true.

The good news for frustrated UKIP members is that there is another party that has none of the baggage you have had to endure. Leader Anne Marie was treated appallingly in the run up to the UKIP leadership election in 2017, and as a result set up our party, For Britain.

It is a party that has absolute consistency of viewpoint from top to bottom. What we stand for is clear and unwavering, and as our manifesto demonstrates, our policies are probably the best of any political party in the country right now. Our new manifesto due to launch at Party Conference is even better.

UKIP members are joining, and in some cases entire branches are coming across as they see the difference. If you would like Anne Marie and/or our committee members to visit your branch to tell you what we are about, or to talk to you individually then please make contact at [email protected]

Anne Marie is the best leader UKIP never had, and For Britain is the party that UKIP could have been under her leadership. But with areas such as animal welfare, climate science and gender issues, we now have moved way beyond what UKIP can offer, so get in touch. We are a great family, from all walks of life and backgrounds, and you will be most welcome. We want clean Brexit, we want an end to the EU project, but we are also fighting for what comes next. We have a long battle ahead.

Join us, we are the only party speaking about what is really important for this great country. We are the only ones that will save it.

To be a part of the For Britain family click here

Ed DeMolay

Party Chairman

The True Darkness of the Trans Insanity

By Anne Marie Waters

30th October 2019

If our world ever regains its sanity, future historians will look back in horror at the era we live in at present. They’ll do this with much justification, and nowhere will this historical insanity be more stark than in our current obsession with all things “trans”.

Let’s be clear about something. The tiny percentage of people who are truly life-long transsexuals, who simply cannot and do not accept their bodily sex, are not actually to blame for this madness. There have always been transsexuals, people with gender dysphoria (described by the NHS as “distress, anxiety, uncertainty and persistently uncomfortable feelings about their biological sex”), or others who are simply a bit different to the norm in terms of gender behaviour or conformity, but never have they pushed for the current state of affairs, and they’re not the ones overwhelmingly pushing for it now. This monstrous situation is the work of the extreme communist Left, intent on doing irreparable damage to Western society at every opportunity. They wish to subvert reality, deny truth, and they are using confused and vulnerable children to do so.

I attended a conference this week entitled ‘Inventing the Transgender Child, a new Sex Education?’ and I came away knowing that this situation is even worse than I imagined. I imagined it was pretty bad. Somehow, overnight and from nowhere, books in children’s schools are telling them that there are dozens of genders and the child gets to choose from a vast array of options. Such books matter-of-factly describe our natural sex as merely “assigned at birth”. The problem is that, apparently, the sex “assigned at birth” may not match a person’s “gender identity”.

Babies can’t talk, we are informed, and so their “gender identity” is guessed at by reference to the physical body. In other words, babies can’t tell us what gender they are, so it is “assigned” based on bodily appearance. Unfortunately, these “assignments” are often the wrong ones and need to be fixed with expensive medications and surgeries. Someone is getting rich from this, of that you can be certain.

Words like “cis” and “non-binary” have been shoehorned in to the language that children are hearing and reading, and of course, all of it nonsense with no basis in evidential fact. Yes, gender dysphoria exists, but this is not gender dysphoria, this is invention, it is the deliberate wrong-footing and confusion of both children and parents for political ends. It spectacularly pigeon holes people by forcing absurd categories and identities upon them, rather than leaving them to be the individuals they are.

This is communism; individuality crushed, replaced by categorization.

Parents have an equally hard time. They are made to feel that they are guilty of “hate” (what else?) if they dare to question this utter madness, so they stay quiet and go along. What makes it immeasurably more difficult for them is the collusion of the police and politicians with the toxic “trans” agenda. Parents can see that people can be arrested for criticizing this cult, and this is simply because the communists have gotten a firm hold on the police, as they have the entire public sector.

To fight back against this, we must first realise what it is. The slow march of communism is exploiting children, and mentally torturing them with profound identity crises imposed from outside. Kids will always struggle with identity, or suffer low self-esteem, and the communists have grabbed hold of this to reshape society to their model.

Once again, For Britain is leading the way in recognizing this, and demands the right of parents, and young people, to speak out against it. The complete de-politicisation of the police, the end of public funding for transctivism groups, and the total exposure of this child-manipulating scam, are the first and minimum steps that need to be taken.

In our 2019 manifesto, For Britain will take exactly these steps. We will speak to the parents too frightened or confused to confront this growing menace.

We cannot simply stand by on this one, history will not forgive us if we do.

Anne Marie Waters
For Britain

Open Letter to the LA Times re Morrissey

Open Letter to Randall Roberts and the Los Angeles Times

Khadija Adam, For Britain Deputy Chair


The headline of your article of 24th October 2019 claims Morrissey is “anti-immigrant”. He is not. He is a supporter of The For Britain Movement which wants to see limited immigration for skills that are in short supply in the UK. What we aren’t in favour of is the current unlimited mass immigration, much of it of unskilled people from the Third World, equivalent to a city the size of Anaheim moving net to England each year. Immigration has to be limited to be sustainable, a majority view in the UK and Europe. England is already the most crowded European country with extreme pressure on social services, housing, the benefits system and more.

The headline also claims For Britain is “a white nationalist political party”. That’s a white nationalist party with, err, a Pakistani-heritage ex-Muslim woman (me) as its Deputy Chair and an incredibly diverse membership! We have no policies that any reasonable person could describe as “white nationalist”. This is a mere defamatory slur. Anybody can check this by simply visiting our web site (something I’d expect a ‘journalist’ to do if they aren’t merely an activist. I have never experienced any racism from any For Britain member, and if I did, I’m sure my boss would instantly cancel their membership. Your claim is nonsense.

Also nonsense is the claim in Randall Roberts’ piece that For Britain is “a far right political party”. Wikipedia does indeed say we are far right, but that’s only because Wikipedia is run by people of the same political persuasion as Randall Roberts who have locked the page to stop anyone correcting it. It is a left wing blog and people do not take it seriously anymore. Again, Los Angeles Times readers don’t need to take my word for it: try editing For Britain’s page on Wikipedia with some positive information and see how far you get.

Nobody who has called us “far right” will ever say what they think “far right” means exactly, even though our press officer Ian McFadzean has specifically challenged them to. Not a single one has been able to articulate the rationale behind the words they write. Isn’t that something?

They won’t define it because any definition that includes For Britain will have to be so broadly drawn as to be patently ridiculous. For Britain believes in 1) British sovereignty outside the EU, 2) tightly limited immigration and 3) stopping Britain becoming an Islamic state, which on current demographic trends must happen in the middle third of this century unless the UK’s immigration and social policies change drastically. If that makes For Britain “far right”, then so are most people in the UK, because all three points are majority views here.

Randall Roberts describes For Britain’s leader Anne Marie Waters (AMW) as being “anti-Islamist” as if that’s a bad thing. The Koran says that husbands who fear disobedience from their wives should beat them (4:34), that thieves should have their hands chopped off (5:38) and that unbelievers are the worst of created beings but Muslims are the best of people (98:6-7). Sharia law which is part and parcel of Islamism says that women who commit adultery, homosexuals, apostates and anyone who criticizes Muhammed or Islam should be killed.

Islamism is a supremacist ideology that seeks to supplant the West. Anyone who supports Western liberal values such as free speech, gender equality and non-violent punishments for offenders should be anti-Islamist. The largest poll in the UK of it’s type revealed over half of UK muslims believe homosexuality should be a criminal offence. Do you therefore not understand why this may be an issue to the leader of a party who is gay herself? This intolerance does not belong in the 21st Century.

I can speak with authority on these matters due to my Islamic upbringing and living in the muslim community. The reality of life experience led me to For Britain as nobody else will confront the truth and talk about it. I do not wish to see this problem continue to grow unchallenged in my country.

Finally, Roberts criticises AMW for talking about what he calls “white replacement theory” regarding “the replacement of white Europe by non-Europeans”. It’s not a theory, it’s a fact. London, Birmingham and Leicester have always been majority white British cities; in the 2011 census they were no longer. White Britons will be minorities in many more English towns and cities in the 2021 census. White British babies have been the majority in the British Isles since the end of the Ice Age; that will cease being the case in the early 2020s. If that’s not “the replacement of white Europe by non-Europeans”, what on Earth is it? Randall Roberts might prefer people to pretend not to notice it, but not talking about it doesn’t mean it’s not happening.

Roberts rounds off his article by approvingly quoting a long list of people who have “cancelled” Morrissey by refusing to play his music on radio or booking him for concerts. He does let the other side get one word in: Los Angeles Councilwoman Monica Rodriguez, who says “Everyone in this country and anywhere, in my belief, is entitled to their opinions, even if I am not a proponent of that mindset.” I agree. Indeed the importance of free speech is one of For Britain’s main policies, but it is disappearing in the UK under “hate speech” laws designed by people like Randall Roberts.

Morrissey and I believe in Randall Roberts’ right to free speech; it is clear he doesn’t believe in ours.

It would be good if Randall Roberts and the Los Angeles Times could allow their readers to judge Morrissey and For Britain on what we have actually said, rather than fact-free assertions dredged up from Wikipedia and articles by other left wing journalists. Let alone such arrant nonsense as describing a party with a British Pakistani ex-Muslim Deputy Chair as being “white nationalist”.

Yours sincerely,

Khadija Adam

For Britain Deputy Chair.

Anne Marie’s Blog – Animal Sanctuary in India

It was a very personal journey for me. For as long as I remember, I have had the most intense passion and compassion for animals. I possess a deep sympathy for them. I don’t know where it comes from, but it’s there. I find genuine peace being around animals. There’s an inspiring innocence and a connection to nature, the kind that humans lost as we evolved intellectually. So for my holiday this year, I wanted to be around animals; to enjoy a genuine break, something completely different from my everyday life – and it doesn’t get much more different than this.

I’ve just returned from a weeklong trip to India, where I worked at an expansive animal shelter in the north of the country.

What an experience! The animal shelter itself was extraordinary. Never before have I been around such a large number of people with the same deep sympathy for animals. They perform little miracles every day. Animal Aid Unlimited, based in the city of Udaipur (about an hour’s flight from Delhi), receives around 100 calls per day from local people reporting an animal in trouble. One of their rescue vehicles is dispatched, and an animal is either patched up by vets and re-released, or stays with the shelter for life if it is deemed that they cannot survive on the streets.

It calls itself a hospital and shelter for street animals, which in India overwhelmingly means cows or dogs, and those are the majority inhabitants in this large refuge. It’s hard to explain the prevalence of street animals to those who have not witnessed the poverty-stricken streets of India. The dogs are not any particular breed, but a breed all of their own – the breed of street dog.

Characteristic of nothing we know in the West, cows wander the streets in this and other parts of the country. This is the case in both rural areas and the city centre. A large cow, or several, strolling down busy city streets is a common sight. Given the chaotic traffic (there is little to no order on the roads), accidents are common, and injured dogs and cows a frequent fallout. It is here that Animal Aid does most of its work. It’s a heart-warming mission and one that matches the obvious reverence for animals among the Indian people.

The animal shelter aside, seeing India for the first time was an eye-opener. I have never visited a 3rd world country before, and the culture shock took me by surprise. On leaving the airport at Udaipur, the impact was instant. There is simply no structure or order like we know in the West. Traffic is one obvious example, but business is another. “Shops” don’t necessarily have shop fronts, and people rest in the sun on a seemingly endless number of rubble piles. I saw people sitting in the streets, children playing on mountains of plastic garbage, and makeshift tents along busy roadsides. The poverty is stark.

It is the business practices however that caught my eye, and I couldn’t but wonder if these weren’t contributing significantly to this widespread poverty. For example, items in shops are not often priced. I bought a diary, something I do on all visits abroad, and asked the vendor for a price. He told me 700 rupees (about £7.50) and I was happy to pay. This took him by surprise; he had expected me to haggle him down. But that’s not how I do things, and I had no intention of bartering for a lower price from someone so obviously struggling. The result? A free gift on top of my purchase. On another occasion, at a restaurant, I paid a 100-rupee note for a bottle of water worth 50 rupees. I was told there was no change available. I was therefore offered the bottle free of charge! A colleague from the animal shelter changed the 100-rupee note for me and thankfully I was able to pay. Soon after, the same restaurateur tried to give me my change again, forgetting that he already had. When cash is handed over, the likelihood is it will be thrown in a drawer rather than a cash register. In other words, a cultural shift, in terms of business, is truly needed if India is to tackle its poverty. It would at least be a good start.

Overall, I loved the experience. The people were warm and friendly, and the staff at both the shelter and my hotel couldn’t have been more obliging. It is a unique country with a unique philosophy; its dominant religions are completely different from most others in the world. Its attitude to animals warms the heart of an animal lover like me, and despite its problems, it is a relaxed and pleasant atmosphere to be in.

I’ve always had a respect for India as a nation, and that respect has only deepened now that I’ve been lucky enough to be there. I wish it very well, I wish its wonderful people well. I wish them a future of prosperity, and I sincerely hope they can achieve it.

Watch the videos of my diary below


Brexit | What’s The Deal?

By Anne Marie Waters, Party Leader

21st October 2019

Back in 2017, when I was standing in the Ukip leadership election, I made a clear point about the EU – I called it Hotel California, you can check out but you can never leave. I was right.

Leaving the EU should not be difficult. All we have to do is pass a law revoking our membership. We could strike a simple trade deal, we can agree to tariff free access to each other’s markets to keep things flowing, this should present no problems to parties acting in good faith. We know of course that both sides, our Parliament and the EU, are not acting in good faith. Neither wants us to leave (some MPs do of course but they are not the majority) and so frustrating the process is the method that will be used, and has been used, since the referendum result.

Now, the latest developments reveal yet more game-playing by the British Parliament. Boris Johnson has negotiated a deal with the EU. It is not everything we would want, but the EU will never agree to everything we want. That’s the reality.

The primary details of the deal are: a transition period until December 2020, a ‘divorce bill’ of £33bn, the protecting of EU citizens’ rights here and UK citizens’ rights in the EU, and the removal of the controversial ‘backstop’ regarding Northern Ireland, ensuring no hard border on the island. In the new deal, Northern Ireland will leave with the rest of the UK, but will remain regulated by the EU on some products, meaning there will be some checks between NI and the Republic of Ireland, but Northern Ireland can make changes to this as times goes on.

Also of great importance, the day after the transition period ends, the UK can engage in unilateral trade deals. This is what we wanted.

MPs were asked to vote at the weekend whether to approve this deal or not. They didn’t, instead they voted on an Oliver Letwin amendment to delay approval of the deal. This means that the Benn Act, requiring Boris Johnson to request an extension has been triggered. So Johnson has written to the EU, as required by law, to request this extension. He has not signed this however, a move labeled “childlike” by some remainers.

Accompanying the unsigned letter is a signed one stating that a delay would be a mistake. Johnson will now put his deal before MPs again this week. Labour, for their part, are threatening another amendment, demanding a second referendum on the deal, with Remain as an option for voters.

Ministers remain convinced that the deal can be passed in Parliament, and have triggered Operation Yellowhammer, the Government preparation strategy for a no deal Brexit.

The European Union meanwhile has said it will extend until February 2020, or beyond. Of course it will. The EU will continue to allow extension after extension because it has no intention of letting Britain go – at least not without great difficulty, or without keeping us entangled in a variety of areas for years or decades to come: Hotel California, we can leave, but we can’t.

Whatever happens this week, one thing must be clear, we must get out by whichever means. No deal is certainly the preference, but this deal is better than more and more extensions. At least with a deal, we can be officially out, giving us far more power as we deal with individual issues in the coming years. Our military for example, must be untangled from EU arrangements, but this can happen after this deal is struck.

What we can’t do is stay in a minute longer. If we do, that’s British politics for years to come, and this will suit many – both on the Remain and Leave side of the debate. Some leave campaigners won’t agree with this deal because it means the country moving on, and they don’t want that. It would suit Nigel Farage perfectly well to carry this on for years; it keeps him in the limelight. It makes politics all about him and others whose living is made as long as Brexit at the forefront of political debate. This has to end.

If we don’t bring an end to this charade, by whichever means (deal or no deal), the country may well be lost for good. Because while this carries on, so does mass immigration, so does the loss of our free speech, so does the perversion of reality of the trans madness and the subsequent abuse of children, so does the climate change lie which will tax us and instill panic across the board, so does the Islamisation, so does the politicisation of the police. It all continues unabated.

We must bring an end to this now, and confront the other major issues, before it’s too late to ever deal with them at all.

For Britain – PayPal Ban Statement

Important Message re PayPal (please read the whole message)

9th October 2019

updated 11th October

On Tuesday the 8th of October, PayPal decided to close the For Britain account without warning or explanation.

An automated email informed us that the account was suspended immediately, and in 6 months they will let us know if they intend to return to us any funds they are holding.

This has the effect of cancelling thousands of member subscriptions who pay via that method, and is of course harmful to the party.

Members are now asked to pay their subs by another method, ideally bank transfer.

We’re sorry for any inconvenience this causes. It’s staggering that private companies have the power to interrupt and obstruct is in this way.

Alarmingly, this suspension was not explained when we contacted PayPal. Our legal officer has written to them and I contacted the MD, Cameron McLean, who has not yet had the courtesy to reply.

He and PayPal have happily taken thousands in fees, but won’t explain the reason for their decision – the reality being, this is politically motivated and they cannot justify the suspension for any other reason.

We of course appeal against this discriminatory decision.

For Britain has not broken any of the Terms & Conditions. PayPal reference the fact that in their pre-written automatic email that they can effectively do whatever they wish.

So this is clearly a political decision aimed at defunding us. This won’t work.

In a sane world, all people on all sides would be alarmed by this. Large companies exercising this much power over politics is a profound threat (yet another one) to our democracy.

We know our media and politicians celebrate these interferences, even though the winds may blow in their direction one day.

For Britain is listed on the Electoral Commission website as a major political party. To have the ability to disrupt politics in this way is something that must be dealt with, and pushed back.

We are aware of other organisations that have suffered a similar fate yesterday – the constant theme being they are also non-left wing.

Please don’t let them win!

Please set up your new payment methods, and help us in this short term cashflow issue by buying conference tickets and donating. Don’t let them have the satisfaction – fight back and answer them by making us bigger and stronger.

This is evidence why For Britain must succeed and turn the dangerous tide.

We will continue to fight back no matter what they throw at us. But we can only do it with your support.

Thank you.

The For Britain Leadership Team

Global debt fuelled economy, heading for disaster

by a retired fund manager and For Britain member

Our economy and indeed, the global economy, is in a far more fragile state than we are being told. There is one word for it and that word is debt.
We are drowning in the stuff yet it remains largely invisible until something like Carillion or Thomas Cook happens, when suddenly it becomes all too visible.
Politicians, the media, elements of the financial system and a generational change in attitudes are all responsible. With 11 years of endless money printing and debt creation since the near collapse in 2008, we appear to have been able to change water into wine as if by magic. That wine is about to turn into vinegar because debt never goes away and there are signs that the crunch is creeping upon us.
The roots of what I believe might well will be a financial implosion started many years ago. It is beyond the scope of this blog to go back into the mists of history but it is fair to say that financial discipline started to erode in the seventies. There were some good patches but overall things deteriorated culminating in the near death 2008 financial collapse.
Few lessons were learned from 2008 as politicians took the easy route, merely blowing a gigantic bubble but doing nothing to tackle the underlying problems. The world went on its greedy, short term, have it all now, path. The idea of saving for a rainy day was consigned to the dustbin as debt took the place of saving. Money printing (just pressing a button these days) ever more “liquidity” took centre stage as all the former discipline was progressively discarded in a frantic effort to keep the plates of the global economy spinning.
So where are we now? In the first quarter of 2019 the world global debt was $246.5 trillion and it grew by $3 trillion in that quarter.
Do you know how many zeros there are in a trillion? The answer is 000000000000. It is twelve zeros so to make it easier to grasp the numbers are sometimes spaced out in fours, i.e. 0000 0000 0000.
The debts are so big that there are what is known as debt clocks on Google where, together with the links, you can read endless details for each country and much more. The one that really hits you in the eyes is called the World Debt Clock. It shows you in real time what is happening. It also shows the interest accruing as you watch.
These debts can never be repaid and there is no will to tackle the problem. Some day, and my instinct is that it is not far off, somebody sufficiently important, will not want to buy the debts. Credibility will then be shattered and the cascade will start.
Why do I think we are almost here? The manipulation of stock markets ever upwards, particularly in the U.S. which has a massive global influence, is now getting tired. Even though it is never mentioned in the Main Stream Media, this manipulation is all over the blogosphere, plenty of people know about it and they have a fair idea of how it is done. Even those remote from the scene sense that something is not right.
Here I need to go into an explanation. In October 1987 world stock markets had a sudden and violent flash crash, from which they later recovered. One of the results was “The President’s Working Group on Markets” which was established in March 1988 under Ronald Reagan. Essentially it was a group of luminaries which was to ensure the smooth running of financial markets.
Fast forward to the aftermath of the 2008 debacle and it slowly became obvious to financial people that something strange was happening. Time and again the U.S. stock market would stabilise just when, to seasoned observers, it looked as if a sell a sell off was coming. Also markets would magically rise towards the end of a rough day to hide the earlier day’s goings on. This also influenced markets in the Far East and Europe, including the U.K. The “Working Group” had morphed into what became known as the “Plunge Protection Team”. To this day neither its existence nor its activities have ever been openly admitted.
This so called team is devilishly sophisticated. It knows exactly what it was doing, has a brilliant sense of timing, and as much “press button” new money as it ever needs to achieve its aim.
There are other activities, all aimed at pushing up markets. One of the most notorious is share “buy backs” which take the cash out of companies. They used to illegal as the idea was thought to be a form of manipulation. However they were legalised in the U.S. in 1982 and the U.K. followed later. They raise the share price enabling the bosses to make more on their share options. There are plenty of supporters for this dubious practice but in my view they may look good but lead to long term fragilities. It is raping the past for the present and the complete opposite of saving for a rainy day. Huge amounts of money have been taken out. In the U.S. alone around $800 billion was taken out in 2018 and this year it might even be $1 Trillion.
If we add in the debts and machinations in Japan, China, and the enormous money printing by the European Central Bank over many years it is no surprise that we have ended up with a global financial system as flimsy as one made of Balsa Wood.
We are not there yet but there are increasing signs that a full blown recession might be in the wind. Let us take a look. The global motor industry is in trouble now that the last great market, China, is maturing. One in eight workers in Germany is employed, either directly or indirectly in that business. Manhattan property prices are falling and good luck trying to sell in Miami. The latest industrial output figures for the U.S were the worst since 2009. The start up WeWork’s proposed new issue has had to be abandoned, it is in meltdown and has big operations worldwide including office space in London. Other new issues have had to be cancelled. South Korea is slowing down, Sweden is in trouble. One of the best global indicators is a company like Federal Express (Fedex) whose last numbers were down amid cautious comments for the future.
Finally there are worrying developments in the “plumbing” of the U.S. money markets. That is the market where banks, and some others, lend money to each other. This is a complex area but it is looking as if the U.S. Central Bank (The Federal Reserve) is having to inject more money than expected to keep control of interest rates. It is doing it by issuing “Repos” which are “Securities Repurchase Agreements.” It raises the question of whether there is something nasty under the surface.
These are early days. The authorities have done everything to keep the balls up in the air. They will continue to do so but if, despite their efforts, we are heading for a crash it will have immense political repercussions. It would not just impact the stock market. Money reaches every nook and cranny and even the leafiest of leafy suburbs will start talking. There would be no papering over the cracks a second time.

Converting to Islam – A Health and Safety Warning

By Nissar Hussain – For Britain Islam Spokesman

2nd October 2019

I think I am going to get an MP to propose a new law or regulation that will save lives. You would think that with the duty of care fetish system we now live under that this would be an easy task, a no-brainer. But what if I ask them to put out a health and safety warning about Islam’s apostasy laws which demand death for leaving the religion? I am sure you can imagine the look of despair in their eyes when they get word of this proposal. Too hot, too dangerous and … and … Islamophobic!

Now hold on! I come from a Muslim family and cannot be a white supremacist, courtesy of my Pakistani heritage. But you can see the eyes closing to a suspicious slit, the wheels in the brain whirring and the eyebrows lowering and coming closer together as they work out how to deal with this conundrum.

What do they say to an ex-Muslim who has been abused, driven from his home – twice – and taken a beating in which he could have died (which Bradford Police refer to as an assault and not attempted murder with no arrests) all because he left Islam? Do they look after the understandable concerns of the viciously attacked convert, or do they look for the quiet life – you know, like Chamberlain and Lord Halifax did back in the day? And there are always the votes. Yes, that community can be guaranteed to come up with the goods, they can always drum up the postal vote needed to swing the seats. I should know. Yes, a difficult one.

Freedom of conscience over pragmatism. Arms sales over a few arms broken. What to do? You can see their cunning little minds going ten-to-the-dozen, eyes darting around as they work on a seeming solution. “This falls into the acceptable level of violence category, just like Ireland. These apostates are just going to have to lump it – or should I say, take their lumps.”

“If I propose something, I might end up on someone’s list in Bradford or Rochdale. Delay, prevaricate, obfuscate and distract. Work through the playlist I have learned over the years and see which one will get this problem-maker off my back.”

“I know! Pass it upwards! I can tell him that I will speak to the right department and Sir Humphrey will deal with it. That’ll take forever and he’ll get bored or go off and pester someone else. Problem solved! ‘Yes, Mr Hussain, I know what to do!’”

File 13, nearly always works. But not this time. The ex-Muslims are doing what they have feared. We are organising, we are going onto the front foot and taking the issue to the public directly. Who needs an MP when you can get a whole party supporting you?

For Britain has given us a voice, and it is a voice that helps the party as well as us apostates. The press and the rest love to employ the knee-jerk reactions that have been inculcated into the general population by saying the mighty magic words – “FAR RIGHT RACISTS!”. Not going to work on us or For Britain now – well, it may do if they cut me out of the photo alongside Ann Marie again!

We are real victims of the currently favoured victim group. But not for long. The more prominent we become, the more effective our group is, the harder the task they face in down-playing what we are demanding. As Morrissey might say, “The more you ignore me, the closer I get”!

Look at my talks on Youtube with Ann Marie (while you can), read the materials on apostasy at the Legalise Apostasy website, and support our campaign under the Apostaid banner. And, most importantly, inform your friends and family of Islam’s disgraceful and genocidal threat to ex-Muslims. It is time we called out the Ulema, the Sharia’s law-makers, and demanded action by our law-makers, our politicians, to deal with this fifth column in our midst.

The death-threatening Ulema versus the freedom-seeking apostates. Whose side are you on?

For Britain 2019 Party Conference

Dear For Britain Member,

I am delighted to announce that tickets are now on sale for our annual party conference in the NorthWest of England on Sunday the 17th of November. We have a new (improved) venue with (some) parking, and it is located between Liverpool and Manchester. Further details will be announced closer to the date. We won’t run coaches this year as it caused some delay and bottleneck last year.

This year, catering (all options) is included in the price of the ticket. We will also have card payment for any merchandise you may wish to purchase on the day. Vegans, please let us know in advance if you purchase a ticket, as well as anyone else with special dietary requirements.

The tickets are limited to a first come first served basis. You are responsible for any guests that you choose to bring. We sold out last year so don’t delay. We will announce our guest speaker line-up in due course, but expect a packed informative and fun day, mingling with like minded friends.

To order, you will need to log into the website. Then if you click ‘members’ in the top bar, you will see the ‘Annual Conference 2019’ option appear. This will take you to the ticket ordering page. There is an option to ‘pre-order’ a personally signed copy of Beyond Terror by Anne Marie, as well as an optional donation. The cost for putting on the event is high, so please support the party and the conference if you can, and we can’t wait to see you there. If you are now logged in, click here to go to the ticket ordering page.

Please note: Gold Members and Platinum Members: for your discount code, please email [email protected] before ordering your ticket.

Party Chairman

Brexit | The Saga So Far

By Anne Marie Waters

25th September 2019

It continues.  This is becoming more and more alarming, and the established elite more and more remote.  The Supreme Court has ruled that Boris Johnson’s proroguing of Parliament was unlawful, and MPs have gone back to work; many of them with the sole intention of preventing Brexit.

The fact that we are still debating this is a sign of the peril we are in.  Supreme Court rulings, Parliamentary manoeuvring, and a Labour leader whose official policy it is to sit on the fence; all of it to determine whether or not we ought to leave the EU.  Something that we were told was decided over three years ago.

Since the result, it has been relentless.  The media re-writing of history began the day after, with the sudden introduction of ‘hard Brexit’ and ‘soft Brexit’, or ‘this isn’t what people voted for’.  Since then, it’s been a horrifying pantomime.  Here’s the story so far…

Following the formation of Theresa May’s Government in 2016, David Davis and Michel Barnier were appointed to thrash out the details of our departure from the EU.  The House of Commons voted in December to trigger Article 50 by the end of the following March. But it wouldn’t be that simple.

In early 2017, the Supreme Court ruled on a matter raised by Gina Miller, a business owner, who argued that the Government couldn’t trigger Article 50 without Parliamentary approval.  So, Theresa May introduced legislation, and it was passed.  Parliamentary approval was gained.  May subsequently sent a letter to Donald Tusk triggering two years of negotiation; the UK would leave the EU on the 29th of March 2019.  Except it wouldn’t. 

A disastrous (from a Tory point of view) general election soon followed – one in which May lost her already slim majority.  A deal with the Democratic Unionist Party allows her to govern, but on thin ice, and beholden to the DUP.

Along comes June 2018 and the ‘Chequers agreement’ is produced.  So little did it satisfy the Cabinet’s Brexiteers that both David Davis and Boris Johnson resigned from the front bench.  It mattered little, because the EU didn’t accept it in any case, partly because it sought a ‘special relationship’ that would give Britain far too easy a ride, and encourage other countries to consider life outside the bloc.  That would never do.    

The notorious Withdrawal Agreement was a published a few months later.  This included an equally notorious transition period, one that could (and likely would) last indefinitely.  This one was happily accepted by the EU (which should set alarm bells ringing).  The same deal was rejected in Parliament not once, not twice, not even three times, it would go on to be voted down four times.

As March 29th 2019 – apparently ‘Brexit day’ – approached, so unpopular were May’s exit proposals, that the first extension to Article 50 was requested.  The new ‘Brexit day’, desired by Theresa May, was June 30th 2019.  However, following some to-ing and fro-ing about the date, October 31st 2019 was eventually settled upon.  ‘Brexit day’ is once again looming, and Prime Minister Boris Johnson has found his hands tied since the moment he set foot in Downing Street.

Fast forward to September of this year and Johnson announces that the Parliamentary session is to come to an end in mid September, to be opened again with a Queen’s speech on October 14th.  This, Remainers in Parliament argued, restricted their ability to debate Brexit (despite the three years they’d just had to do so). 

Parliament afterwards busied itself with passing a bill to prevent a no-deal Brexit at the end of October, and rejecting the possibility of a general election.

Now, the latest.  The Supreme Court has ruled that Johnson had no legal right to suspend Parliament at all.

That’s where we are. 

This has been an entirely unprecedented period in British politics.  The gap between Parliament and the people has never been wider.  Parliament is openly defying a democratic mandate and is in total opposition to the voting public. 

This cannot continue indefinitely, but while there are so many vested interests in its continuance, that may tragically be the reality.  Remainers will stop at nothing, politicians believe they are untouchable, and the people at the bottom of the ladder watch as their vote is rendered void.

There is only one answer, do what it takes to get out now, then clean up the House of Commons permanently. 

Press Statement : Supreme Court Decision 24th September 2019

Press Statement : 24th September 2019

The For Britain Movement strongly disagrees with the decision reached today by the Supreme Court that the Queen’s prorogation of parliament is void. 
As pointed out in the Law Spokesman’s blog yesterday, the principle that parliament is sovereign is at the heart of UK’s unwritten constitution, but it is not a replacement for the constitution. The court failed to address in its reasons,  and the government failed to argue, the extent of the present constitutional crisis we are now in. It is illogical for the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty to be cited to justify surrendering that sovereignty against the will of the British people formally expressed in a referendum. 
The Supreme Court’s decision is impeccably expressed, and in accordance with convention, but fails to reflect the unprecedented paradox the country faces. An opportunity to remind parliament of the basis of its sovereignty, the consent of the people, and thereby bring some order to the chaos has been missed.

Legal Officer’s View: The Prorogation Case in the Supreme Court

By Paul Ellis, Legal Officer

19th September 2019

The news watching public have sat through more parliamentary votes and debates over standing orders and Erskine May over the past three years than is normal for a whole lifetime.
The respite from more Brexit that came with prorogation of parliament has proved brief as the battle has only moved a few hundred yards across the square to the Supreme Court. Here arguments have been put that prorogation was illegal and that the parliament should be recalled to hold the government to account and possibly enact more legislation. What joy.

The point in issue is initially an arcane one: is the prime minister’s advice to the monarch to prorogue parliament an act of the executive, in which case the courts can review it, as they review any act of the government to determine if it is lawful, or is it a political act that forms part of the proceedings of parliament and which the courts are forbidden from pronouncing upon by the Bill of Rights of 1689. If the court decides that it is an act of the executive, it must then consider a second and more controversial question: whether Boris Johnson acted through ‘improper motivation’ in advising the Queen to prorogue this parliament for five weeks.

There is, it should be said, no ‘correct’ legal answer to either question. The British constitution works on following convention, but the country is in the midst of an entirely unprecedented set of circumstances and a deep constitutional crisis.

Lady Hale, President of the Supreme Court, insisted again and again that the case was not about Brexit. The court would focus exclusively on the narrow one of the decision to prorogue and ignore all context.

So the court did not ask whether achieving the decision voted for by the majority in a national referendum would be an ‘improper reason’ for proguing a parliament that was refusing to do so. It did not address parliament’s own unconstitutional behaviour in seeking to legislate to negotiate with a foreign power from the opposition benches whilst refusing to allow an election. Most importantly, the court looked away from the heart of the Brexit crisis: the paradox that parliament is stretching the doctrine of its own sovereignty to braking point for the explicit purpose of surrendering that sovereignty, possibly permanently, to an unaccountable foreign power.

As David Starkey succinctly put it, parliamentary sovereignty is meaningless without national sovereignty. Many, including myself, would go further, and say that parliamentary sovereignty is not superior to the will of the people formally expressed in a referendum.

Possibly the justices hoped that by isolating the issue of the prorogation from its context they could provide one small island of certainty within the chaos. But how could the court sensibly find and apply precedent for a situation that is completely without precedent? How can one address the propriety of Boris Johnson’s motives without considering the context that British democracy is fighting for its life?

The case offers a golden, possibly the only opportunity for the Supreme Court to introduce some much-needed sanity to the present crisis. In its judgment it could point out that parliament is sovereign only within the constitution, but that its own behaviour is subject to the law. It could point out that Parliament, the constitution, even the authority of the court rests ultimately upon the consent of a free population.

The Supreme Court could and should be democracy’s backstop. However, I saw little sign from the justices that the court is about to say any such things or offer the country any stability. On the contrary, I fear that the nation is about to be plunged into another round of law making without rules, and government by opposition, and the constitutional crisis will deepen yet.

Brexit Latest – Labour’s Demise

By Anne Marie Waters, Party Leader

10th September 2019

Some things don’t age very well – especially Jeremy Corbyn’s demands for a general election!  It must be embarrassing for Labour at present.  Not only do they have to crawl backwards on their hitherto insistence on an election, but they find themselves in a position where they are promoting a ridiculous policy of negotiating a deal with the EU and then campaigning against it.

In the latest episode of the Brexit saga, Prime Minister Boris Johnson has once again failed to persuade Parliament to back a General Election.  Labour don’t want one, despite all the months they were calling for one.  They’ve come up with the rather lame excuse that they do want an election, just not on Boris Johnson’s terms.  Tripe.  Labour is running scared.  On his Twitter account, Corbyn insists he wants rid of Johnson’s government, so it is obvious then that he doesn’t think he can win, and he’s probably right.

Meanwhile, Parliament has now been suspended, and already EU leaders are hinting that they will allow an extension of Brexit – of course they will, the EU doesn’t want the UK cash cow to depart.  Just like other referenda in countries across Europe, the EU machine will happily ignore the result of this one and carry on as before. 

Boris Johnson’s promises to take us out of the EU on October 31st are now in serious doubt, but few will blame Johnson himself.  Our opportunity to change the House of Commons has been denied to us by MPs, whose opposition to democracy becomes ever clearer by the day.

Labour, a party whose heartlands voted to Leave, has turned its back on the British working class, whose livelihoods they claim to be defending.  Labour acts as if there will be no employment rights outside the EU, their entire premise is built on nonsense.  Their policy on Brexit as it stands is nothing less than laughable.  In fact, it’s making for some good comedy hits on social media.

Essentially, Labour are now stating this: if they were in power they would negotiate a deal with the EU that maintains employment and environment laws etc, and then they would campaign to Remain.  In short, they’ll negotiate a deal and then campaign against it.  It truly has gotten to new levels of ineptitude now. 

Labour is revealing, more and more each day, its absolute contempt for the voice of the British voting public.  In backing Remain, it trampled all over its own voters’ choice, and now, in disallowing a general election, it is doing the same. 

What is needed is for all of us who are pro-Brexit to get behind Boris Johnson at this time.  Ukip should get behind him, Farage should get behind him.  We should leave as promised on October 31st, without a deal, and begin the process of putting Great Britain back together again.  Failing this, a general election in which all Brexiteers get behind Boris, so we can get out – once and for all. If not, this will drag on for decades and professional politicians will make a handsome living out of it; Farage has done so for decades.

We must get the country back in order, but we must never forget what so many MPs have done.  They have denounced the voice of the public, they have shown us their contempt time after time.  When we get out of the EU, we then get on with the business of draining the swamp – by throwing them out of the Commons and reminding them of exactly who is in charge. 


Animal Welfare | Non Stun Slaughter Report

Religious Slaughter in the UK and Beyond

Written by Anne Marie Waters, issued 7th September 2019

Halal food, food prepared according to sharia law, has become a staple of the Western diet – and much of this food is sold unlabelled. Halal is a multi-billion dollar global industry involving agriculture and farming, food processing, catering, manufacturing, pharmaceuticals, tourism and trade.

Halal slaughter involves cutting the throat of a conscious animal – “unstunned slaughter”. British law maintains that animals should be stunned to unconsciousness; this is often carried out with a bolt of electricity to the head prior to slaughter. The animal therefore does not feel the pain of slaughter and is unconscious throughout. Unstunned slaughter means the animal is conscious while its throat is cut – a method used in both halal and kosher animal slaughter.

A long series of legislative provisions over the last century prohibit the unstunned slaughter of animals in the UK. This stretches all the way back to the Slaughter of Animals Act 1933, which introduced the requirement to stun animals before killing. However, then, as now, a religious exemption applied and both Jews and Muslims were permitted to continue with conscious slaughter.
In a statement to the House of Commons in 2014, George Eustice, Agriculture Minister, said the “UK Government recognises and respects the needs of religious communities, so has always maintained the limited exemption, which is to be used only for meat produced for Jewish and Muslim communities.” [1]

This was a reiteration of the requirement that religiously slaughtered meat is provided only for those religious groups. This is dramatically not the case in relation to halal.

A Mail on Sunday investigation in 2010 found that schools, hospitals, pubs and sporting venues throughout Britain are routinely serving halal meat unlabelled. Iconic arenas named included Ascot, Twickenham and Wembley Stadium. NHS hospitals serving halal meat, without informing patients, include London’s largest Trust – Guy’s & St Thomas.

In 2013, an East London newspaper reported that three quarters of schools in the London Borough of Waltham Forest were serving halal meat to all pupils. These schools were under the control of the Borough Council. The same report referred to a school in Chingford which informed parents that meat served there would be replaced by an all-halal menu, prompting protests from some. A council spokesperson is reported to have said “All meat provided to local schools is certified by the Halal Food Authority.”

Various reports of people being fired from their jobs for accidentally serving non-halal meat have also emerged. A dinner lady was fired from a Birmingham school in 2013 for serving non-halal meat at a supposed multi-faith school. The subsequent news reports confirmed that 1,400 pupils at Moseley school were routinely being served halal meat, regardless of religion and without being informed. The head-teacher apologised for the unintentional error of allowing non-halal meat to be supplied, but many Muslim parents demanded punishment. A Birmingham City Council spokesperson also apologised.

Critics of halal, or even those who raise questions or call for labelling, have been accused of ‘picking on religious minorities’. Those who attest that they are acting out of concern for animal welfare are dismissed as liars – meaning they are in a lose-lose situation. In 2014, Conservative MP Philip Davies tabled a motion in the House of Commons arguing that religiously slaughtered meat should be labelled as such, but his proposals were defeated. Davies had quoted Oxfordshire Imam Taj Hargey, who has stated that halal imposition amounts to “covert religious extremism and creeping Islamic fundamentalism making its way into Britain by the backdoor“.

In response to his proposals, Conservative MP Jonathan Djanogly asked of Davies, “Why is he picking on religious communities in his new clause?” The fact that it is religious communities requiring the exemption to unstunned slaughter is of course the reason religious communities are being discussed.

More recently, in October 2018, councillors on Lancashire Council voted to stop supplying the county’s schools with unstunned halal meat. The Lancashire Council of Mosques objected to this, and “threatened to ask Muslim families across the county to boycott all school meals”. Abdul Hamid Qureshi, the chief executive officer, called the move “hugely discriminatory.” He said “It could be categorised as Islamophobic, it could be categorised as a racist approach. It’s not sensible action but offensive action to me.

Similarly, in Kirklees, West Yorkshire, councillors attempted to debate the provision of unstunned halal meat to schools, but the debate was shut down under accusations of ‘targeting sections of the community’. Labour’s council leader Shabir Pandor shut down any debate, saying “I’m closing the debate on halal at full council. Diversity is our strength. Those questioning our provision of halal don’t have animal welfare at heart. They have targeted sections of the community which had caused fear [sic]. Our policy on halal will remain in place.”

In effect therefore, according to some members of Kirklees Council, people are no longer permitted to raise concerns about animal welfare in relation to unstunned slaughter, and their concerns will be dismissed as lies or hatred.

Non-Meat Certification
The halal certification of non-meat products is also a fast-growing business. The Halal Food Authority (HFA) is perhaps the most prominent halal certification provider in the UK. Companies pay for their products to be certified halal in order to appeal to the rapidly expanding Muslim market. On its website, the HFA boasts of having provided certification to food giants including Mars, KFC, Kingsmill, Warburtons, and McCain. The Guardian has reported that Subway, Nando’s, and Pizza Express serve halal food at many of their outlets.
Furthermore, much has suggested that some funds raised through halal certification is being used to fund Islamist organisations, and even terrorist groups.
(As with many matters involving the Islamic faith, accurate and reliable information is difficult to find. We can therefore only inform you of some of the most common beliefs and statements surrounding this issue).

In the United States and Canada for example, some foods have been receiving halal certification from the Canadian Islamic Society of North America (ISNA-Canada). The Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) issued a suspension and fine to ISNA-Canada in 2018 after an audit raised concerns that it had provided resources “to support armed militancy”.

According to the CRA, “the society’s resources may have, directly or indirectly, been used the support the political efforts of Jamaat-e-Islami and/or its armed wing Hizbul Mujahideen.” The group’s halal certification scheme was reportedly described as “essentially a business”.

In France, the revenue of the halal food industry has been estimated at around $7 billion. It is believed that halal certification in France is often provided by “experts”, themselves certified by the UOIF, or Union of the Islamic Organizations in France, which according to the Simon Wiesenthal Centre has strong ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. French journalist and author Alexandre del Valle was threatened with violence when he investigated the extent of halal food in France. His investigation concluded “Nearly 60 percent of halal food is controlled by organizations belonging to the Muslim brotherhood.” [2]

The halal preparation of meat consists of cutting the throat of a fully conscious animal while uttering an Islamic prayer, and then allowing the animal to bleed to death. This procedure can only be carried out by a Muslim.

The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) has stated that “Evidence clearly indicates that slaughter without pre-stunning can cause unnecessary suffering.” The RSPCA launched a campaign against religious unstunned slaughter in 2019, but it has had little success in persuading authorities to take action on this issue.

The Government advisory body, the Farm Animal Welfare Council (now Committee) argues that the practice should be banned because animals experience “very significant pain and distress” before they become unconscious.

According to the National Secular Society, “the Government no longer keeps statistics on religious slaughter and said in October 2010 that it did not know the number of halal slaughterhouses.”
On top of the above, there are further concerns surrounding employment; only a Muslim can carry out the ritual slaughter demanded of halal, and as such, as the market grows, a de facto discrimination against non-Muslims emerges in the abattoir employment field. The law potentially allows for exemptions to discriminatory employment laws for reasons such as these (if it can be argued, legally, that there is a “genuine occupational requirement”), however this merely compounds the advantage of Muslims in employment terms in the meat market as halal continues to expand.

While significantly smaller, and not imposed in public places, kosher slaughter (prepared according to Jewish law) also requires the unstunned killing of animals. There is however no suggestion or evidence that funds from kosher certification are used for political or terrorist activity. However, on animal welfare grounds, both practices must be considered impermissible.

For Britain’s Position

For Britain is fully committed to our long-standing proposal to repeal the religious exemption to unstunned slaughter in the United Kingdom. Unstunned slaughter carried out within the UK’s borders should not be permitted.

Both Denmark and Belgium have banned religious slaughter, and so there is no reason that the same can’t be done in the UK. What is required to implement such laws is the ability to withstand and dismiss false accusations of ‘hate’ and ‘bigotry’ (etc.) and to insist that animal welfare is prioritised over and above the requirements of religious minorities.

Any import of halal or kosher (or unstunned meat of any kind) must be carefully labeled and its sale geared towards to relevant religious communities as originally intended. No schools, or hospitals, or sporting venues, or other public places should serve meat from animals slaughtered without stunning.

We will continue to campaign on this vital issue and will not be deterred by false smears. Animals have no voice of their own, so For Britain is committed to being a voice on their behalf.

[1] HC Deb 4 November 2014 c168WH

[2] Note the original CBN report is no longer listed on the CBN site


Party Statement Regarding Brexit / General Election

5th September 2019

For Britain is watching the situation with Brexit, and the potential for a General Election closely. A General Election, if called, would clearly be a single issue election.

We, like all democratic people in the country are horrified at the contempt and disregard for the democratic will of the British people shown by politicians from all parties. This has become not just a battle for Brexit, but a battle to restore democracy within the United Kingdom. If Jeremy Corbyn and his consortium are successful, the country has some very dark times ahead. The decent people who support democracy, love their country and want to ensure Brexit happens must come together and do the right thing.

As the situation is fluid, it is impossible to make definitive statements, but I felt it important to state our thinking at this time.

We recognise, for the good of the country, that Brexit must be delivered. In the recent EU elections, our members overwhelmingly supported For Britain not standing candidates to risk splitting the vote. We cannot allow Jeremy Corbyn to become Prime Minister via the back door, and for Brexit to be thwarted. So with this in mind, our position will be to act in a way that minimises the risk of splitting ‘Leave’ votes, a Labour Government or Brexit not being delivered. It is our view that by rejecting the chance of ‘no deal’, the politicians are effectively undermining any negotiation ability, and as such trying to land us in a position of no Brexit. This must not be allowed to happen.

There may be a seat with unique circumstances that warrant our standing a candidate, and these will be reviewed if that situation arises, and we will keep you informed of our intention and rationale. Our strategy of building the party up from a local level will of course continue, as will our long term vision which will ultimately bring us power.

Brexit : Best & Worst Case Scenarios

By Anne Marie Waters, Party Leader

4th September 2019


The best case scenario is easy. We get out on the 31st of October with a trade deal that allows businesses to do business. Tariff-free movement of goods and services between the EU and the UK is entirely reasonable, and entirely doable if parties are acting in good faith.

The UK does not have to be in a customs union or a single market in order to trade freely with the EU, the only reason for it is the EU’s insistence. Free movement of people is not necessary for free trade either, that’s also a product of Brussels’ ambitions.

As such, the European Union’s machinery would never allow such a scenario to occur, so our best and only option of getting out now is no deal. The failure to secure a simple trade deal is, as Boris Johnson rightly says, largely the fault of the MPs doing their utmost to scupper Brexit. Their continued attempts to keep the Remain dream alive has handed all the advantage to the EU. If Brussels is sure we won’t leave on No Deal, it strengthens their negotiating hand infinitely. The Remain camp is effectively working with the EU to block our exit.

The behaviour of some of our MPs, in failing to respect the Brexit referendum result, is a shocking reality for the British public to face. They want unaccountable power; it’s attractive. They are fully on board with the anti-democratic Brussels bureaucracy, and the direction that Europe is taking, because it is removing the public voice from the governing process. This suits them very much indeed. They think they know best after all.

Members of Parliament have pledged to introduce legislation to the House of Commons forcing Boris Johnson in to yet another extension, and pushing our departure date back until January 2020. This of course is to buy them more time, until they can bring Brexit crashing down altogether, and (they hope) hammer the final nail in to the coffin of the input of the disobedient electorate.

The worst case scenario is staying in, and those who voted to leave left to wonder what happen to their country, what happened to their power. It’s entirely feasible that a Labour government would cancel Brexit altogether, or MPs force through a May-like deal that keeps us in the customs union and single market, i.e. we stay in the EU in all but name.

Then we face the possibility of a decade or more getting bogged down in arguments over the details of the Brexit deal; politicians continuing to play the big political game (that provides them with a handsome living) while the enormous social and cultural problems we face grow ever larger.

We must get out now. MPs have a moral duty to get behind Boris Johnson at this time and deliver the will of the electorate. If they don’t, they must pay with their seats. I sincerely hope that the British public makes sure this is done.

State of the Nation Documentary

Welcome to our latest campaign

We are going to produce a documentary to tell the public what the situation is that this country is facing. We will look at politics, crime, rights, democracy, the defence of our future, our culture. We will tell the public exactly why For Britain has the policies we have and why we feel the way we do about the country today. The State of Britain 2020 will be produced over the next few months. We need your help to produce it. We need your funds to produce it, so please do donate via link below. Donations can lead to a credit on the film for example and if there’s any other help you’d like to offer us please do get in touch this is important.



Be Part of The Production

We have created the following levels to this end:

  • Under £100 donations = credit on end of documentary
  • £100 = invite to private screening / credit on end of documentary
  • £200 = advanced copy of the doc / private screening invite / credit on end of documentary
  • £350 = advanced copy of the doc / screening invite / after show VIP / credit on end of documentary
  • £500 = advanced copy of the doc / private screening invite / after show VIP / credit on documentary  / EXECUTIVE PRODUCER credit on end of documentary

BREXIT: Speaker’s Authority Is Now Very Dicey

by Paul Ellis, Legal Officer

29th August 2019

When I was a teacher of law, one of my favourite classes concerned the rule of law. To make a potentially rather dull and theoretical topic more engaging for my students, I devised a fiendishly complicated game. The game had a board with a start and a finishing line, some randomly positioned snakes and ladders and a Monopoly-style jail. Students moved their counters around the board, or failed to, by throwing an ever-changing number of dice of different colours and sizes, including some novelty and poker dice. The students were not told the rules of the game, and it quickly became clear to them that any ‘rules’ were different for different students and changed frequently without notice.

The point of my little exercise was to demonstrate Albert Venn Dicey’s analysis of the rule of law – the principle that all laws, to be effective, should apply equally to everyone, be prospective and reasonably clear, certain and publicly discoverable, and that they be fairly and impartially applied. These principles are more important than any individual law, and whilst compliance with them does not guarantee democracy and just laws, it is a necessary precondition for them. Without the rule of law, the exercise of authority must be tyranny and people’s response will be inevitably tend towards anarchy. My classroom ‘game’ certainly moved swiftly from the former to the latter!

I later asked the kids what they thought of my game and received the highly memorable reply from one frustrated hijabi-clad girl, who had spent almost her entire game trying to throw the mystery combination to get out of jail, that it ‘sucked like a porn star, sir’. The name that I had chosen for the game was ‘Dicey’, in honour of the great Victorian jurist, and I doubt that there was a student present who will not, for the rest of their lives, get a flashback to that game whenever they hear the name of A. V. Dicey mentioned.

Dicey’s name has been cited frequently by remainers over the twenty four hours since Boris Johnson announced that he had advised the Queen to prorogue parliament for a longer than normal period in the build up to Brexit. However, remainers’ sudden conversion to the rule of law makes them utterly unconvincing democrats. It is remainers who have campaigned relentlessly to ignore the outcome of the 2016 referendum, often on the basis of an undisguised contempt for people they regard too old, white, undereducated or poor to have their vote recognised as legitimate. Remainers in the House of Lords that have casually and repeatedly ignored the Salisbury Convention that as the unelected chamber the Lords must not frustrate the manifesto commitments of an elected government. In the Commons, back bencher and opposition MPs have sallied far beyond their proper role of holding the executive to account, to attempt to become back seat drivers in the UK’s negotiations with Brussels. Most scandalously of all, the person upon whom the enforcement of the rule of law within parliament falls most directly, the Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow, has time and again demonstrated his bias, even to extent of driving a car with a ‘Bollocks to Brexit’ bumper sticker proudly displayed.

With political events now moving very quickly, it is worth taking a moment to recall and fix in our minds his statement of yesterday, sent shortly after the prorogation was announced. The proroguing of parliament would be, Bercow fumed, ‘a constitutional outrage’; it was ‘blindingly obvious’ that its purpose was ‘to stop parliament … performing its duty in shaping a course for the country’; ‘shutting down parliament’ is ‘an offence against the democratic process and the rights of parliamentarians as the people’s elected representatives’; and by the move the Prime Minister ‘undermine(s) his democratic credentials and indeed his commitment to Parliamentary democracy’.

The facts are that a prorogation of parliament, at the prime minister’s discretion, is a normal part of parliamentary procedure and is now very long overdue. A month-long conference season recess is also normal at this time of year. Yes, Boris is no doubt also using this as device to make it more difficult for remainer MPs to block Brexit, but he is acting within the constitution and the ultimate purpose of the exercise is self-evidently to restore parliamentary democracy, rather than allow parliament to be forever subjugated to a foreign power against the expressed will of its people. Speaker Bercow’s polemics about a lack of an offence against and a lack of commitment to parliamentary democracy are wild, wrong and dangerous.

The UK’s unwritten constitution relies upon convention. It offers flexibility but also uncertainty in unconventional times. In such times, the role of Speaker in enforcing the rule of law might be expected to offer a rare instance of stability, but instead John Bercow has hopelessly compromised himself as an impartial adjudicator of Commons rules. It is Bercow, not Boris, that is undermining democracy, by his hollowing out the rule of law upon which it stands. Parliamentary sitting time before 31 October may be curtailed, but there is still more than enough of it for us to see extraordinary scenes stemming from this abdication of due impartiality: and conceivably the collapse of order in the Commons chamber altogether. After all, why should a Brexit-supporting MP now defer to his umpiring any more than one of my students playing the mug’s game ‘Dicey’ to mine?

The Irish Backstop – Here We Go Again

Here we go again.  Since we voted to leave the European Union, we have been going around in circles, and now we’ve arrived back at the start.  Boris Johnson finds himself locked in the same back-and-forward arguments with the EU; he insists there can be no deal involving the Irish backstop, the EU tells him the opposite.  Round and round we go.


In the latest developments, Johnson has given cause for enthusiasm among those of us who voted Leave.  He has repeatedly stated, and his ministers do the same, that we will leave the EU on the 31st of October, with or without a deal.  But he has also stated that a deal is preferable, one that won’t involve an Irish backstop.


The backstop can best be summarized like this: when we leave the EU, Northern Ireland will continue to have a land border with the Republic of Ireland.  This means that part of the UK will have a land border with part of the EU.  The debate therefore surrounds what kind of border this will be.  Given the tumultuous history of Ireland, all parties involved state that they do not wish to see a ‘hard border’ in Ireland, as this could evoke and revive divisions on the island.


The European Union therefore insists that Northern Ireland remain in the EU’s Customs Union for an undefined period, until a ‘soft’ border can be agreed on the island of Ireland.  Parties in Northern Ireland have objected to this idea as they do not accept different treatment to the rest of the UK.  This has meant that the UK’s full inclusion in the Customs’ Union be continued for an undefined period.  Leaving the Customs Union however is vital if we are to leave the EU – something the people of the UK voted to do.  Customs Union membership means that the UK will still be unable to make new trade deals unilaterally, once again, something that people voted for when they voted to leave the European Union.


This is the sticking point.  The United States has also warned that we do nothing to threaten peace in Northern Ireland.  It is a serious matter, so does Boris Johnson have a solution?  Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, has given him 30 days to come up with one![1]


Johnson has met with the leaders of France and Germany over recent days.  While both meetings appear to have been amicable, Merkel has persuaded Johnson that it is the UK, and not the EU, that must come up with a workable solution to the Irish backstop.  Johnson has accepted this.  The Guardian reports that he told the German Chancellor “You rightly say the onus is on us to produce those solutions, those ideas, to show how we can address the issue of the Northern Irish border and that is what we want to do”.


By contrast however, France’s Emmanuel Macron has been more robust, stating that the backstop is “indispensible”.[2] 


The EU’s chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier has come closer to Macron’s position than Merkel’s.  He told Boris Johnson that the demand to scrap the backstop is “unacceptable”.[3]


Even with all of this in mind, Johnson still insists we will leave the EU on Halloween.  We will leave without a deal unless a deal scraps the backstop.


We must now simply wait and see.  For those of us on the Brexit side of the debate, this looks like a strong position for the UK.  If Johnson can now come up with a solution to the Irish border problem, we may well get out in October, and we may well be able, as a nation, to move forward and to politically focus on problems here at home – problems that the people face, rather than the politicians.


We can then refocus our efforts on Westminster instead of Brussels, and we can shine a light on the failings, past and future, of Boris Johnson and his government, as well as Labour and the Conservatives, and the damage both parties have inflicted upon our country.  It is time to move on.  Let us hope that time is soon.

Impartial Policing

By Mike Speakman (Law & Order Spokesperson)

22nd August 2019

One of the themes drummed into me at basic police training was that it is imperative that the police do not take sides. Respect and trust for the police was seen as conditional on our fairness and impartiality.

I soon experienced practical examples of this. Liverpool is well known for its Orange parades and no more than on 12th July. Policing the 12th July was a major exercise in Liverpool. Orange bands would assemble all over the city and march to the city centre to get on trains for a day out in Southport. Several thousand people were often involved. The weekends throughout the summer were also subject to local marches, accompanied by bands. The first time I ever accompanied such a march I was told in no uncertain terms that I must not march in step with the band as this would imply solidarity with the march. Now this was actually quite hard to do as the music was often lively and vibrant. Such events could be a bit contentious as many of the marches passed though Catholic areas of the city and the odd brick or bottle was sometimes lobbed at the marchers.

Although Liverpool police contained many Catholics and a few Orangemen, you could never tell their allegiance at any of these parades and I never ever heard of the impartiality of the police being called into question.

We were given similar instructions for policing industrial disputes and political demonstrations. In the nineteen eighties there were quite a lot of National Front demonstrations and marches which were opposed by the Socialist Workers Party in particular. Again, it was emphasised that we must not give any appearance of being aligned to any one group. This was not too hard as policemen detested both groups equally, but we were also very keen to ensure that they had their right to march and demonstrate protected.

Contrast that era with today. Any suggestion of impartiality has long gone. Police forces are heavily influenced by the political makeup of local authorities and the Police and Crime Commissioner. Chief Constables were the bastions of police independence and their authority has now been undermined by the Crime Commissioners and increasing central government influence over policing activity.

The most outstanding example today is the police involvement in “pride” parades. Firstly, I do believe these parades are political, many LGBT (etc etc) groups are seeking changes to the law, particularly as the gender identity issue is being heavily promoted. I would definitely characterise these parades as political marches, and are the police impartial? They certainly are not, there is no semblance of impartiality at all, they are full on identifying with the members of these parades. Now it may be that some of these police officers are LGBT (etc etc), but so what? We don’t need to know that, and it should not influence the way they do their job. In these circumstance police officers are like umpires. They are there to enforce the law and ensure fair play. Their sporting of LGBT symbols is like umpires wearing Australian colours at a test match. They appear to have taken sides.

It doesn’t end there, For Britain has been at the receiving end of police bias where the police actively attempt to stop us meeting at a particular venue, sometimes successfully. I was once proud to uphold any organisations right to assemble and have meetings, this is no longer a police priority. They will try and stop any organisation that doesn’t fit the establishments criteria of political correctness.

We need to take politics out of policing and that means from the top down. Get rid of Police and Crime Commissioners, replace the government-controlled Police Chiefs Council and reinstate a professional body to lead the police. Make the police accountable to the local public, not political appointments. Above all, we need to change policing culture and have one law for all. This is what For Britain is about.

The Freedom Index

The UK probably isn’t the first country to spring to mind when one thinks of political oppression.  The Freedom Index (which measures freedom of the press but provides a glimpse a freedoms generally) rates us at 33rd out of 180, an improvement on 2018, where we sat at 40.[1]  That might be an improved picture, but that’s not a full picture of civil liberties in the country at present.  The real picture is far less positive; definitive, abject political oppression is taking place on a broad scale in Britain, and very few seem to notice.


First, a definition of political oppression (or repression).  In Wiki, it is summed up as a “state entity controlling a citizenry by force for political reasons, particularly for the purpose of restricting or preventing their ability to take part in the political life of a society thereby reducing their standing among their fellow citizens”.[2]  Does that sound familiar?  It should.  It’s happening every day in Britain – at least to some of us.


Just like the rest of Europe, and the Western world, opposition to government policy on migration (and accompanying Islamisation) subjects a person to genuine political oppression and persecution in Great Britain.


Governments prevent the participation of some of their citizens in the political process by various means including violence and removal of their human rights; this includes the right to a fair trial.


A “fair” trial is an interesting concept in politically correct Britain, as is fairness in the legal system generally.  Take for example, hate speech and hate crime.  The language used to discuss these on the British legal scene is alarming. The website of the Metropolitan Police Service for example, on discussion of “hate crime”, includes the following chilling statement: “Evidence of the hate element is not a requirement”.[3]  What you’ve just read is that evidence is not required to punish a person for a crime.  If ‘hate’ can be shown to be an element of a crime, then the punishment is greater, and so a person receives a punishment, or part of one, based on zero evidence.  This statement unashamedly appears upon the website of the biggest police force in Britain.


Just as chillingly, the same site states: “A hate incident is any incident which the victim, or anyone else, thinks is based on someone’s prejudice towards them because of their race, religion” etc.  The emphasis there is mine, but can you see it?  ‘Hate’ is proven if the victim or someone else thinks the crime was motivated by ‘hate’.  A person can therefore be criminally punished for what someone else believes they were thinking when they committed a crime. This is wide open to political abuse, and that is indeed what it is used for.  “Hate” is not an issue when Muslim gangs rape white “trash”,[4] but it can be very important indeed when offensive or threatening language is used against Muslims on Twitter.  It’s entirely arbitrary, vague, and is only used against one political viewpoint. That’s why it amounts to political oppression.


Collusion between state and media to silence political opponents is also a method of oppression (and repression) of dissenting voices, and here in Britain, if you dare to oppose mass migration, Islamisation, or indeed express disgust as barbaric practices such as halal slaughter or FGM, the press will immediately destroy your reputation with labels of “racist”, “fascist”, and “far right”.  This then closes off an honest route to public discussion for those deemed unacceptable by the state/media alliance.  If a candidate for example expresses views inconsistent with celebration of mass migration, the press will destroy them on behalf of the state, which has no time for such criticisms of its open border policies.  Destroying the reputation of political opponents using falsehoods is a form of political oppression.


Just as with hate crime laws, accusation in these matters is proof – no evidence is needed.  If a newspaper calls you a fascist, as I know from personal experience, no evidence is required, and none is produced.  The newspaper in question will not phone its victim to ask for a response to such an accusation, nor will it print any actual policy proposals.  It won’t define fascism or explain how the accused fits the bill, it will simply label them a fascist and leave it at that.  In addition, the ‘journalists’ will chase Hope Not Hate for back up, an extreme left-wing group known for smearing its opponents.  The papers don’t contact the accused, they deliberately seek out support for the accuser.  The words ‘witch hunt’ are truly apt.


To add an extra injustice, those on the receiving end of political oppression in the UK are often there because of their race – making them victims of racial oppression as well.  Evidence is not required to prove motive in “hate crime” cases as outlined above, but nor is it required to imply motive.  If I oppose halal meat on animal welfare grounds, I will be told “no, that’s not the reason, the reason is that you don’t like people with brown skin”.  That’s the accusation and no proof is needed.  If I am white, that accusation is ever more serious and ever more powerful.  Indeed, sentencing guidelines produced in 2017 for the first time suggested greater sentences for white offenders than for non-white.[5]   It is a disastrous recipe for division and disempowerment, and that is exactly the point of it.


The British state, and all mainstream political parties, have committed themselves to mass migration, that is a given.  In order to open the borders and keep them open, both had to lie to the populace about the future that lay ahead.  It was a future of racial and religious segregation, and the appeasement of alien cultural norms considered crimes among the British majority.  What results is a confused citizenry, one lacking leadership or moral clarity, and one told by its leaders that it is weak and deserving of demise.


The state’s disempowerment of the British people was complete when it refused to honour the result of the Brexit referendum, but this is just one example, the British people have been insulted and silenced for years with political correctness and censorship.  We need urgently to rediscover our power.  As civilised people, we will exercise that power through the utilisation of our democracy, and we will fight at the ballot box for a say over our lives again.  For Britain is committed to this, we will travel the country, we will make our voices heard. We are politically oppressed, and we will fight back for Britain.


Anne Marie Waters


New Website Launches

We are pleased to launch our new website, taking the party forward as we grow and progress.

We wanted to iron out the issues with our original site by rebuilding it from scratch, as well as moving to a private server on dedicated infrastructure. The frustrations some of you had with payments and the joining process have been addressed, and we are pleased to now have card payments as an option too.

The site as it is today is just the start – we have lots of media, blogs and content to add – but it is a website you can all contribute to. We would love your blogs and content, or your photos and videos to add.

Members have an extra section on the website for member only information.

Keep coming back to the site, content will be added all the time, and it will be the hub for other content such as videos and podcasts.

We hope you like the new site. The red, white and blue of Great Britain proclaims what we stand for:

Freedom | Justice | Democracy

Blog on Islam – We’ve lost Muhammad part 1

We’ve lost Muhammad

Look at these maps from the 6th Century of Saudi Arabia and see if you can identify what’s not there that should be.

Here’s another of the same region from 1484AD, with a little bit more detail and colour, showing the advancement of cartography over the previous centuries, but still with one thing missing.

This one, dated from the 18th Century, is of the same area and has the same lack.

None of these maps shows Mecca, not even the one from the century of Muhammad’s birth in 570AD.

This is surprising, given how important the city is to Muslims and how it is described by them as the birthplace of their prophet.

Mecca then was not the place of importance that we see today as the centre of Islamic worship. Back in the 6th Century, it had no strategic positioning for trade or for the military and therefore no reason for it to be on any map, as it was nothing more than a quiet hamlet.

By the time we reach the middle ages, nothing much had changed, as Mecca still hadn’t risen to any prominence and cannot be seen on the maps from 1484AD and the 18th century.

Mecca was not considered of any importance for at least a millennium, and its elevated status today is very much a modern invention.

The discrepancies

But we are told by Muslims that it is the mother of all settlements, the centre of Islam and therefore the centre of history.
The trouble is, we have Islamic text that describes where Mohammed was born which doesn’t match with reality. The geographical picture given and the information supplied of the vegetation that was around the locality of his place of birth at the time, make it impossible for him to have been born in Mecca.

When we examine the text for clues, we find the following details about his birthplace. It was: in a valley with a parallel valley (IbnIshaq; AlBukhari2:645, 2:685, 3:891, 2:815, 2:820, 4:227), with a stream (Al Bukhari 2:685), fields (Al Bukhari 9:337), trees(Sahihal-Tirmidhi 1535), grass (Al Bukhari 9:337), fruit (Al Bukhari 4:281), clay and loam (Al Tabari VI 1079 p.6), olive trees (Surah6141; Surah16; Surah80) with Mountains overlooking the Kaaba (Ibn Ishaq; Al Bukhari 2:645, 2:685, 3:891, 2:815, 2:820, 4:227)

Lot’s wife as Pillar of Salt outside Sodom in Jordan

None of these descriptions of geography and vegetation matches Mecca of that period or even now. So the weight of evidence for where this place was point away from the place Muslims like to tell us it is.

The place of Mohammed’s origin is described elsewhere as having outside ruins and a pillar of salt (Surah37:133-138), which is a description of a place 730 miles north, called Sodom and Gomorrah of the Bible, where Lots’s wife was turned into a pillar of salt after looking back whilst the cities were destroyed after being warned by God not to.

The Kaaba

The other descriptions, of clay and loam, mountains overlooking the Kaaba, and of it being in a parallel valley, match Petra, which is 50 miles away in Jordan. The Kaaba was in Petra before being moved by Abdullah Ibn Zubayr around 683AD, 50 years after Mohammed died.

Archaeologists have since found an irrigation system that would have served adjacent fields growing the type of vegetation described in the Quran, such as olive trees and fruit, none of which can be found growing in Mecca today.

So we know now that Mohammed was not originally from Mecca and we also know that the Saudis know this too, which is the reason why they are so keen to hide any evidence that suggests otherwise.

This centre of the Islamic world, like Islam itself, is false. Islam wants to keep the myth alive and Muslims are trying their hardest to hide the truth. Even to the point of building over what is supposed to be ground of such historical importance.

Modern Mecca

Mecca, it seems, is being developed at a rapid pace, as we can see from these two pictures. Which show the work in progress of a complete modernisation plan, which will cover this supposed historical site.

A town that is supposed to be of such great religious heritage for the most important figure in Islam is being bulldozed to hide all evidence that Mohammed came from there at all.

It is surely a crime against humanity to deprive the world of a place of such supposed historical importance. A place of such renown should be open to archaeologists and historians from around the world. They should be working full time on this historically valuable ground before it is lost to the developers forever. Unless, of course, this priceless ground is in fact worthless and the archaeologists have nothing to find.


We’ve lost Muhammad (Part 1)

by Ian Sleeper

Intro and first blog – Islam Spokesperson

My name is Nissar Hussain.  I am from a Pakistani heritage and a muslim background. My family and I are internally displaced people, living in hiding in the UK, where we were born and raised. The reason for this is because I am an ex-Muslim. In technical terms, this makes me an apostate, someone who has renounced their old religion. By leaving Islam, I have personally come to know religious persecution. I have sentenced myself and my family to death, even in our supposedly free, democratic country. This is because the punishment for apostasy in all the law schools of the Sharia is, sadly, execution. No other religion has a blanket death sentence for those who leave their religion, only Islam.

I have been invited by Anne Marie Waters’ deputy chair, Kadeeja Adam, to join For Britain to represent ex-Muslims, and I cherish this opportunity to take our case forward. I am grateful to Anne Marie and For Britain for giving us a voice, and for the support of such an enthusiastic group of freedom-lovers from across our great country.

I look forward to working together with you all and increasing awareness of the “Legalise Apostasy” campaign.  We hope to  free 1.6 billion Muslims from a death threat and all ex-Muslims from a death sentence. Kadeeja is an apostate from Islam as well.  As such, she has an instinctive feel for this matter. I know she will be working alongside me and be a great catalyst for change, opening eyes to the disgraceful acquiescence on the part of the authorities and the mendacious advance of the silver-tongued Muslim leaders, the Ulema (scholars).

My Story

You may think that this is the UK and that therefore, we live under common law, but in the Islamic community, the Sharia is adhered to more closely, by many adherents, than are the laws of this land. You need to understand that, for most Muslims, the Sharia is for all time and for all people – Muslim or not – and that the UK’s laws are not from God but are man-made, temporary and over-ridden by the strictures of the Sharia. That is why I was persecuted for nearly two decades, driven from my home on two occasions, and nearly bludgeoned to death outside my front gate. I won’t list here the innumerable other incidents that occurred to cause my PTSD.

How did the authorities help my family and me through this ordeal? They minimised, denied, obfuscated and belittled the issues, and eventually armed Police escorted us from our home after claiming they had “intelligence” on another imminent threat to my life. I believe they just wanted me out of their hair and out of Bradford, as I tied up too many resources and was becoming known as an example of the failure of the Muslim community to integrate and to follow the rule of law.

However, the community was following the law, but that law was the Sharia.  The authorities covered up this law-breaking by describing it as a “community issue”.   This was backed up by the disgraceful, anti semitic Pakistani MP Naz Shah, who is seemingly in cahoots with Toby Howarth the Bishop of Bradford, the agenda-driven Interfaith betrayer who seems keen not apostates,to lose friendship with the muslim community. So, where you see “community issue”, read “Sharia enforcement” – UK-style.

Since my brutal attack and enforced flight from Bradford, I and others began to campaign for all ex-Muslims on behalf of the Legalise Apostasy campaign. The aim of the campaign is to force those who guide and largely control the Islamic community. The Ulema, to rescind all laws punishing apostates from Islam. Is this a difficult task? Yes, and so was the eradication of the slave trade, but Thomas Clarkson and the 11 others who met to begin the campaign to end slavery in the West did eventually succeed. Now we want to free the slaves of Sharia from a threat that terrifies many into staying in Islam and causes immeasurable suffering across the globe.

We believe that this change can be brought about,  first, in the UK, by demanding that politicians deal with the Sharia-enforcers through the use of British law and its statutes, which defend religious freedom. Second, we want, eventually, to free Muslims everywhere from the genocidal grip of the Ulema. By campaigning for reform in the UN and in the institutes run by the Ulema. But to do so, we need to vote for politicians who have the will to act. That is why I and so many ex-Muslims are now joining For Britain.

Legalise Apostasy Petition

For Britain and Anne-Marie Waters have demonstrated immense courage.  Anne Marie has put her head above the parapet and is the only politician to do so. How are we, in For Britain and the Legalise Apostasy campaign going to make these changes? First, we go for the low-hanging fruit.  That is, we bring about change where we remain strong – here in the UK  – and the law can be used to defend our rights. After success here at home, we can begin to apply pressure on the international stage.

But first, we MUST have our laws enforced and the Sharia councils removed. It must be made clear to Muslims that the Sharia’s disgraceful laws requiring the death of ex-Muslims are the absolute opposite of the British people’s unqualified support for tolerance. The means for applying continuous pressure on our cowardly politicians, our supposed “representatives”, is to use the Legalise Apostasy campaign’s petition here.

The petition asks for support for ex-Muslims by demanding the rescinding of the Sharia’s apostate-killing statutes. This is clear and reasonable enough, you would think, for any politician to support. And this is where For Britain supporters can lead the way and demonstrate their courage, their belief in our freedoms. The freedom of all of us to live the life we choose – as Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists or non-believers.

Please arrange to meet your MP at a surgery. Print off the Petition (and any supporting documents from the website that you may want to take with you) and when you meet, ask the MP to sign up to support ex-Muslims from being killed. Ask your councillors and other elected representatives at every level to do so. Best of all, ask if you can video it on your mobile phone and download it. Anyone want to front up to Mayor Sadiq Khan and video him signing up to Sharia reform? That will be harder for him than defending his record on knife crime. How about Hope Not Hate too?

Contact Us

Please send copies of the signed Petitions and videos to For Britain at [email protected].  We will host them and drive the campaign:

    • To eradicate the Sharia from our shores.
    • To free ex-Muslims from terror.
    • To re-assert our moral authority as a people.
    • To demand the reform of the Sharia wherever its long arm reaches.

Nissar Hussain

For Britain Islam Spokesperson

Labour vote of no-confidence

I’ve just been talking to a couple of my friends in Parliament, and it looks like my worst fears have been realised.  Labour are going to take a vote of no-confidence to the table as soon as possible. This has important implications for us as a party, because if Labour are able to install a new leader before Halloween, then we’re probably looking at a second referendum. But if they can’t manage that, we’re almost certain to be facing a general election call on November 1st.

We are prepared for future elections

We have no choice but to be ready for the coming fight, whether it be against a new Labour leader (which I predict will be Sadiq Khan or John McDonnell) or the expected new Prime Minister Boris Johnson.

We haven’t got much time to organise the fight either way, but we’re British and we can pull rabbits out of a hat when we need to. Now really is the time to prove that, as we’re looking at a catastrophe in the making!

Future generations

I trust you, each and every one of you, to do everything in your power to keep this ship, the ‘HMS United Kingdom’ safe for your, my and future generations, no matter the cost, because we’ve got an eternal debt to those who came before us.

  • There have been many lives lost in multiple wars but Britain has survived.
  • There have been many casualties of Muslim Jihadi atrocities but Britain has survived.
  • There is over £2tn national debt but Britain survives.
  • There will one day be a For Britain majority in Parliament and we will ensure that Britain continues to survive and thrive!

We don’t know what defeat is. It’s just a word the weak use to explain failure – we will not fail. We will prevail.

It’s appropriate that this is the 50th anniversary of the moon landing because, as President Kennedy said in his immortal words:
We choose to do this not because it is easy but because it is hard.

Fly safe brothers and sisters. We’re in for a rocky ride, but by jingo we’re going to enjoy every second of it. And when the dust clears, we’ll be able to look back with such pride that it will bring tears to our eyes, knowing what we started and what we managed to deliver – FREEDOM

The Tommy Robinson Contempt Judgement Summary

On 5th July 2019 judges Mark Warby and Victoria Sharp found Tommy Robinson guilty of contempt of court: See here.

They were only able to do so by using a misleadingly-edited quote of what Tommy said and retrospectively making up sweeping new laws on contempt. The page numbers given are those in the judgement. Many details, such as the complete absence of the required notices advising the reporting order was in force (p11), and Warby and Sharp’s innovative definition of “court precincts” (p25) have had to be left out to keep this summary short.

Warby and Sharp found Tommy guilty in three particulars:

1. Breaching the reporting restriction order (RRO) that Judge Marson had imposed on his series of three linked trials of 29 mostly Muslim men for gang-raping and prostituting children (p2).

According to Judicial College guidelines (p16), RROs cannot prevent re-publication of material that is already in the public domain. Tommy knew this because he had recently attended a legal training course on contempt. He therefore took care to report only details from a BBC News article and a Huddersfield Examiner article published at the start of the trial. These named the defendants and what they were accused of.

Warby and Sharp simply added a new clause to the guidelines (p17), stating that “they believed”

courts have no power under s 4(2) to prevent publication of material that is already in the public domain

actually means

courts have no power under s 4(2) to prevent publication of material that is already in the public domain which is not or does not purport to be a report of the relevant proceedings.

Why would the guidance mention the publication of material at all unless such material were relevant to the case? Of course RROs cannot prevent publication of the Beano or David Copperfield; that does not need stating. This is not a matter of re-interpreting an existing but unclear guideline: Warby and Sharp simply added a new clause that was not there before. In their court on 4th and 5th of July it became contempt to re-publish any material that reported details of proceedings, even an article currently on the BBC News website. They changed the law a year after the fact.

2. The content of what was published gave rise to a substantial risk that the course of justice would be seriously impeded (p2) by reason of its impact on the defendants (p20).

A. Warby and Sharp claim that Tommy incited his supporters to harass the defendants (p21), based on this quote from the transcript of his video:

You want to harass someone’s family? You see that man, he was getting aggressive as he walked into court, the man who faces charges of child abduction, rape, prostitution, harass him, find him, go knock on his door, follow him, see where he works, see what he’s doing. You want to stick pictures online and call people and slander people, how about do about them

Here is the full quote in context, with the bit Warby and Sharp extracted in red:

look, there’s no media here, there’s no media here, there’s no press here, there’s no mainstream media, they’re all taking photographs of someone who said something mean on Twitter. They’re not here, they’re not here to find who these people are, they haven’t followed these people, you know this lad who runs Generation Identity, I found out that the media had been harassing his family, yeah y’all know, you want to harass someone’s family? You see that man, he was getting aggressive as he walked into court, the man who faces charges of child abduction, rape, prostitution, harass him, find him, go knock on his door, follow him, see where he works, see what he’s doing. You want to stick pictures online and call people and slander people, how about do about them instead of doing it about someone speaking about them.

Tommy is rhetorically asking the mainstream media why they don’t harass Muslim gang rapists like they harassed the family of the leader of Generation Identity. He is not asking his followers to harass anyone. Warby and Sharp have simply stripped the quote of its context to hide the fact that he is rhetorically addressing the mainstream media. George Eaton did a similar thing to Sir Roger Scruton recently, using partial quotes to make out he’s a racist. The New Statesman was eventually forced to retract and apologise and demoted Eaton.

B. Warby and Sharp claim that Tommy’s ‘harassment’ of the defendants (see below) as they walked into court was so aggressive and so upset them that it “impeded their ability to participate fully in the trial” (p21). This might be arguable if it were the start or middle of the trial. But the evidence had finished being heard. The jury was out. The defendants were attending that morning expecting to be told the verdict. Besides standing up when told to, what “participation in the trial” did they need to do? Warby and Sharp’s argument here is ridiculous.

C. Warby and Sharp further claim there was a risk that the defendants might be so upset by the harassment Tommy hadn’t told his followers to carry out that they might abscond. “Bad man told his followers to harass the defendants (in a quote lifted out of context); his followers whom we can’t name and have never met might do what he (didn’t) ask them to do; the defendants might get so upset they do a runner.” What-if piled upon what-if is not a basis for sending a man to prison. Unless his name is Tommy Robinson, apparently.

If the defendants were a flight risk they should never have been on bail. Contrast Warby and Sharp’s extreme solicitation for the upset feelings of gang rapists with the fact that one of the defendants did actually abscond, though not because of anything Tommy did. He was free to do so because Judge Marson had given all the defendants bail, despite the overwhelming DNA evidence that they had gang raped and prostituted many children. But the police couldn’t appeal to the public to help catch him before he fled the country because of Judge Marson’s gagging order.

3. Aggressively confronting and filming the defendants as they arrive at court interfered with the due administration of justice.

Defendants should be able to arrive at court “without let or hindrance or fear of molestation” (p24). Warby and Sharp claim that Tommy’s behaviour was “of an intimidating nature, and aggressive and provocative”. As anyone who watches Tommy’s livestream can see, his behaviour was much less intimidating than that of many journalists covering trials. He asked the defendants what they thought about the verdict and asked one, “Is that your prison bag?” Asking defendants questions from a short distance away without standing in front of them is not “causing them let or hindrance”. When they tell you to “**** off”, if you then leave them alone that is not “molesting” them. Defendants do not have a right not to be asked questions, even pointed and unwelcome questions. All they had to do was stay silent and keep walking.

If Tommy’s behaviour counts as so “aggressive and provocative” that it interfered with the due administration of justice, almost every reporter who has questioned defendants arriving at court for decades is guilty of such interference. The BBC’s own Lucy Manning aggressively confronted Tommy on his way into his own trial and asked him, “Are you finally going to face justice for potentially collapsing this trial? Is it right that you finally face justice?”

thus presuming his guilt. This was far more “aggressive and provocative” than anything Tommy did. But no-one thinks Lucy Manning will face contempt of court proceedings.

In summary, Warby and Sharp

1. Used misleadingly-edited a quote to ‘prove’ Tommy asked his supporters to harass the defendants when he didn’t

2. Simply made up sweeping new guidance on contempt, a year after the fact, which made re-reporting any article detailing proceedings subject to an RRO into contempt of court, and

3. Asserted that asking defendants unwelcome questions on their way into court is likely to so badly upset them, causing them to be unable to fully participate in proceedings and possibly abscond, that it amounts to interfering with the administration of justice.

2. and 3. would be sweeping changes to English law on contempt – if they were permanent. But we all know they are not. [2019] EWHC 1791 (Admin) will not set a new standard on contempt. The Judicial College will not open an inquiry into whether they should now change their guidelines, nor do Warby and Sharp expect them to. Mainstream media employers are not asking whether they should now change their guidance to their journalists, advising them not to quote material already in the public domain when an RRO is in force and not to ask defendants on their way into court difficult questions. No mainstream journalist risks prison for doing what Tommy did. The new standards for contempt apply only to Tommy Robinson – plus any of his supporters who dare to report anything at all about a Muslim gang rape trial.

Readers will note that Warby and Sharp are not accorded the respect of their official titles. Cutting and pasting a partial quote to ‘prove’ an untrue claim does not merit respect, be you ever so high and mighty. George Eaton is just a left wing journalist who was out to destroy Sir Roger Scruton’s reputation because he is a prominent conservative. How much worse is it when the highest judges in the land use the same tactic to deprive a man of his liberty? Making up new laws as you go along, to retrospectively make something that was legal illegal, does not merit respect either. Mark Warby and Victoria Sharp are a disgrace to their profession.

Philip Hammond

On Sunday 14th July 2019, Philip Hammond made a statement which could be the perfect example of how idiotic the mindset of a remainer can be! He found it necessary to inform the media that the UK would not be able to control all aspects of a no-deal brexit.

No kidding Phil! That’s exactly the same as saying that a bingo player can’t control the numbers pulled out of the bag! Trade deals on a bilateral basis do tend to rely on both parties agreeing terms. Spreadsheet Phil and the MayBot are past their sell-by dates. No matter whatever Parliament does in desperation to cling onto the EU’s skirt, we made our minds up three years ago.

We need to train our sights on what comes next and what the UK wants to become. Not on saving face in front of a failed establishment! Get your leafleting boots on people, we’ve got a country to win 🙂

Richard, Chair of North Staffordshire

Who will rid me of this man?

In Hadith number 59:369 collated by Sahih Bukhari he recounts the murder of Ka’b bin al-Ashraf, a Jewish poet who wrote verses about Muslims that Muhammad found insulting. So Muhammed asked his followers, ‘Who will rid me of this man?’ Several volunteered. Ka’b bin al-Ashraf was subsequently stabbed to death and the precedent was set of ‘ridding’ people for calling out Islam. And this has continued into modern times. Recall the fatwa on Salman Rushdie and the slaughter of the staff of Charlie Hebdo, along with many many more.

Fast forward to July 11th 2019 at the Old Bailey in London. Two judges chose to ‘rid’ society of Tommy Robinson, but did someone give them that order? Did someone say, ‘Who will rid me of this man?’ And if so, WHO?


[Muhammed (571 AD – 632 AD) was the founder of Islam.]

[The Hadith are a collection of words and actions of Muhammed which constitute the major source of guidance for Muslims apart from the Koran]


By J Jay Dupre, author of ‘Al-Britannya’ – a novel recounting the horrors of life for a non-Muslim family living in Islamic Britain in 2042AD

For Britain vs the Global Elites

Tommy Robinson was sentenced on the 11th of July as we all know. Outside the court there were many flags flying but, guess what? The biggest one was OURS!

Not a single flapping UKIP cloth amongst them despite how important that moment was, doesn’t that speak volumes?
To have our flag flying so proudly on national television nearly made me cry with joy, it was probably the fact that I’m made of stone that prevented it 🙂

Seriously though, we are not chasing UKIP anymore. We’ve left them in the stalls as we gallop away. Don’t let complacency set in though, we have a lot of work to do before the next election, and with hard work and resolve we can build on the foundations laid during the local election successes we had in May. We need to be out there handing out leaflets, moaning in the local papers, speaking to people in pubs and doing anything else we can imagine to make sure that, when the time comes, people know who we are and what we are intending to deliver.

Freedom is the enemy of dictators

For that to happen, we need to be strong and stand up straight, proud of our trident symbol, because it represents everything we believe. We are the protectors of the United Kingdom, whether we’ve been openly recognised by the masses yet or not. We are the FINAL line of defence for our nation against the federalist elitists who want ultimate power over us.

They want a world of slave nations with no sovereignty but with convoluted ideological conflicts, so they can ensure that no nation or people ever becomes powerful enough to stand up and defy their status as overlords ever again. They’ll do anything under the sun to prevent democracy and freedom of thought being the norm. Because freedom is the enemy of dictators.

For Britain is the only party that is willing to say these things out loud. We will ask the questions that need to be asked, instead of burying our heads in the sand like all the others do. Tommy Robinson has been sent to prison for telling the truth. If we don’t fight back, we might be next. Fight for freedom!

Thank you for taking your time to read this. I look forward to hearing your reactions 🙂

Richard Broughan,

For Britain chair of North Staffordshire branch

For Britain Welcomes the Visit of President Donald Trump

For Britain Press Release

Title: For Britain welcomes the visit of President Donald Trump to the UK
From: The For Britain Movement, Press Office
Date: Monday 3rd June 2019, 1 a.m.
Notes: For immediate release.

British political party For Britain wholeheartedly welcomes the State Visit of Donald Trump and his family to Great Britain.

President Trump is here to commemorate the D-day landings of 75 years ago; to remember the dedication, sacrifice and bravery of those who liberated Europe from a totalitarian aggressor. This event also reminds us of the important bond between the United States and the UK.

We believe that Donald Trump is already one of the great American Presidents, and we strongly admire his ‘America First’ vision and philosophy.

We note the economic success and growth that the President has brought to America; creating jobs for all communities and a US financial market that is reaching ever new highs.

Furthermore, we respect the fact that President Trump ‘says it as he sees it’. He is authentic, and does not filter his words through a government spin machine.

No matter what President Trump has achieved, we know that the biased UK mainstream media will cause mischief with the usual smears and denouncements during his visit, as will many of our politicians.

Smears and denouncements aside, Mr Trump has enormous support in the UK for his straightforward and common sense approach. It is the same approach we believe in at For Britain, and when this message is heard, it will bring us similar levels of support.

Endorsement from Morrissey!

We’ve had another clear endorsement from Morrissey! You might have seen on social media that legendary musician Morrissey has been spotted proudly displaying his For Britain badge – twice!

Morrissey IMG: Dream Propaganda

We think he looks fantastic! If you want a badge too why not take a look at our shop with badges and other great merchandise.

Morrissey For Britain badge
Morrissey For Britain badge

Morrissey is known for his fantastic music, but also for his politics. He unashamedly stands up for Britain, our culture and heritage, and our working people – the backbone of our nation. He is also passionate about animal welfare. So it should come as no surprise that he has thrown his weight behind our party.

We would like to thank him for his endorsement and courage in defying the lies and smears of the so called journalist and media.

For Britain is a democratic populist party with a constitution that promotes equality. For Britain is a steadfast supporter of the Jewish community and Israel. We campaign on behalf of real people for the people in local communities and one of our primary goals is to fight for animal welfare.

Muslim men: The invisible victims of Islamic intolerance

In 2017, as Britain entered the month of October, a fifteen-year-old boy was left fighting for his life after being stabbed in the head outside a mosque in Birmingham. The mosque leaders described the horrific attack as “racially motivated”.  But this wasn’t an attack by a stereotypical far-right racist.  If it had been, no doubt the mainstream media would have reported on it.  Although police stated it wasn’t terror-related, an elder at the Maarif-e-Islam Hussainia mosque said the attack was ISIS-inspired and carried out by a Muslim of a rival sect.

Islamic terrorism

When debunking the myth that Islamic terrorism is caused entirely by Western foreign policy, it’s often brought up that Sunni and Shia Muslims have been fighting each other for 1,400 years.  Violence began when the two sects formed, immediately after the death of the prophet Mohammed, but it’s sadly somewhat overlooked when a Shia is almost killed by a Sunni in this country.

This Muslim-on-Muslim violence in Birmingham shouldn’t surprise anyone. Tarik Chadilioui, a Birmingham-based imam is currently facing extradition, charged with supporting ISIS. The Islamic State has been accused of ethnic cleansing, with hundreds of innocent Shia prisoners executed.  Muslim hate preachers defend these crimes against humanity.

Muslim-on-Muslim murder

Muslim-on-Muslim murder in the name of Allah has been largely overlooked in the UK. In March last year, an Ahmadiyya shopkeeper was stabbed thirty times and kicked to death by a Sunni militant from Bradford shouting “Allah is the only one!” and “Praise for Prophet Mohammed, there is only one prophet.” Why? The kind shopkeeper’s last Facebook post read “Good Friday and a very happy Easter especially to my beloved Christian nation”.  His name was Asad Shah.  Where was the outrage? When Lee Rigby was murdered, thousands took to the streets to confront radical Islam. Asad Shah was killed because he loved this country. Just hours before his death, he made a video about the response he received and warned that radical Islam “needs to be nipped in the bud”. He was a British patriot and deserves recognition and respect.

When we think of Rochdale, we think of the rape of a generation of children. We forget the terrorist attack in February 2016. When a respected imam, Jalal Uddin, was beaten to death by ISIS supporters. The quiet, but popular old man was killed with a hammer in an attack “borne of hatred and intolerance”.  The terrorists, Mohammed Hussain Syeedy, 22, and Mohammed Abdul Kadir, 24, accused the imam of practising “black magic” for following an Islamic superstition called Ruqyah healing. It’s punished with death in the Islamic State and was punished with death in the United Kingdom.

“moderate Muslim”

This fringe lunacy enables extremism. But it has been normalised. When questioned by Richard Dawkins, Medhi Hasan, journalist and go-to “moderate Muslim” for the left-wing media, insisted that the prophet Mohammed went to heaven on a flying horse. If a moderate Christian or Hindu were confronted with something like this, they’d probably call it a metaphor or lost in translation. If not, they would be considered hard-line. Are our expectations of Muslims so low that we consider them moderate simply for not being terrorists? Atheists should challenge and mock these ridiculous ideas. Muslim leaders should do more to discourage their followers from reading scripture so literally.

Then there was the Bangladeshi Muslim man who died in Luton in a suspected honour killing, after a relationship with a Hindu girl; , Ahmed Mohammed Ibrahim, who was beaten to death in Liverpool at 17 for drinking alcohol; and the seven year-old boy beaten by his mother for failing to memorise verses from the Quran. The child died in his home in Cardiff.

Support Muslims

When we think of Muslims being the first victims of Islam, we think mainly of Muslim women. Because many of whom are subjected to FGM as children. We rarely think about the abuse and persecution sometimes faced by Muslim men from their communities. At demonstrations around the country and in my beloved city of Exeter, I’ve met ex-Muslims who can no longer see their families and reformists demonised around mosques. Sometimes for their views, other times simply for the colour of their skin. A gay Muslim told me how he hated seeing his mother wear the burqa and how children received corporal punishment in mosques where they were taught to hate Ahmadiyyas.

Muslim Men matter too

When Muslim boys are exposed to radical ideas, the first victims will be their childhoods. In numerous documentaries, hidden camera footage has exposed teachers in Islamic schools beating their pupils. This is where the seeds of hatred can be planted, ensuring these boys grow up spiteful and angry, to dream of Jihad.

These innocent men have been overlooked for too long. We need to stand up for Muslim men from the more peaceful sects and westernised Muslims. Find common ground with the reformists, who expose the hateful teachings that produce Jihadist terrorists. And listen to what solutions they have to offer. This would not only help a section of the Muslim community that is often ignored but would also help us ditch the “far right” label once and for all.

Frankie Rufolo / Islamism

Britain’s Political Prisoner

Press release

Britain’s Political Prisoner

Paul Ellis, legal officer


Given that For Britain deplored the outrageous decision of the High Court to find Tommy Robinson in contempt of court for filming and speaking to defendants as they attended court, it must follow that we also deplore the sentence. Given that Tommy did nothing wrong, any punishment must, by definition be unfair.

But yesterdays’ sentence of six months immediate imprisonment plus the activation of three months of his suspended sentence, puts the lie to any suggestion that Tommy had fallen foul of some legal technicality.

This  but that the point needed to be made that an was breached

In sentencing a court should primarily look at two factors: the culpability of the convicted person and the harm that the offence caused. A person may be very culpable and yet cause no harm, such as an attempted murderer who misses his target or they may have relatively little culpability but cause great harm, for example a driver who from a momentary lapse of attention causes death and serious injury.

There was no dispute that Tommy had believed that he was not breaching the order preventing ‘any report of the proceedings, or any part of the proceedings’ (section 4(2) Contempt of Court Act 1981) by by reading out the accused’s names and charges (which had been fixed and publicised before the proceedings started) and by asking those individuals attending the proceedings how they were feeling and broadcasting their replies (mostly vulgar profanities). He made references in his reportage to his intent to remain with the law concerning the reporting restrictions.

Nor could it be said that his interpretation of the law was unreasonable, since it was in accordance with the wording of the guidance issued by the Judicial College – the body that trains judges:

‘… courts have no power under s.4(2) to prevent publication of material that is already in the public domain.’

To find Tommy guilty of contempt, Dame Victoria Sharpe QC had to restate this advice as:

‘We believe the point that the Judicial College was striving to make was that a section 4(2) order cannot prevent the publication of information in the public domain which is not nor does not purport to be a report of the relevant proceedings.’

This may be the sort of technical distinction (what Katie Hopkins wonderfully described as ‘legal twat-waffle’) that a particularly pernickety judge might think it worth the expense and inconvenience of an Old Bailey trial to clarify for future reference, but taking pains to abide by the judges’ own official guidance as it was written, rather than as it was later interpreted, hardly constitutes the sort of wickedness that merits nine months in the slammer.

As for harm caused, it is agreed by all sides that there was none, other for a fleeting moment of social awkwardness for some child rapists, being asked for a comment by a lone citizen journalist.

There are other factors that a sentencing court can take into account, such as suffering already incurred by the defendant as a result of their actions. Before these proceedings had even begun, Tommy had already suffered ten weeks on starvation diet in virtual solitary confinement from the previous ‘kangeroo court’. Love him or loath him, Tommy Robinson is no snowflake, and the Sky News footage of his release, gaunt and haggard, from prison, resembling a prisoner of war, speaks volumes about the hardships that he must have endured on the inside.

If ever there was a case for a judge to pass a time served sentence, this was it, but from the moment of Tommy’s illegal arrest for breach of the peace this case never looked as though it had anything to do with achieving justice. In previous blogs I have accused the state of putting on a show trial. Yesterday’s sentence demonstrates beyond reasonable doubt that I was correct to do so. It is not Tommy at all but the English legal system that now stands convicted of impeding justice.

You can read the full court transcript here:

Case No: QB-2019-000741

Democracy vs Theocracy: A fight to the death part 2

The End of Intolerance

Part II

CS Lewis wrote that the adjective “democratic” has two meanings, which are frequently antithetical. It describes institutions – such as freedom of speech and equality before the law – that democracy needs in order to thrive. But it can also describe things that democracies like, such as organised sentimentality and the promise of easy answers. And there is nothing that modern democracies like more than feeling good about themselves. “Tolerance” gives them the chance to preen over their own niceness.

The most pernicious falsehood undermining democracy is the claim that tolerance is a major virtue. It is not a virtue at all. It is just a feeling, and a pretty flabby one at that. At best, it is ethically neutral – at worst, it is an alibi for intellectual sloth and moral cowardice. We would have more honesty in public life if the word were abandoned entirely and replaced with “apathy”. A society which prides itself on its tolerance will be swept away by those who don’t know that such a thing even exists.


Those Islamic “scholars” who claim that Islam can co-exist with democracy are either indulging in the same kind of sentimentality and self-delusion as secular liberals or they are practising the deception of infidels sanctioned by the Koran. Perhaps even they don’t know which.

We used to know a subversive, totalitarian ideology when we saw it. That is why communism was recognised as a national security risk and its supporters were excluded as far as possible from public office. But the followers of Islam – an equally ruthless and violent ideology – get a free pass, and even preferential treatment, when they squawk about “culture” or “freedom of religion”.

The notion that the demands of Islam can be appeased is the supreme delusion of the liberal mind. Islam means “submission”; Muslims submit to Allah, while the rest of us are supposed to submit to them. There is no “common ground”.

When the Roman Empire collapsed, political power passed to the only institution still functioning – the Christian Church. The various forms of paganism were more or less eradicated, not by persecution of individuals, but by closing temples and ceasing to pay priests from public funds. This is the way to deal with Islam. While opposition to the spread of Sharia courts etc. must continue, the long-term aim must be eradication.

Book banning

I would not advocate banning the Koran (nor any book for that matter, not even Mein Kampf). People should be free to read and think what they want. What matters is no organising. That means no mosques, no imams, no “Islamic cultural centres”, no faith schools.

Those who are committed to Islam can move to countries where it is the norm, though I suspect that a great many would be happy to escape from the pressures exerted by their “community”, and sink into the pervasive agnostic torpor of the rest of this country. Jihadis will still be a problem, of course, and they will have to be dealt with more seriously than they are now. There would be negligible public opposition to the re-introduction of capital punishment for terrorist crimes.

Whether we have time left to implement the above is the real question. Whatever happens, we must stop being tolerant of the intolerance of Islam.

Michael North

Read Part One here.

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery that mediocrity can pay to greatness

“Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery that mediocrity can pay to greatness”

Was once said by Oscar Wilde. If that is true, then we at For Britain should be feeling fairly flattered right now.

It seems our inaugural manifesto in 2018 was so good, other parties both old and new couldn’t help but recycle elements for themselves. Both the Brexit Party, led by Nigel Farage who smeared supporters of leader Anne Marie Waters ‘Nazis and Racists’. And the party he used to lead at the time UKIP seem to think our common sense policies are political gold.

Odd, as the Brexit Party has bizarrely banned For Britain members from joining. Yet it seems to like what we are saying! Bizarre, as UKIP agreed with what Anne Marie said when she was a member. But would whisper to her “we just don’t like the way you say it”.

We fully expect our manifesto this year to be plagiarised, it is going to be even better than last year’s. The beauty of not being a defined left or right wing party is you can just do the right thing. You can pick the best and most sensible direction of travel on any subject.

The only mystery is why anyone would choose the impostors and not the source. Who knows which direction the wind will blow next year for UKIP, and whether their members will be back to being called ‘Nazis’ by their own leadership. If Brexit is delivered, does anyone now trust Farage to preserve British culture that is under attack from all quarters? Islam bullies people and the weak eventually choose the easy path and stop speaking out when they have grave concerns. I don’t think anyone doubts that the one party that stands firm and principled on these issues will capitulate. If you do feel strongly, even if you can’t speak out yourself, you can trust us to fight on your behalf.

We won’t imitate anyone. We won’t steal ideas. We have always thought for ourselves and we always will.

Don't Copy

Is Islam Halal For The Rest Of Us?

by Ian Sleeper


“Halal” means permissible in Arabic. Under Islamic law, anything halal, is allowable for a Muslim. It doesn’t just apply to meat, or food generally. The term “halal” also applies to any product or activity that Muhammad, according to Muslims, would allow (including marrying your sex slave, if you have one). This includes a wide range of items, for example, halal lipstick, halal skin cream, halal beer which is non-alcoholic of course, and even halal cigarettes.

Halal meat requires the animal to be blessed by a prayer, in the name of Allah, using the “Bismilah”, a most powerful prayer to a Muslim: Say (O Muhammad): Invoke Allah or invoke the Most Gracious, [al-Rahmaan] (Allah) (Quran S.17:110).The animal’s throat is then cut and it dies a slow, cruel death, without being humanely stunned first. Eat not (O believers) of that (meat) on which Allah’s Name has not been pronounced (at the time of the slaughtering of the animal) (Quran S.6:121)

Currently, UK government guidelines on animal slaughter state that animals must be stunned to render them unconscious before being slaughtered, stopping them from feeling pain when having their throats cut, and therefore reducing any suffering; unless, the animal is to be slaughtered for religious consumption, i.e. halal for Muslims or kosher for Jews. Here the act of stunning first is omitted and deemed unnecessary. Government guidance on stunned slaughter. So, there is one rule of slaughtering for one group of society and another for the rest.

My Indian Restaurant

Sitting in my Indian Restaurant (yes, I own an Indian restaurant), a Muslim couple drinking beer and wine asked my waiter if our lamb was halal. All food and drink is Halal for Muslims, apart from pork and alcohol, but the meat must be prayed over before slaughter. So, the answer for the couple at the table was: “Your lamb jalfrezi is halal, but your Cobra beer and Chardonnay aren’t”.

It’s so ridiculously contradictory, and funny, for them to be so concerned about keeping within Islamic law whilst not keeping within Islamic law. They might as well have asked for a halal bacon butty but sadly bacon butties are not on our menu, so not possible anyway.

To make meat halal for Muslims, the animal from which it comes has to be slaughtered in a certain way, in accordance with Islamic practice, and this practice has been written into UK law.

No choice in suppliers

Now, I know what you are all thinking, hang on Ian, aren’t you being a bit hypocritical, owning an Indian Restaurant and serving halal meat? Well yes, you could say that but, I still must keep the peace with my chefs, who won’t handle anything that is not halal, and none of my suppliers will deal in non-halal chicken. I do have to tread a very fine line. It is easy to criticise halal meat and the practices surrounding it, but I must equally keep the Singleton Tandoori a happy ship. Besides, I can’t change things on my own. I must be realistic.

Halal meat, whether we like it or not, is used in many institutions in the UK, such as prisons, schools and hospitals, to satisfy the needs of a minority. It is easier and more cost effective for them to supply halal-approved foods for all, rather than offer a choice of halal or non-halal. This is an imposition on the majority for the sake of the vocal minority.


The choice between halal and non-halal is being reduced for the rest of us too, as more and more food outlets, such as KFC, M&S, Pizza Express, the Slug and Lettuce chain, Domino’s Pizza, Morrisons, Tesco, Greggs, Waitrose, Subway, Zizzi and Nando’s are vying for the Islamic pound.

There are specialist Kosher meat outlets for those who specifically want Kosher meat, and that’s fine if you are not concerned about the inhumane killing methods at the abattoir. But the same cannot be said for halal where there is no choice for the rest of us.

Many people won’t have a problem with the availability of halal food for Muslims. We are, after all, a tolerant nation. But when it is forced onto all our plates, it is fair to say that our tolerance is being abused.

However, all this controversy is unnecessary, because an Imam’s advice to any Muslim travelling abroad to somewhere where halal meat cannot be found, is to follow the rule of convenience… just don’t worry about it, eat what’s there! Our government does not need to allow halal slaughter at all. Muslims would not suffer.

How do Christians feel?

Some Christians are concerned about whether they are allowed to eat meat which has been offered up in worship to another God, but halal has only been prayed over and not offered as an appeasing sacrifice. Besides, whatever has been prayed into your dinner, can be prayed out again for your peace of mind. Be assured also that Jesus said, in Mathew 15:11, “What goes into someone’s mouth does not defile them, but what comes out of their mouth, that is what defiles them”.

Of further concern is the suspicion that a portion of the funds generated from the fees charged to businesses for the certification of products as halal is being used to fund terrorism. At the very least, money generated is used to prop up and fund an ideology that is anti-female Surah 4:34 “Men are in charge of women” , “Men can beat their wives”; anti-homosexual “If you find anyone doing as Lot’s people did, kill the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.” Book of Al-Akhan Book 38 Number 4447; anti-unbeliever “Slay the unbelievers, and ambush them” Sura 9:5; and anti-apostate “Kill the apostate” Sura 4:89.

Whatever is permissible or not permissible for Muslims, it is not acceptable for the rest of us to be asked to follow the rules of their religion. We must stop all non-stun slaughter in this country.

Ian Sleeper’s YouTube Channel

The State of Policing

This week has seen a number of events thrust the future of policing back into the spotlight, if it ever left. Her Majesties Inspector of Constabulary Mr. Tom Winsor, a civilian by the way, has published his annual review of policing (The State of Policing The Annual Assessment of Policing in England and Wales 2018) and finds fault with the police service.  Retired senior Metropolitan Police Commissioners have finally had the bottle to criticise the government’s handling of the Police service for the last eight years under Theresa May as Home Secretary and Prime Minister.

30,000 officers and support staff gone

I think the problems go back further than eight years. But they have certainly seen the most damage to the policing of this country. The headline figure is the loss of some 30,000 officers and support staff, over 20 per cent of the total available 10 years ago.  The bulk of these have gone from street policing.  It was always the way that specialist roles were filled first, and the remainder allocated to beat work.

Government have consistently imposed additional priorities on the police and indeed built targets to enforce them. Consequently, the number of specialist squads has multiplied and the source to fill them has been uniform patrol.  These priorities were often ones that the government wanted rather than what the local population thought was important.  This has reached absurd levels with the formation of units to monitor so called Hate Crime, where people’s feelings and sensitivities take priority over the real world of burglary, knife crime and grooming gangs.

Tory Cuts

The government and in particular the Tory party have never understood policing from the grass roots of local communities.  They have failed to understand the crucial links between communities and their police. The police have effectively withdrawn from street policing and the consequences are evident across the country. This has resulted in a lack of confidence in the police and I believe this has been a deliberate aim of the government.

The Tories in particular were always jealous of the independence of Chief Constables. Historically they were accountable to a police authority of mixed politicians and magistrates. The Tories made several attempts to take control of policing services, initially unsuccessfully, but they eventually appointed Police and Crime Commissioners. When you look in detail at the role and powers of these Commissioners you find that they are subject to almost total control by the Home Office.  They are government agents, even when not members of the governing political party.

Association of Chief Police Officers

The Tories also abolished a professional body I belonged to, the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO). ACPO used to advise on policy and practice and was independent of government. It has been replaced by The Police Chiefs Council, accountable to government.

Her Majesties Inspectorate of Constabulary used to be headed by retired senior police officers. Not any more, the current incumbent is an ex rail regulator, which says it all really.

So, the thrust of this week’s publications is that the police service needs further “reform”. This is often code for centralisation and political control. In my view the exact opposite of what should be done. Policing is essentially a local service delivered for local people and national politicians are best kept out of it.  A little story will illustrate what I see as the problem.  In the 1990’s it is claimed that a certain Home Secretary was fed up with going to meetings with his European colleagues and finding he was the only Minister of the Interior (Home Secretary)  who did not have direct control of police activity, as is the case in European countries.

Regional Crime Squads

What they did was to hijack what at that time were known as Regional Crime Squads. These were local officers who were pooled regionally to combat serious and organised crime. They were coordinated centrally.  What was done was to take these officers away from their local forces and form them into what has become the National Crime Agency. Forces were not given a choice. Hence a national agency, accountable to the Home Secretary was created to satisfy the ego of a national politician.

Now there is a case for some crime to be dealt with at a national level, but there were mechanisms in existence to do this. The response to the IRA was one such example.

There is now a risk that perceived weaknesses in policing will be used as an excuse for further centralisation of policing, again to the detriment of local communities.

“Boots on the ground”

It is fundamental to the nature of policing that it requires boots on the ground.  The beat bobby is the eyes and ears of the police force and the friend of the local community. I have numerous examples from my career of information and intelligence being passed to me because I was known in a particular area where I was a foot patrol.  You cannot beat being out on the street in uniform talking to people.  The government tried to undermine the idea of beat patrol over several years by commissioning research that showed that a uniformed foot patrol hardly prevented any crime.  Apart from it being difficult to establish what you have prevented the idea that that is the only role of a beat bobby shows a true ignorance of the nature of policing. Indeed, crime is only about 20% of what a bobby deals with.

I have only scratched the surface of some of the issues with this article. There is a lot more to be said about a quite complicated and intricate relationship between Police Forces, Local Communities and central and local government.

For Britain Policies

For the record For Britain has policies to deal with the problem. Some of them are:

  • We will restore policing numbers to pre2010 levels. (Thank you, Boris, for stealing this policy).
  • We will remove the Police from the Political Control of Police and Crime Commissioners.
  • We will make sure they are accountable to local populations.
  • Reform the HMI from a puppet of government to an independent professional body
  • Prevent further mergers of Police Forces
  • Restore Beat Policing
  • Remove restraints on Stop and Search
  • Abolish the concept of Hate crime.

Mike Speakman is a retired Deputy Chief Constable and Policing Spokesman for For Britain.

We welcome ex police officers to the party and value their experience.

E mail: [email protected]

Democracy vs Theocracy: A fight to the death

Part I

Islam is wholly incompatible with the kind of liberal democracy that we in the western world have come to regard as normal. It is not just the cultural elements associated with Islam that most of us find repugnant, such as FGM, the denigration of women, halal slaughter, “honour killing” and the rest. These may not be essential to Islam, as some “liberal” Muslims claim, though the fact that they are so entwined in the minds of countless Muslims worldwide indicates something deeply wrong with its intellectual structure. The two truly insurmountable obstacles in the way of Islam’s co-existing with democracy are its radical obscurantism and its ideal of theocracy.

Islam’s obscurantism – the fact that it deliberately prevents the facts or full details of something from becoming known – negates any possibility of critical or sceptical discussion. The Koran is the Word of God, and that’s that. How does one know it’s the Word of God? Because the Koran says so. Anyone who doesn’t accept that circular proposition is, ipso facto, an infidel, and infidels have no rights; though a merciful Islamic government may allow them living space, if they perform some useful service. Muslims cannot allow non-Muslims to utter anything critical of Islam, so the basic democratic principle of free speech is out of the question.

The old adage runs that democracy is the worst form of government, apart from all the others. Theocracy is the worst, including all the others, because those in command possess all power, both temporal and spiritual, to use Christian terminology.

A democracy is concerned only with what people do; a theocracy is equally concerned with what they think and believe. We already have theocracy creeping into our system of justice, with the concept of “hate crime”. The idea that an objective crime is somehow made worse by the emotion that is supposed to have motivated it is an essentially theocratic one.

The scourge of the 20th century was the atheist theocracy of communism, with its drive to ensure that its subjects had the “correct consciousness”. China’s Cultural Revolution was one of the most monstrous examples of communist theocracy in action, with the Red Guards persecuting millions for the crime of being educated and, perhaps, thoughtful.

In fact, Islam resembles communism in a number of ways. As a total system, claiming to have an answer to every question, it has no respect for other systems, sweeping them aside as soon as it has the power, but exploiting them when that serves its long-term objectives.

Just as 20th century communists would make use of the “bourgeois” freedoms allowed them by the democracies they despised, so Islam exploits the apparatus of the rights-and-equalities industry, all of which it would obliterate, once in power.

To both Islam and communism, the very existence of these freedoms is evidence of the decadence of democratic societies, which refuse to acknowledge the inevitability of the triumph of Sharia or the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. Both justify any crime in pursuit of their particular goals. Both can count on the support of useful idiots in government, the media, social services and academia.

There is a dangerous myth that there is something “natural” about democracy and only adverse circumstances keep it from flowering. (It was this delusion that helped take the USA into Iraq.) In fact, it is no more natural than a garden, created by hard work and constant attention. Neglect it and it goes back to the jungle. That’s natural.

We must maintain democracy as a gardener maintains his garden, and we must keep it free from the ravages of the pestilent theocracy of Islam.

Read Part II Here.

Michael North

Love Muslims Hate Islam!

Ali couldn’t believe his eyes and ears when a white Englishman offered to buy his Indian restaurant.

This was not what he was expecting. Only Muslims, and mainly those of Bangladeshi descent, buy Indian restaurants in the UK, not pasty-faced middle-aged Christians.

This was not going to be a business venture of great money-making proportions, but more of a God-led calling to save a Muslim soul from Hell.

I had never run a restaurant before, and I am by no means a chef. I was completely reliant on God to get me through the next few years. So the decision to buy the restaurant was made not from a proper business point of view, but from a spiritual one. My attitude was that you come into the world with nothing and you leave with nothing.  Anything in between is God-given.

Sayem, a Muslim waiter at the Singleton Tandoori, was asking searching questions about Christianity and telling me about Islam. Conversations deepened, and after he received a vision of Jesus in a dream (a popular way for Muslims to know Christ),  he was baptised in June 2017. That was the day I knew why this pasty-faced middle-aged Christian had bought an Indian Restaurant.

Reading about Islam is not the same as immersing yourself in it, and running an Indian restaurant, and employing Muslims is the closest I could get to total immersion without, God forbid, converting.

None of the Muslims staff were united, they were all jealous of each other and bickered a lot. Everyone was a “no 1 liar” – their favourite phrase- as if they had some sort of chart going on and none of them trusted one another. Toward me they were fine.  They worked hard and produced a good curry, but I couldn’t recognise them in Islamic text. The Islamic texts that talk about not making friends with the Kafir and about killing the unbeliever were not the instructions these fellows were following. These guys were normal; these guys were just like most Muslims.

Muslims are just ordinary people who follow Islam, a religion, an ideology a belief system that is man-made and which holds them in check. Leaving Islam makes you an apostate, a figure of hate, isolated from friends and family. You cannot hate Muslims, as they are men and women, but you can hate the doctrine, the creed that they are following.

It is Incredible how most Muslims have not got a clue about the truth of Islam, and certainly the same goes for most of the rest of us.

This is because the media are silent on the truth of Islam, and the silence is deafening. And by being silent, they are in fact lying to the public.

The silence of the media made me angry. I couldn’t just sit still and do nothing,  so I decided to get a long way out of my comfort zone and pitch up outside the BBC to stage a game-changing one-man protest act.

Every week, I would travel on the High Speed train from Ashford International to London St. Pancras International and head straight for Broadcasting House, Langham Place with my “#lovemuslimshateislam Time For The Truth!” placard.

Immediately after I arrived the first time, a pretty young girl told me she liked my sign and thanked me for it. I was buoyed by this and remained happy to sit on the ledge inside the Langham Place courtyard, waiting for a reaction. I didn’t have long to wait before four burly guys came walking by with hard hats and yellow hi-viz vests on. When they told me they were Muslims, I thought the worst, but to my relief, and as an answer to my prayer, they agreed with my sign too!

After a few weeks, when the Westminster attack happened, in March 2017, I turned my attention to that side of the capital.  Then  I went to London Bridge, after the attack there weeks later, provoking an interesting but mixed reaction from locals and tourists alike.

When I read that Southwark Cathedral was holding a public service for the victims of the London Bridge attacks, I couldn’t resist.  I just had to be there and let all of my 33 Twitter followers know of my intention to be outside. Little did I know that Southwark Cathedral was also one of my many followers and that someone from there would alert the police in advance of my plan.

My freedom of speech was severely tested when two Metropolitan Police officers took exception to the “hate Islam” part of my placard and, despite my protestations of innocence, they decided to arrest me under the Crime and Disorder Act.

After 13 hours locked in a police cell, at silly o’clock in the morning, the police finally released me on the condition that I would not be allowed to go anywhere near Southwark Cathedral. I found myself outside Elephant and Castle tube station trying to find working public transport, only to discover that the last tube train had gone. I decided to try my luck and walk to the main line London Bridge Station, only to realise that within minutes of being released, I had already broken my bail conditions.

Weeks dragged by until the Crown Prosecution Service finally came to their senses and dropped the charges against me, leaving the way open for me to sue the Met for wrongful arrest.

Of course, the left want to accuse me of Islamophobia and call me racist. They have no idea that I am a son of an immigrant, that my wife is an immigrant, or that I own an Indian Restaurant and employ Muslims, so I always reply “Which part of me is Islamophobic? Which part is racist?”

Ian Sleeper

He Died Singing

A Cornishman named Rick Rescorla

After a notable military career in Vietnam, an ex-patriate Cornishman named Rick Rescorla found himself responsible for the safety of forty floors of the South Tower of the World Trade Centre, New York.  The WTC basement explosion of 1993 caused Rescorla to predict an air attack. He devised evacuation precautions for his forty floors and rehearsed them regularly, to the annoyance of all those whose work he interrupted.

On the morning of 9/11, 2001, Rick went to work – to fill in for an absent colleague. When the first strike happened he left a voice message for his wife : ‘Are you watching TV?’ and then he implemented his rescue plans.  He guided 2, 687 office workers to safety. To keep their up spirits on the long trudge downstairs he sang out some Cornish songs, including ‘Camborne Hill’.

The ‘orses stood still, the wheels went aroun’

Goin’ up Camborne Hill, comin’ down!’

This song celebrates Trevithick’s first steam road vehicle. That first ‘horseless carriage’ was the ancestor of the steam railways.

Now on 9/11 Rick Rescorla sang while he led to safety those 2,687 people. There were stragglers still to come so Rick Rescorla, who was not even on duty that day, re-entered the shaking tower to look for them. The tower fell. He was seen no more.

The ‘Camborne Hill’ song celebrates an adventurous, creative spirit which embraces life wholly and frankly. Rescorla spiced his duty with a wry grin. He was a man all Britain should admire and celebrate. As we should another incident of self-disclipine and cool courage.

Lord Kitchener and the HMS Hampshire.

In 2016, we celebrated the centenary of Lord Kitchener’s death. He is familiarly known to some of us as ‘K of K’, Kitchener of Khartoum. We gathered in St Paul’s under the dome for evensong. We sang, not without tears , ‘O hear us when we cry to thee/For those in peril on the sea.’

You know Kitchener well from the famous poster in which he stares at you over his moustache and pointing finger with the words: ‘Your Country Needs You’.

Kitchener was Secretary of State for War during the ‘Great War’ of 1914-18. Setting sail in 1916 from the Orkneys to visit Russia, his ship, the H.M.S. Hampshire, hit an enemy mine. It sank fast.  Of the full complement of 600 plus men only a few survived. One of those few told of his last sight of Kitchener. Dressed in full uniform, with greatcoat, cap and heavy boots, he was standing on the quarter deck. What was he doing? Talking calmly to two of his officers. Talking!

My mind whirls with supposition. What was he talking about so calmly, with his certain death a few moments away? Was the man utterly mad? Why was he not tearing off his cumbersome uniform, his heavy boots which would act like dead weights and drag him down, down, down? My guess is that he was thanking his men for their past service together. But that is mere supposition. We shall never know: ‘Oh hear us when we cry to Thee / For those in peril on the sea.’

Kitchener had won notable victories, he had seen off the crazed Mahdists at Omdurman, the battle in which the young Churchill had a small part.  But before Kitchener’s 1916 death at sea there were other soldiers, sailors and marines, many of them young, inexperienced and not so privileged, who had shown equal self-discipline and fortitude on a previous sinking ship, the ‘HMS Birkenhead’, in 1852.

Young soldiers, many of them poor Irish seeking respite from the Famine, older men, and also wives and children were on the troopship ‘Birkenhead’ when it hit an uncharted rock off the coast of South Africa. There were not enough lifeboats.  So that a rush would not swamp the few boats there were, it was ordered: ‘Women and children first!’ And that was the origin, they say, of the now famous phrase. It has become standard practice, for us British at any rate.

The soldiers, from many different regiments, stood calmly in parade line. An officer drew his sword. Was he aware that this was his last battle? The nine horses on board were loosed into the sea, to give them a fighting chance. Eight landed safely, evading the hosts of hungry sharks.

The soldiers, young and old, stood firm as the deck canted steeply. All the women and children were saved – over a hundred. Five times that number of men were lost to the sea, which was soon boiling with feasting sharks.

Kipling wrote of this incident, in his poem celebrating the Royal Marines,’Soldier and Sailor Both’ :

‘To stand and be still in the Birkenhead drill is a damn tough bullet to chew’.

Damn right, I respond, ‘A damn tough bullet to chew.’

All these three examples of courage are relevant now, today. Some of us may be called upon to exhibit similar levels of courage and self-discipline. Indeed some already face death threats. You know their names very well.

We have never in my lifetime been in as much need of inspiration from our heroic ancestors as now. I believe we can win against the dark rising tide, win against the cult of death and savagery, win against our own internal enemies and despicable traitors.

So thank you for your example Rick Rescorla, thank you Lord Kitchener, and thank you all, you nameless, gallant men on both the ships I have named.

And thank you, our own present leaders, for putting yourselves in danger, for the truth.

‘A damn tough bullet to chew…’




Revised 05/06/2019.

Vibrant, Enriching Diversity

Stratford, E London, 2009

At this time I was teaching in a small college dedicated to ‘teaching the unteachable’ – 16 to 19 year old teenagers that had been excluded from other colleges and were in danger of being left NEET (Not in Employment, Education or Training).

The college was very proud of its ‘diversity’ displays in the corridors but, in truth, it was the least diverse place I have ever worked. The ethnic mix of students was predominantly Bengali Muslims with a handful of black Christians. There were two, yes two, white pupils.

Students were late or absent on a daily basis, often having been arrested the night before for a violent incident of one sort or another. Listening to their conversations, it seemed they had no value for life.

“Yeah, he was stabbed, innit?”

“Did Abs mash him?”

“Yeah blud, dead.”

“What for?”

“He disrespected Abs innit?’

The students self-segregated by gender, by religion and by race. The Bengali Muslims hated the black Christians. They were seen as the lowest of the low and many Bengalis wouldn’t sit near them, work with them, or even touch anything they had touched. I learned this on one notable day during my first week there.

Cultural Racism

I naively asked the students to swap their work so they could mark each other’s answers (a common assessment strategy approved of by OfstEd). I swapped a few reluctant students’ work and all hell broke loose. One of the Bengali lads shouted he wouldn’t touch the black girl’s work. She exploded in rage and, within seconds, I had a full-on bar-room brawl. Tables and chairs were flying everywhere, girls were screaming and punches were being thrown. I got myself between the two in the centre, received a number of blows, but still managed to separate them. The girl raced out of the classroom and many followed her into the hallway, where numerous phone calls were made to notify ‘crews’ from other classes (and even neighbouring areas) to join the fight.

Every member of staff had to intervene to separate the crowds and settle the different groups and segregate them into different classrooms. All lessons were suspended for the day.

That was my first true taste of London’s vibrant diversity. I didn’t feel stronger for it, nor enriched. I felt terrified.

Fast-forward a few months; the students and I had formed a precarious mutual respect. They knew I followed through with my threats, that I was “bare strict man”, but they also knew that I was a good teacher, and that I wanted them to achieve. Some of them were even beginning to enjoy learning.


In the middle of one lesson, a text message alert was heard, then another, then another. Soon almost everyone in the class had their phones in hand reading the same text. “EDL outside Green Lanes mosque. Get here now”.

It’s unbelievable to think that at that point, I had never heard of the English Defence League or Tommy Robinson. I asked the pupils what was going on. Ignoring me, the lads left. One turned back, showed me the text and said: “Sorry sir, gotta go and smash some white boys, no offence.”

Other bemused teachers met in the corridor where we informed each other of what was happening. Most Bengali Muslim lads, and even a teacher, left the building to go and fight the EDL. College management did nothing.

Death Threats

Not long afterwards, I was full to the brim with my newly acquired enrichment and vibrant diversity. After my daily walk from Stratford station to the college, I’d been spat at a number of times. I walked into work only to be met by a student threatening to have me killed. “One of his boys” was going to wait in a car outside and shoot me when I came to school in the morning or when I went home in the afternoon. The management did exclude the student, but for a couple of weeks I had to arrive and leave at different times, so that I didn’t have a routine. I wanted to contact the police, but the college told me it would bring negative publicity.

The daily walk to and from the station became unbearable. I had no idea if that guy over there, or that bloke outside the shop, or those lads talking together had guns or knives. I had no idea who might kill me and who might to spit at me, or call me a filthy kuffar under their breath.

Eventually, living and working in London got to me.  You see, London is not English anymore. It hasn’t been English for a long time. John Cleese is correct. London is another country. Somewhere ‘other’. Go to Wood Green shopping centre and you won’t hear English spoken anywhere. Go to Walthamstow market and you won’t see any of the “Pound a bowl!” barrow boys that used to sell fruit and veg. The last Eastend ‘Pie n Mash’ shop is barely frequented and you won’t find fish n chips unless you go to Toffs out in Muswell Hill, and take out a small mortgage for some Dover Sole. London is now Shisha bars, hair weave salons, Pakistani takeaways and Polski Skleps. Sadiq Khan says “London is open”. So open and welcoming that there’s no longer any room for the English.

Abandoning London

Within a few weeks of being threatened with death, I joined the tens of thousands of white people who have abandoned London and I walked away. I left my flat in East London, where a girl was raped outside my window and a man was stabbed to death in my doorway. I left behind the ‘Sharia Zone’ stickers and the racial abuse. No longer would I be pushed off tube-trains because I was white. No longer would I be fearful walking home. No longer would I be afraid of students rioting, killing or dying.  I came home to the North. Back to England.

London has been lost.

Mortal Neglect

Mortal Neglect. No other words are sufficient to describe the disgraceful way in which our politicians – and Britain’s internal enemies – are treating our Armed Forces. To this neglect they have added contempt and vindictiveness. The neglect may be seen in these official Treasury figures which show expenditure on our Armed Service as a percentage of GDP.

1947 16%
1950 11.2%
1959 7.0%
1970 5.5%
1990s 4.0%
2003 2.63%
2010s 2.4%
2018-19 2.3%

Much of this decrease in spending is because defence is now much more about machines than it is about men. We no longer have National Service, which forced often unwilling young men into the army. Instead, we have highly professional armed services using high tech weapons.  This is much more efficient and less costly.  However, the decline in spending has continued to the point where it is now leaving us vulnerable.  It should not be allowed to continue any further. It risks our very survival as an independent nation.

Strategic Defence and Security Review

No Strategic Defence and Security Review has taken place since 2015. This is highly significant.  Brexit will certainly have a deep impact on our national Defence policy. Yet the government seems not to be making the changes necessary to prepare for when we leave.  Is this an indication that the government has no intention of taking us out of the EU and wishes for our armed services to be part of a common EU defence force? Make of it what you will.

The fiscal aspect is damning, but more damning is the increase in human cost and suffering to those who have placed their lives in jeopardy for our national defence.

It was reported a short time ago by a retired officer, a Falklands veteran, that more Falklands veterans have now committed suicide than were killed in action in that conflict. This is shocking and shameful. It requires our attention and our action.

The inevitable problems resulting from psychological stress in action, from new stresses in civilian life after retirement, and from loss of comradeship and purpose are simply not being addressed. Meanwhile aliens, whose ideology is based on hatred of our society, and who have expressed a clear desire to destroy our values, are being treated as honoured guests, bad guests who rape and kill our innocent children.

The prosecution and persecution of retired soldiers

Things are even worse than we realise, for our enemies within are now using our own ‘fair’ system to take retired soldiers to court, just for loyally doing their duty in the past. This is a deeply corrupting phenomenon, it is a psychological weapon intended to destroy the morale of our Armed Forces. For they are the best of patriots and they may well be our final shield against the attacks on our freedom by the Globalist-Neo Marxist-Islamic alliance. Each of these enemies of our freedom can only benefit from causing dismay and distrust among our Armed Services.

We are not a poor nation yet those who have risked their lives in our defence are left homeless on our streets by the thousand. This is a disgrace which each one of us must take to heart. For Britain must take action on this. Conditions for ex-servicemen, and disregard for their sacrifices, have fallen back to the 1890’s when Kipling wrote:

‘Yes, making’ mock of uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an’ they’re starvation cheap;’

Mortal neglect of our finest men and women can only lead to mortal results in the society they defend, results which the far left seem to intend. We have been warned. We must make For Britain the party of choice for all our Armed Services.

Richard Carlyon 17/06/2019

For Britain Taxi Driver Policy

For Britain will introduce a Six Point Plan for Taxi and Private Hire Drivers (including ‘Uber’ drivers).

Taking a taxi is a contract between the customer and the driver.  The customer wants to be taken to their destination safely, in a professional manner, in a clean and safe vehicle. The driver wants to earn a living and be treated with respect.

This proposal seeks to ensure the safest possible environment for the passenger, and a fair and reasonable market for the driver to operate.

Private hire drivers often work via an operator (the taxi firm). Black cab drivers may operate fully independently of an operator.


Taxi drivers are self-employed. Many work around 50 hours a week or more to earn enough to live. They are generally dependent upon tips to make up their wage. Drivers do not get sick pay or holiday pay. Fares are often artificially low and do not reflect a true market value. Fares are set in place by each operator (the taxi firm). Operators may lower taxi rates or keep them low as a marketing tactic to attract customers; it can be a case of a ‘race to the bottom’.

Each licensing area (Local Authority) has different criteria for a driver to gain a taxi licence – some areas have less strict criteria than others.

For Britain would introduce the following as national requirements for a driver to become a taxi driver:

  1. The driver must have a registered UK address and be listed on the electoral register;
  2. Drivers must be legally resident in the UK for at least 24 months;
  3. The driver must hold a full valid UK (or Irish) driving licence, earned by taking and passing the national driving test in Britain or Ireland;
  4. The driver must satisfy a comprehensive DBS safety check (formerly a CRB check) going back a minimum of 10 years;
  5. The driver must be able to speak English and pass a national standardised spoken & written English test. All tests and interviews will be carried out in English;
  6. Licencing fraud, or any fraud committed by drivers in the establishment of a taxi service, will be punishable with a prison sentence and/or deportation for non-British citizens;

Local knowledge is key to the customer getting the best possible experience. The above would support and encourage more local drivers.

Existing taxi drivers would also have to comply with the above criteria.

For Britain - Taxi Policy
For Britain – Taxi Policy – 6 point plan

Further notes:

It is our belief that, because of the lack of proper regulation (and corruption within some council licensing departments) in the taxi market, the British public is put at unnecessary risk in taxis and private hire vehicles. An income stream for British workers is also being lost.  The above proposal will have the benefit of bringing local people back into the trade and supporting the local community.

Furthermore, it is well known that large numbers of non-British taxi drivers have been involved in rape gangs over the last few decades – many of whom would not have passed the above criteria.  In many cases, taxis were used to deliver young white and Sikh girls to have sex with Muslim men.  Some of these girls were as young as eleven years old.  Putting all and any systems in place to prevent this must be a priority: The For Britain Six Point Plan will make our taxis safer.

Jerking and Twitching Like Chickens

‘They were jerking and twitching like chickens.’

Not my words. Words I came across years ago while researching eye-witness accounts for a postgraduate degree. Words I felt unable to include. Words which have been burned into my brain.

‘They were jerking and twitching like chickens.’

What, you ask, could ‘jerk’? What was it that ‘twitched’?

Why…. ‘like chickens’?

You demand context. You deserve context. For you may have stopped, you may have looked away. Your eyes may have wandered from those few words, may have wandered away from the words, to seek those familiar objects around you. Why have you stopped? Are you  afraid? Are you seeking relief? Or reassurance? Or escape? Do you really wish to continue?

Some of you may have passed over those words, in fearful dismissal. You may have stopped, as I did. Stopped, as in one of those childhood moments when I approached some unexpected terror,  moments of agony – just before the opening of a dark mental door. That door opening into a sudden depth of disbelief at the horrors of which humanity is capable.

What is down there crawling in that black icy depth? What could it be that was so terrible that it made the ‘grown-ups’ exchange swift but meaningful looks; and swiftly  diverting your bewildered childish horror?

‘They were jerking and twitching like chickens’.

God help me.

You demand context? The context is autumn, 1895, in Constantinople,  ‘Bulis’. Bulis is the familiar name which the Armenian people called that city. Similar to the Greek ‘polis’, the city.

‘They were jerking and twitching like chickens.’


Ah, says the mind, frantically seeking diversion from the darkness ahead. Ah yes, yes….

‘They were….’

But you nod rather quickly, eyes averted, and you hear your own voice, far off, mutter: ‘…yes, Armenian, an Indo-European language, developed alongside Greek……..’

‘… chickens!’

Like chickens?

Yes, on an autumn day, in Bulis, hordes of  ‘softas’, koranic students, came pouring out of the madrassas and mosques armed with metal-shod clubs provided by the Ottoman emperor. The butchers, and police, donned leather aprons to avoid staining themselves with kufar blood and took up their finely-honed slaughtering knives.

Screaming with bloodlust the Muslims, hundreds and hundreds of them spread out across the city in full view of everyone, including the European diplomats, the financial and technical European staff employed by the Ottomans. The Muslims grabbed any Armenian they could find and  then obeyed the instructions of the Koran as ‘written’ by Mahomet, as preached by the imams: ‘Kill them wherever you find them.’, ‘Strike them on the neck!’

Thousands of innocent Armenians were savagely clubbed to death in the streets, in full view of all;  rich Armenians as well as poor Armenians, women also, priests, businessmen, writers, ordinary Armenian folk. For they were all Christians, you see. Muslims are urged to kill Christians simply for not being Muslim. Its very simple. Its very clear. The most childish and ignorant mind can understand it. All non-Muslims can be killed, because Mahomet said so, indeed they MUST be killed. And he, the aforesaid Mahomet, was the most perfect man who ever lived. Fact, for thus it is stated in the Koran and in the hadith, see? Solid fact. How could those venerable men lie? The words of Allah!

The 1895 Constantinople slaughter was open, brutal, horrific. The Armenians had dared to protest against the massacres, rapes and robberies they had suffered. This protest could not be allowed. These kufar had to be taught a lesson.

One butcher, I call him butcher though he was a policeman, was more skilled than the loutish knout-wavers, those who beat out the brains of  every Armenian they found. He was more skilled, more accomplished. For, you see, many small Armenian children and babies, yes babies, were brought to him as he sat, knife in hand, clad in a leather apron.

And he seized them one by one, pulled them over his knees and slit their soft throats expertly, halal style. Halal style. Not chickens. Toddlers and babies. Then threw them aside, in a bleeding, twitching heap, to grab the next. As authorised by islam. Delicate and exact work. Blessed by the hovering, excited imams. As the little Christian children and babies bled to death, halal style, oh yes, halal style, they squirmed. They jerked. They twitched. Like chickens.

Can you ever eat chicken again, halal chicken, any chicken ?

‘They jerked and twitched like chickens,’ he said. He relished ‘their ensuing convulsions’. We know this because he was asked about it afterwards.  He described what he had done, relishing it, to Professor A. Moriz, a specialist in Ottoman studies.

His words.

Not mine.

He showed no remorse, no regret, no shame, no doubt. He relished his work. Work of note and credit, holy work, a form of prayer. Authorised by the imams, by Islam. By Mahomet. ‘The perfect man’.

‘They jerked and twitched like chickens’.

And recently, the yelling supporters of Diane Abbot and her dear ‘friend’ Comrade Corbyn, had the temerity to call me Islamophobic, a bigot? Racist scum they screamed as they kicked and punched me, for to the left, the modern Islam appeasers, I am racist scum for I openly oppose the death ideology they cringe before like slaves.

That day’s work in Bulis and in many previous massacres all over Armenia, was repeated with greater terminal fury in the Genocide of 1916 in which 2 million Armenians perished in many unspeakable ways. 200,000 Armenian women and girls were made sex slaves. The road to Deir-es-Zor was lined with scores of crosses on which twisted and twitched the naked bodies of Armenian women who had been raped before crucifixion, in mockery of their Christian faith.

This satanic behaviour was recorded in many European languages. The eyewitnesses of the hellish slaughter perpetrated by Islam included one young German officer who took photographs of this Genocide. Many photographs. I have seen them. They too are branded deep in my brain.

Have any of our ‘leaders’ bothered to read what always happens when Islam gains the upper hand over the kufar? It is happening now, now. Last year 90,000 Middle Eastern Christians were murdered. Most Iraqi Christians ‘have disappeared’. The killing continues as you read these words.

And now our own police escort Muslim rioters to attack peaceful working citizens in Oldham. Instead of arresting the violent ones they appear to side with them against the victims, women, frightened children, innocent folk. Today it happened, in Oldham. So I am forced to think again of  that day in 1895, ‘They were jerking and twitching like chickens’.

‘… jerking and twitching like chickens’.





My Descent Into Islam and My Ascent Out

My descent into Islam did not happen  in a  vacuum or without context.    There were many variables and extenuating circumstances that occurred before I became a Muslim.  There are many factors that have affected me, from my childhood, early adolescence, and my life as an adult woman. It’s a similar experience for many converts.  Many people think those who convert to Islam must be un-intelligent to join such an oppressive ideology and faith . But the female converts I have known have usually had  an abusive upbringing or childhood.

I have not known any male converts,as women and men are forbidden friendships under Islam.

I came from a back ground of severe abuse as a child; psychological, sexual, and physical.  I have known women who are also survivors of child sex abuse, and who went on to convert to Islam. They had come from horrendous backgrounds, full of horrific abuse. I’m not suggesting this is the case for all converts, but it is the case with many I have met.

Some convert to Islam because they feel disillusioned with their own religious faith, or are looking for a different path of spirituality. I noticed also that some converts had a propensity towards dogmatism. I often felt uncomfortable with other Muslim convert women, because they were very controlling. They would often try to control other converts, and preach the details of how to be a good Muslim.

I think some join Islam because it also gives them power and control over the sexuality of other women.  Women were often overly focused and consumed with each other’s Islamic dress and sexuality.

I must tell my own story ,and my own experience and not dwell  too much on why others convert. But I do think it is important to try to understand why women are persuaded to embrace  Islam. It is detrimental to their well being, and many enter a world they did not realise they were entering.

The main reason that Muslims desire to live in our Western cultures is to do dawah; proselytizing  and  spreading the ideology of Islam.  Being aware of this , we can educate young women about the dangers of Islam. The religion is often sugar-coated,and women are not told the truth about the reality and true meanings of the Quran and the hadith.

Muslims teach other Muslims to provide non Muslims with a version of Islam that they can handle –  a sanitised version.  Their belief is that after we convert, slowly our hearts will be open to the ‘truth’ of Islam.

One needs to understand the different contexts that can make a person vulnerable to this religion. If we understand why some people are more vulnerable than others, then we can prevent their descent into Islam and save girls from being influenced by this cult.

I call it a cult because that is what Islam truly is.  Some say it is not a religion, but it does contain strong dogmatic rulings and spiritual practices.  However, Islam is not only a religion, it is a political ideology and all-encompassing way of life.  Most alarming of all, leaving or criticising Islam carries the penalty of death.

A true religion or authentic spirituality I believe is about compassion and love. People are free in their choice to leave or join an authentic religion.  If a religion is real and true, it never needs to be forced on anyone.  Therefore I see Islam as a dangerous cult,that  controls the people in it by using fear and tyranny.

Because of my childhood of severe abuse, I was very vulnerable before I came to know about Islam.   I  was isolated, I was a struggling single mother and college student. When one feels isolated and alone, they are more prone to be drawn into a cult or religion that presents itself as a warm family,and gives a person a sense of belonging .

The reality is very different.

Written by Sara Slater

We’ve been suspended from Twitter

This morning we discovered that unfortunately our party has been suspended from Twitter. This looks to be a permanent ban, but we have not received any notification. Twitter’s censorship of Conservative voices is well documented.

Project Veritas

Project Veritas released undercover footage of Twitter employees stating they censor political opinions of Conservatives.

“A lot of unwritten rules, and being that we’re in San Francisco, we’re in California, very liberal, a very blue state. You had to be… I mean as a company you can’t really say it because it would make you look bad, but behind closed doors are lots of rules.”

“There was, I would say… Twitter was probably about 90% Anti-Trump, maybe 99% Anti-Trump.”

“Yeah, if they said this is: ‘Pro-Trump’ I don’t want it because it offends me, this, that. And I say I banned this whole thing, and it goes over here and they are like, ‘Oh you know what? I don’t like it too. You know what? Mo’s right, let’s go, let’s carry on, what’s next?’”

Find out all about Twitter’s censorship of Conservative voices and help support Project Veritas here. 

Twitter is interfering with British politics

It is very clear: Twitter is interfering with British politics and is busily engaged in the demonetisation and silencing of dissenting political voices.

For Britain has never indulged in racist or hateful behaviour, never encouraged or endorsed violence, so this censorship is based solely upon the fact our political views do not suit the elite – we are silenced because we are a threat to the established order.

We will not allow them to break our spirit. We will continue to fight back.

Help us by making your voice heard. Complain to Twitter. Write to the newspapers. Tell vloggers and bloggers!

Let’s put pressure on Twitter and demand our rightful place on social media.

It is not up to private companies to regulate politics in this way. The influence of the tech giants is too enormous for us to accept this manipulation.

Fight back for free speech… prove that the greater Twitter’s censorship of Conservative voices , the greater our fight back will be.


Hartlepool Borough Council Election Win

Read all about our new Councillor in Hartlepool Karen King in the following news article by the Hartlepool Mail. Karen is dedicated to making changes to her constituency for the local residents. For Britain wants to help make lives better for all our countries citizens. Karen is a perfect example of who For Britain supports and what we really wish to achieve in Great Britain.

“For the previous five weeks I had been asking residents to give me a chance to show them what I could do for them as a For Britain councillor. The fact that they have graciously given me that opportunity is a huge honour but also a huge responsibility. I will never be able to thank them enough for their trust.”


“During May I will be doing a lot of behind the scenes groundwork to start dealing with the ward’s problems. Once again, I would like to thank the residents of De Bruce for their support. For De Bruce, For Hartlepool and For Britain.”

If you too want to make a difference then why not Join For Britain and become a local councillor like our new Hartlepool Councillor Karen King or help in other ways. Making a better future is our passion and it could be yours too.


The For Britain Movement – Big Local Election Breakthroughs

Press Release

Title: The For Britain Movement makes big breakthroughs in the local elections
From: The For Britain Movement, Press Office
Date: Friday, 03.05.2019
Notes: For immediate release. All pictures and content are free to use without any prior consent or licence.

For Britain are up and running, with some fantastic results in the 2019 Local Elections including seat wins! Last year the party had just been formed, missing out on postal votes, but still managed some credible results for a brand new party, beating the Greens, UKIP and the LibDems in some wards.

But in 2019 we have gone further, winning seats which is extremely pleasing. This campaign has taught us a lot, when you take to the streets and talk to people, our message is extremely well received. 99% of the public agree with the common sense views we hold. It is incredible for a brand new party to beat Labour in the Northeast; congratulations to new Councillor Karen King, and in beating the Tories in Epping Forest; congratulations to new Councillor Julian Leppert.

Digging deeper, For Britain has consistently managed to finish ahead of other major parties, we managed to beat the LibDems and Greens in many seats, and both the Tories and Labour in others. This is something extremely positive to build on, and the party will now learn from the success to replicate the models that work across the country. These wins are the acorns from which future success will grow.

Some results are still not in at the time of this article, but we have already seen enough to know that we can compete and can win. We can take on Labour and we can take on the Tories and we can beat them. This is without any help from any of the media, so as our name becomes better known, we will go from strength to strength.

Party Leader Anne Marie Waters: “I’m so very proud of our new Councillors, who I know will do a fantastic job. As a new party, we beat the two big players right in their heartlands. To beat Labour so significantly in Hartlepool is proof that we can take the Labour vote. Likewise, beating the Conservatives in Essex proves that we can take that vote as well. For Britain is showing itself to be the party of the common sense majority, regardless of political affiliation. People now see that we can win, and we know this will inspire many more to get on board. Now is the time to join us as our journey truly takes off!”

Local Elections 2019

For Britain are up and running, with some fantastic results in the 2019 Local Elections including seat wins! Last year the party had just been formed, missing out on postal votes, but still managed some credible results for a brand new party, beating the Greens, UKIP and the LibDems in some wards.

But in 2019 we have gone further, winning seats which is extremely pleasing. This campaign has taught us a lot, when you take to the streets and talk to people, our message is extremely well received. 99% of the public agree with the common sense views we hold. It is incredible for a brand new party to beat Labour in the Northeast (congratulations to new Councillor Karen King), and to beat the Tories in Epping Forest (congratulations to new Councillor Julian Leppert).

Digging deeper, For Britain has consistently managed to finish ahead of other major parties, we managed to beat the LibDems and Greens in many seats, and both the Tories and Labour in others. This is something extremely positive to build on, and the party will now learn from the success to replicate the models that work across the country. These wins are the acorns from which future success will grow.

Some results are still not in at the time of this article, but we have already seen enough to know that we can compete and can win. We can take on Labour and we can take on the Tories and we can beat them. This is without any help from any of the media, so as our name becomes more well known, we will go from strength to strength.

Party Leader Anne Marie Waters: “I’m so very proud of our new Councillors, who I know will do a fantastic job. As a new party, we beat the two big players right in their heartlands. To beat Labour so significantly in Hartlepool is proof that we can take the Labour vote. Likewise, beating the Conservatives in Essex proves that we can take that vote as well. For Britain is showing itself to be the party of the common sense majority, regardless of political affiliation. People now see that we can win, and we know this will inspire many more to get on board. Now is the time to join us as our journey truly takes off!”

Anne Marie Waters barnstorms about Brexit at Swansea Castle

Press Release

Title: Anne Marie Waters barnstorms about Brexit at Swansea Castle
Date: 27.04.2019
Notes: For immediate use. All images here are free to uplift use and free from licence or restrictions.

Saturday the 27th of April, Swansea Castle Gardens. Anne Marie Waters, Leader of The For Britain Movement, has just come off stage at Swansea Garden Square. At a Brexit Rally organised by local campaigner Stephen Harry. Anne Marie delivered an impassioned and barnstorming speech to a crowd of both local people and people who had travelled in from other parts of south Wales. The For Britain Movement calls for full and complete Brexit now, on WTO terms. Anne Marie Waters message “the current Political class have betrayed you, vote differently, stop voting them back in, I can’t say it enough”

Toot for Brexit

Opening up the speeches at the Rally was Dave Simpson who runs ‘Toot for Brexit’. Toot for Brexit is a hardworking south Wales grass roots group, actively keeping people alerted to appalling betrayal of the referendum. Toot for Brexit is in the same vein as the Yellow vests movement Paris. An organic popular response to the treachery of the incumbent and impotent political establishment. With Dave’s call to action banners up, motorists beeped their agreement as they drove past in response. Hugh Nicklin, recent For Britain Candidate in the Newport West by-election also spoke at the event. Hugh discussed the important historical back story to the Brexit betrayal, and why is so vital that we now leave the EU.

Swansea a refuge city

Sadly, on the run up to today’s public event, the local Labour Council Leader Rob Stewart and his left-wing cronies had disgraced his Public Office, and betrayed the people of Swansea, by acting undemocratically and churlishly to disrupt this free speech event. This would be shocking if it was not now so normalised by the pro-Palestine Left wing elitist Political class that Stewart represent. And their Latte drinking Brown Shirts; in the form of the hysterical ‘Stand up to Racism’, and ‘Hope not Hate’

‘Open borders Stewart’, who has proclaimed ‘Swansea a refuge city’ and aims to score high on the ‘virtue signalling charts’. However, this begs the question; where do the decent working Welsh people. People who have invested generationally into this area, go themselves to seek refuge for Rob Stewart and his extremist ideas? Where do they go to find affordable homes, jobs and good school places as Stewart gifts these resources away to the on-going stream of third world arrives? We implore the good people of Swansea to kick these Labour Quislings out at the ballot box. Ex-servicemen of the British forces sleep rough on the streets of Swansea.

Labour Brown Shirts

From Stewart’s shock troops: Repetitive and illogical slurs where screeched out across the lines. But when Anne Marie Waters engaged with them directly and asked them to come and debate. There was no legible or intelligent response from these hard Lefts open border extremists.

For Britain is a Patriotic party that wants the very best for the people of this nation, and looks to put British people and the interests of this nation first and foremost.

Easter Message

Press Release

Title: An Easter message from The For Britain Movement.
Date: Saturday 20.04.2019
Notes: For immediate release

This Easter For Britain remember the on-going and daily slaughter of Christians around the world at the hands of Islamic-doctrine soaked Muslims.  This Easter is the right time to remember and highlight these crimes. For Britain says we see what is happening and we a shout about this as much as we are able. However, we note that the British mainstream media and establishment remain quiet on these facts.

Back in our own country, the media and establishment continue to sneer and snark towards all things Christian; and further encourage the general populace to do the same – while at the same time themselves bowing down, submitting to and excusing all ‘indiscretions’  Islamic at every opportunity.

A Time to reflect

This Easter we also think about Asia Bibi; the Pakistani Christian lady who for years remained on death row in Pakistan for alleged ‘blasphemy’ crimes against Mohamed. After many years of tough legal fighting and international pressure, Asia Bibi’s sentence was finally overturned; however she still remains in hiding in Pakistan for fear of her life from the screeching Muslim mobs & clerics. To its shame the UK government, under Theresa May, refused Mrs Bibi safe asylum ‘for the risk of upsetting local communities’- in reality this code means Mrs May did not want to risk upsetting Muslims. Asia Bibi has become a symbol of those Christians around the world who live under on-going persecution in Islamic countries.

This past week we watched the tragic scenes as the over 800 year old Notre-Dame Cathedral burned in Paris. We are still waiting to be told the establishment official line about the cause; we may never know. Whatever we are told, we think upon the past 12 months alone where hundreds of churches right across France have been damaged and degraded at the hands of Muslim groups and individuals. Although like the ‘yellow vest’ protests in Paris, airbrushed out of the UK news.

Christian message

Easter is the most important Christian festival. The Christian message is that; Jesus Christ allowed Himself to take ‘the Cross’ in our place; as ‘payment for, settlement for, the Bill’ of Man’s rebellion and sin. Christian belief is that Christ going to the Cross meant that man could have communion with God again; the God of the Old Testament, the God of Israel. Easter is the message of Salvation and of Hope. This is the Christian message.

Mohammedan/Koranic/Islamic teaching is that Christ did not in fact go to the Cross – but in the last moments ‘he bottled it and swerved it’ and in a supernatural ‘sleight of hand’ ‘allah’ put Judas the traitor on the Cross instead. This is the Islamic belief and the reason why Islam looks to shut down the Christian message with such hatred and ferocity.

Regardless of a person’s beliefs, For Britain recognises the deeply important and foundational role that Christianity has played in our nation’s history, culture and journey. We honour and respect our nations Christian festivals and traditions. We also see that they are being rapidly eroded.  Easter Sunday is a day that Christians remember the resurrection of Christ. Our hope is that as Christians remember the courage and character of Christ, and they find it in themselves to stand further for the persecuted Church around the world, and find new courage to stand for Britain again in a reborn vision of this our nation’s purpose and function.

Easter Greetings and Peace to all,

The For Britain Movement

EU Elections 2019

Press Release

EU Elections

The Brexit betrayal continues, with preparations for EU elections we should not be subject to.

For Britain is NOT standing in the EU Parliamentary Elections

We object strongly to these elections and are reluctant to spend £10,000s of members’ money attempting to get elected to an illegitimate Parliament that we could leave at any time. Therefore, following much discussion, as well as feedback from members and supporters, and in light of recent election results, we conclude that it is not in the interests of our party to stand in the upcoming European elections.

Collaboration approaches rebuffed by other parties

We also acknowledge the surge of concern around ‘splitting the vote’ on this issue. When our collaboration approaches were rebuffed by other parties, the For Britain leadership had to put country first. The EU is not our sole focus, and as a new party. It is important to analyse where we spend our resources, both in terms of money and manpower.

The European Parliament is merely a stage show, making names for politicians. It has no power; the Commission holds the power and the Commission effectively controls elected governments across Europe. We know it will dismiss elected governments it doesn’t approve of, and we certainly know that it will ignore referendum results.

Recent election results here in Britain have revealed something very important: that even at the height of the Brexit scandal, the response of the public is not to vote differently, but to not vote at all.

People don’t trust current parties, any of them. They don’t trust politics at all, and who can blame them?

We will not waiver

For Britain will continue to tell the truth, and it is the truth that will gain the public’s trust. Our party will not waiver in its endeavours. We will reach out to those with no faith in politics, and convince them to rethink, to use their right to vote to make the changes needed for our country. Much of the country doesn’t vote – we will turn that around. Just imagine the power non-voters actually hold!

The battle for this country will not take place in Brussels, it will take place in local councils, then Westminster. That is now our aim and not standing in the enforced EU elections. We have enormous obstacles facing us, and let’s be clear. We will struggle to compete against Nigel Farage and his instant national platform, where he represents the acceptable opposition to the status quo. Farage and others will continue to raise their profile, and bank balance, in Brussels but this will achieve nothing for Britain’s every day working people.

This is the big political game…

and it matters nothing to people struggling to get by as their taxes keep going up, their services continue to be decimated, and their neighbourhoods turn in to places they don’t recognise. This is the battle for Britain – not the stage-show in Brussels.

We will, therefore, focus our efforts on the local elections in May, and I want to thank those who have put themselves forward in spite of all the abuse we are subjected to. The media seems obsessed with us and disseminates outright lies about us everywhere we go. Antifa protest against us everywhere we go. They do not do this to other parties, they do it to us because they know our message is strong.

So we hold our nerve, persevere, and play the long game.

Brexit is the start of the process of getting Britain back, but it will not happen dramatically, or overnight. It will be a long hard slog to gain the trust of the voters, that is our key – we have been honest throughout and that honesty will gain us support. We will persevere and we will fight because our fight is worthwhile.

Parliamentary elections

I know some will be disappointed with this, and it has been a difficult decision to make, but I would urge those who sought to stand in these elections to re-focus on local and Parliamentary elections. That is where our country will recover, not in Brussels.

We know that the EU must be brought down, but this will be done in the nation-states, not a fake Parliament in Belgium. We will continue to work with our friends across the continent to bring the corrupt cabal crashing down, but we must focus here at home, that is where change needs to take place.

Thank you for your continued support. I know this isn’t easy, but I have never wavered and I never will.

We must save Britain by turning the ship back in the right direction. We are authentic and genuine and won’t be intimidated or bought. This is why we are such a target for the press and leftist activists.

I make you a solemn promise that regardless of the difficult time we find ourselves in, I will keep fighting. I will still be here in a decade, and in two decades. I will still be standing, still telling the truth, and still working for the Britain I love.

Please join me.

Anne Marie Waters

For Britain


What’s right when writing about the ‘Far Right’?

Please define ‘Far Right’

Dear Members of Press & Media Organisations
The Media’s coverage of the notion of ‘Far Right’ would be comical if it was not so deadly serious.

For the past couple of years it would appear that the Mainstream Media and journalists have created an entire sub-industry around screeching or printing the unqualified phrase ‘Far right’. The Media seem obsessed with ‘finding the Far right’; but far less clear about defining what ‘far right’ (ideology) might actually mean; what the ‘checklist’ is, as it were – hence my article here today.

My request: In your role as journalist / news organisation, I would be most keen to read your succinct definition of the phrase: “Far right”

Currently, it could look to the outsider, that unless a person is either: a loudly self-promoting & self-defining ‘socialist’, member of Labour’s Momentum, a full Europhile/open boarders extremist , somebody desperate to genuflect towards Islam (to demonstrate how ‘woke’ they are) – or in fact all of the above -, then via the media a person, it seems, can legitimately be a target of the weaponized dog whistle word ‘Far Right; and potentially have their life destroyed.

However, we note with interest Labour’s deep opposition to the State of Israel and apparent disdain of all things Jewish does not qualify them to be viewed as ‘far right’; your thoughts on this matter also would also be illuminating!

This is a serious request, if you could if you could email me back with your ‘easy for us all to follow Far Right definition’ we would be most grateful and it would be most useful.

Yours in eager anticipation

Ian Mack
Press Officer
For Britain Movement
[email protected]

Christchurch – Shocking


Following the horrific terror attack on two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, visited one of the largest mosques in New Zealand, the Masjid e Umar mosque, and personally thanked the mosque’s chairman, Ahmed Bhamji, for the invitation. Bhamji, a prominent Muslim figure, was subsequently invited to speak at the “Love Aotearoa, Hate Racism” (Love New Zealand, Hate Racism) rally in Auckland. In this video, you can see film of him making his speech, in which he makes an unsupported allegation that the Christchurch terror attack was backed and funded by Mossad (Israel’s national intelligence agency), as well as local, Zionist, Jewish businessmen in New Zealand.

Why Mossad would have any interest in attacking two pretty obscure mosques on the other side of the planet, in Christchurch, New Zealand (albeit that one of them was associated with “extremist” preaching in 2014, and two of its congregation were subsequently killed fighting for ISIS), is anybody’s guess. And Bhamji isn’t saying. He produced absolutely no evidence whatsoever to support his vile, racist allegation, made at an anti-racist event, merely talking vehemently about having the “very, very, strong suspicions”.

The excellent David Wood has exposed this appalling antisemitic allegation, but where has it featured in the news? And is Jacinda Ardern aware of it? If she is aware of what Bhamji has done she should be issuing the strongest possible public condemnation of this, just as she rightly did of the bigotry at the root of the Christchurch attack itself – and so should all other prominent New Zealander public figures, including Bhamji’s co-religionists. Because antisemitism, and attacks on Jews, are rising, and must be condemned by us all.

But where are these condemnations? When Bhamji delivered his disgusting and dangerous statement just one person in the crowd shouted assent – the rest of the crowd looked pretty stunned and uncomfortable. All this should be giving New Zealanders, public figures and private citizens alike, and indeed the rest of us, pause about exactly what ideas are actually being purveyed behind closed doors in mosques in New Zealand, and everywhere else. Condemning a terrible act of terror should never deter us from honest scrutiny of, and debate about, the ideology of Islam, its tenets, and the attitudes and activities it produces. Still less induce us to defend or endorse Islam itself. It is no coincidence that Islamic scriptures specifically demonise, and incite violence against, Jews.

I’m Spartacus! I’m an Islamophobe?

URGENT. Here is our letter to our MP – please send a similar one to your MP too. We can change things. Politicians and the press care about their political futures and money. If we constantly deluge their postbags with the truth, and demands for our rights and freedoms to respected and protected, they will have to begin to take notice of that. Get active.
Dear {…….} ,

We have close family living in Wellington, New Zealand, and we have been strongly emotionally affected by the horrific massacre of worshippers in mosques in Christchurch. Like all decent people, we utterly condemn the attack, and our hearts go out to all the victims and their families. A Muslim colleague and friend of one of our relatives had advised several Syrian friends to come and settle in lovely, peaceful, New Zealand, and two of them are now dead. So this feels very close to us, and we can only imagine what our relative’s friend is going through now. The attack is especially shocking precisely because it has happened in such a peaceful country, hitherto untouched by terrorism.

You will understand from the above that we strongly condemn all generalised anti-Muslim bigotry, as we do all bigotry. But, that said, we do have grave concerns about the kinds of response we are seeing to this attack, in terms of the closing down of freedom of speech on Islam, and even the closing down of opinion, and banning of books, from what is, often wrongly, designated the right in politics (even Jordan Peterson’s blameless “12 Rules for Life.” has been removed from bookshops in New Zealand).

In democratic, secular New Zealand, the Islamic call to prayer is to be broadcast nationwide in commemoration of the victims, and non-Muslim women are being asked to honour the occasion by donning the hejab, a garment that is a symbol of the oppression of women under Islam, with Iranian protesters against its imposition currently in prison, and apparently suffering rape and flogging there. At the same time, references to Jesus have been removed from Parliamentary prayers in Wellington. As a secularist, I (Mary) can see an argument for removing religious observances from political institutions and national events, but broadcasting the call to prayer, and asking non-Muslim women to wear hejabs, makes no sense alongside this action.

The response to the atrocity in Britain, while not as florid, has also been extreme. In just the last few weeks, hundreds of Christians have been murdered by Muslims in terrorist attacks around the world. These attacks on non-Muslims, and Muslims not considered Muslims by the killers – 34,725 since 9/11 – go on month in month out, unceasingly. But where is there any response to those atrocities which remotely compares to that which the lone-wolf, apparently ethno-nationalist, Christchurch atrocity has elicited in the West? There has been near silence on those attacks which took place virtually at the same time as the Christchurch attack.

We are very worried that this horrific event is already being used to defame any criticism of Islam as “Islamophobic”. Let’s be clear, “Islamophobia” is not, and never has been, a legitimate concept, and we now desperately need to repudiate it as dangerous nonsense. How about Christianityophobia, Zionismophobia, human rightsophobia, Nazismophobia, Hinduismophobia, secular democracyophobia – or Kuffarophobia for goodness’ sake (though that one is actually a reality of course) – the whole idea is absolutely ludicrous. Sticking the word “phobia” on the end of a word representing an ideology or set of ideas, thereby suggesting that you are mentally impaired (or morally reprehensible) even to examine or debate those ideas, is unconscionable, or should be, in any free society – and in this case, it seems to us, completely calculated. How did the word “Islamophobia” ever get accepted as having any legitimacy? We can only assume as a result of fear of Islam (which as we know is not unfounded).

The current standard definition of Islamophobia is “Dislike of, or prejudice against, Muslims or Islam, especially as a political force.”. This deliberately conflates human beings and ideology – something which we’re sure you agree should never be done – in order to close down debate on the ideology of Islam, which we must, of course, be free to examine, criticise, debate, and even condemn, as we see fit, like any other set of ideas. And anyone who doesn’t more than dislike political Islam is a great deal worse than a fool – when we can we see what it does in the countries living under Sharia control (and is already doing in the West). The OIC refused to sign up to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights because Islam doesn’t recognise human rights. So they confected their own Cairo Declaration of Human Rights, which, it goes without saying, doesn’t protect human rights as we understand them at all. (And yet Saudi Arabia, one of the greatest human rights abusers in the world, has chaired the UN Human Rights Committee – with our government’s shameful support). And have people forgotten the centuries of hideous wars, slaughter, persecution and torture inflicted by theocracy on mediaeval Europe, and elsewhere?

To be perfectly frank, the point is being reached where ordinary people like us, with very serious, and perfectly legitimate, concerns about political Islam, and its codification in the Sharia, will have no choice but to “be Spartacus”, and say yes, I’m an “Islamophobe”- because I believe in human rights, and therefore condemn political Islam and the Sharia, which discriminate against, and oppress, women, children, gays, apostates, blasphemers, and “dhimmi” Christians and Jews and other “Kuffar”. And because they endorse forced and child marriage, wife-beating, rape in marriage, and slavery etc. etc.. And because where Sharia rules it frequently executes gays, apostates, blasphemers, and women or girls judged to have committed adultery (who have often actually been raped), or exerts totalitarian control by means of the threat of those barbaric penalties. And also because Islam’s scriptural incitement of violence against Jews is stoking a shocking rise in antisemitic violence against Jews in Europe.

Such a protest against the inflicting of the the false concept of “Islamophobia” on us all to silence criticism of Islam would be entirely justified. And the longer freedom of speech on this vital issue is suppressed, the worse the eventual consequences will be for everyone. You can support individual human rights, or you can support theocracy – you can’t do both.


But our grave concerns about this issue have greatly intensified lately, because we hear that, far from the term “Islamophobia” being rejected as the falsehood that it is, a Parliamentary group (including Naz Shah MP, who tweeted that the Muslim rape gang victims should “shut up for the sake of diversity”) has produced a new definition of “Islamophobia”, defining it as a form of racism – and we understand that there is an intention to attempt to criminalise it, that is to criminalise criticism of Islam, along with criticism of a wide set of what are designated as manifestations of “Muslimness”, including observations, whether well-founded or not, on Muslim entryism in politics and the block vote. This is simply outrageous, and terrifying. The definition has already been taken up by a number of Councils (including Oxford council) as guidance. And this will obviously spread.

We cannot let this happen. We must maintain and defend our freedom of speech, which has already been shockingly constrained, and must be re-established. People have rights, ideas have none, and, as Maajid Nawaz of the Quilliam Foundation has affirmed (as a result of which we understand that he has received much abuse, and some threats), “No human being is beneath dignity, and no idea is above scrutiny.”. (Regarding our reference above to “Muslim rape gangs”, we use that phrase advisedly, because, as Maajid Nawaz has observed, the overwhelming preponderance of members of these shocking and widespread gangs are Muslim, mostly of Pakistani origin, but some from the much smaller Somali Muslim population. And the same phenomenon is in evidence in Europe, involving Muslims from other Islamic countries.)

We will be very grateful if you can give some serious consideration to this issue, and commit yourself to the repudiation of the concept of “Islamophobia”, and the defence of freedom of speech – our foundational human right. This is essential in the interests of our whole society, including, of course, many Muslims, and others, suffering from coercion and abuse as a result of aspects of political Islam and the Sharia.

Yours sincerely,



‘Islamophobia’ really means being scared of the truth

In late 2018/early 2019 parliament’s Home Affairs Committee undertook a consultation in the supposed definition of ‘Islamophobia’. As the Labour Party has today formally adopted the supposed ‘definition’ of Islamophobia drawn up by the All Parliamentary Group on Appeasing Muslims.

‘Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness.’

(which isn’t actually a definition at all), I share the concluding paragraphs of the submission that For Britain made to that consultation.


  • It is readily observable that throughout the report the word ‘Muslimness’, which is often used in the phrase ‘expressions of ‘Muslimness’’ appears in inverted commas in order to indicate that it is a word being used with a technical, unfamiliar meaning, and yet is introduced without explanation and is never explained …

The term ‘Muslimness’ is clearly used as a substitute term for Islam in this definition in order to blur the meaning of ‘Islam’ within the term Islamophobia. By this legerdemain, a person’s adherence to the Quran’s encouragement that a man should beat his wife for disobedience or its instructions to kill idolaters and homosexuals is equated with a person inheriting the surname Khan from their parents or eating Middle Eastern food. All are manifestations of ‘Muslimness’ and under this definition any person who challenges the reasons for the former, violently intolerant but specifically Islamic, behaviour is automatically lumped together with racism based upon the latter entirely value-neutral characteristics.


  • It should also be clearly recognised as inappropriate for any person, in any circumstances, to make sweeping accusations against the mental health of those who pursue an argument with which they disagree or which they find to be inconvenient. Such terminology seems specifically designed to prevent the resolution of any issues of contention in a peaceful and civilised manner. It is also, of course, insulting to those people unfortunate enough to suffer from real phobias. The proposed use of the term ‘Islamophobia’ is in fact a pernicious form of hate speech, projecting the accusation of irrational hostility, using the trope of a person suffering mental disorder, onto a person with whom one disagrees.


  • All of the spawning Newspeak vocabulary, such as ‘Islamophobia’, ‘raceing’, ‘(de)culturing’ and ‘Muslimness’, outlined above [in the APPG report] represents more than mere incompetent use of the English language. True to Orwell’s concept, the promotion of the word ‘Islamophobia’ is clearly designed to avoid people speaking, and by so doing ultimately to prevent people thinking, the inconvenient truth that in the UK and around the world, many acts of intolerance, not to say barbaric cruelty, are being committed by Muslims sincerely following the unambiguous teaching of the Quran and the example of Mohammed.

Use of such words to deny the link between Islam and Islam-inspired intolerance is more insidious than merely a decision to see no evil or avoid a thorny issue. It appears to give official support to the narrative that there is no such link and that those who challenge the values of the Quran, even using the most moderate language and in the name of liberty and democracy, can only be irrational and themselves motivated by intolerance and ‘hate’.

  • It is in the interests of all UK citizens that the UK remains a country in which all can live together in peace. The lesson of the past four hundred years of British history is that peace comes only from a rule of law that respects the individual’s freedom to live, express themselves and worship or not, as they see fit, and a democratic culture in which communities integrate and share decision making rather than progress, or not, in separate, parallel worlds. Social harmony can never be based upon empowering people sympathetic to one tradition to silence its critics and malign views that they do not wish to be expressed.
  • The word ‘Islamophobia’ has no legitimate use. It is suggested that its use be abandoned immediately.

You can read Paul’s full response to the Home Affairs Committee here:


By Paul Ellis

For Britain Legal Officer


Political Lite

There are few media figures as inoffensive as Stacey Dooley.  Dooley is an investigative journalist who makes excellent documentaries (if you haven’t seen her interview with jailed ISIS fighters, I recommend it).  She leans to the left of course (she wouldn’t work if she didn’t) but as journalists go, she is one of the better ones.  She also took part in Strictly Come Dancing and Comic Relief, and it is the latter that has landed her in trouble.

When can charitable work land a person in hot water?  When they are white, of course.  The latest episode in the long-running series of open hatred of white people involves condemnation not just of Dooley, but of white people involving themselves in charity work generally.  The attack was initiated by an extreme anti-white MP, one Mr David Lammy.

David Lammy is the future of Labour – if it has a future.  This anti-white party produces MP after MP who clearly loathe those of white skin.  Diane Abbott, a Labour front-bencher and potential Home Secretary, has expressed similar contempt.  Abbott has tweeted that “white people love playing divide and rule”[1], as well as describing Britain as the inventor of racism[2].  Abbott’s dislike of our country and its white majority has been evident throughout her career.  But it is David Lammy, a Labour MP in Tottenham, London, who has made recent headlines for yet more Labour anti-white rhetoric; Mr Lammy condemned Stacey Dooley for her Comic Relief charitable work in Africa, and said the world no longer needs “white saviours”[3].

Lammy not only wants Comic Relief, an annual charitable event that raises millions for good causes, to prevent white people making informative films in Africa, he wants these replaced by African comedians telling anti-white jokes.  Lammy openly promoted a comedian whose act seemed solely to consist of her hilarious contempt for whites.[4]  Could he be any clearer?

This is hardly news though.  Anti-white hatred is widespread and sanctioned.  The media’s response to Lammy’s race-baiting was naturally enough to side with him.  The Scotsman said “Celebrities like Stacey Dooley should think twice about Comic Relief” and accused her , and Comic Relief, of “enduring colonialism”.[5] It is nothing short of stunning – white people must stop being charitable, it’s reminiscent of colonialism.  Hatred doesn’t get much more hateful than that.

The media agrees with Lammy’s take because the media too is openly anti-white.  Here are some actual headlines from various media outlets: “White men must be stopped – The future of mankind depends on it”, “How to talk about white people”, “White privilege has enormous implications for policy”, “Time to profile white men?”, “White guys are killing us”, “I chose not to have children because they’d be white”, “Whites should die”, and the icing on the cake, “10 ways white people are more racist than they realise”.

Just imagine for a moment “white” replaced with any other racial group, and then imagine the outcry.  But this outcry doesn’t occur when whites are attacked, because “white privilege” means it’s not race-hate to hate white people for their race.

White privilege also means that whites are excluded from job applications and can’t complain – if they do, they’ll be racists.  Throughout the public sector, “diversity” requirements mean offices up and down the land openly lament the presence of ‘too many white people’, and set up departments and appoint officers to focus on bringing this horror to an end.

By any objective standard, what I’ve described above amounts to racial oppression and racial abuse.  But as it is aimed at white people, “privilege” means that standard doesn’t apply (itself a form of racial abuse).  Only white majority countries are expected to open our borders to mass immigration, or to disadvantage our majorities with “diverse” employment quotas.  One assumes there is no “diversity” crisis in Nigeria, with offices dedicated to improving non-Black representation.

Nobody in politics will talk about this, it is a major taboo, so once again For Britain will step up to the plate.  We will talk about this, and we will change it.  There is only one way Britain can move on to the future peacefully, and that is for all people to be subject to the same rights and rules, and for anti-white hatred to be tackled and condemned as it would for any other group.

We will end racial segregation and re-instate one law for all.  Furthermore, we’ll protect and preserve the majority British culture, as well as its authority.

Most people are fair-minded and reject racism, but we must understand that anti-white hatred is racism, and we must stamp it out, For Britain.






Come and join us on the 29th of March in London

I’m no longer invited to speak, but I’ll make my voice heard, join me.

Meet at 11 am outside Westminster Station. We’ll be joining the rally, please bring your ‘For Britain’ flags and banners.

Please watch and share my latest video. We hope to see you at both events.

Come and join us on the 31st of March in Essex.

Meet at 12.15 pm at Woodford Underground Station (Central Line)

The Westbound or Snakes Lane East exit

For car drivers, there is ample parking available at Madeira Grove (postcode for Sat Navs IG8 7QQ)

We have some great speakers including our special guest Lucy Brown.

We’ll also hear from Nissar Hussain who is a victim of hate crimes, Muslims repeatedly brutalised him and his family. At one point he was hit thirteen times with a pickaxe outside his home and suffered a broken knee cap and shattered hand. He had previously been smoked out of his home which he was forced to leave after Bradford police stated they could no longer protect him, a poor indictment on the state of extremist expansion in the UK.

For Britain For Brexit

Come join us if you want to leave….

Act now to stop the “Great BREXIT Betrayal”

We have been betrayed by Theresa May and her government. For several years since the majority of the country voted to leave the EU we have been told time and time again that we would leave the EU on the 29th of March 2019 with or without a deal. Over one hundred times did May state that lie. We were told no deal was better than a bad deal.

Theresa May and her government have ignored your democratic vote. They have ignored your wishes, they have lied to you countless times since the referendum. Now is the time to make your voice heard once again. Come join fellow betrayed citizens on the 29th of March at 11:00AM at Westminster Station – London.

We will be joining Tommy Robinson on the march in London – please bring ‘For Britain’ flags and banners.

Use the below share links to share this on social media – FAR AND WIDE!

Great Events in the Next Few Weeks

You’re invited to a Public Safety Event on the 21st March in Southend Essex.

We are inviting you to come to an event dedicated to public safety and the issues and concerns YOU have.

There’ll be 4 great speakers who are well worth listening to, you’ll also have a chance to ask questions and voice your opinions.

We want people to be able to come together and share their concerns.

Please email us at [email protected] to receive the venue details.


Our VIPs (volunteers in politics) have already received an invite to attend a meeting on 23rd March in Birmingham.

If you haven’t yet accepted/declined your invite then please do so by emailing us at [email protected]


You’re invited to a branch meeting on 25th March in Manchester

I and many other speakers will be attending and we’d love to see you there. For further details please email the branch chairman Simon Collins at [email protected]


You’re invited to a rally on 31st March in Essex

As you are hopefully aware, For Britain will be holding a major rally in Essex on the afternoon of Sunday 31st March. I will be speaking along with others.

The main theme will be to address the outcome of Brexit, whatever that might be, and to launch our local election campaigns.

Please promote this event energetically through your local social media, also email others to ask that they spread the word.

There will be good rail and road connections for the venue. We’ll send further details nearer the date.

Rally in Essex
Rally in Essex, 31st March with Anne Marie Waters

London branch ‘MEMBERS ONLY’ will meet on 1st April in London

The branch is holding elections for its governing roles, including chairman and secretary at 7 pm. 

We strongly encourage all London members to attend and to vote for a new start for the London branch.

I will attend this event and will discuss the future of our party in London.

If you’re interested in standing for any roles then please send a few lines about yourself and what you’d bring to the branch. Send this in before the 25th March to [email protected]

All applications will be sent to members beforehand to help with their decision on who to vote for.


You’re invited to a meeting on 6th April in Morton on Marsh

Where I’ll give a speech and chat with people. Please come along. For further details please email [email protected]


The future is here, the future is For Britain.

Essex Branch

Two fantastic new For Britain recruitment leaflets are now available for our branches and activists.

These were professionally designed on our behalf and will be a vital tool in developing local support in the run up to this year’s local elections in May and in recruiting new members.

They will be going out in their tens of thousands up and down the country over the coming weeks.

One of the leaflets focuses on the Brexit betrayal in very forthright terms. The other is a more general introduction to the party.
Both are important new additions to our arsenal.

BREXIT Leaflet
5 Point Plan
For Britain – 5 Point Plan


Our good Councillor Brian Silvester has created this letter you can send to your MP and ensure they understand you demand they protect the vote you made in the 2016 referendum. Just type your post code in to the search engine on and send an email or letter to stop the Brexit Betrayal like the one below to your MP.

Let them know you will not sit ideally while they break their oath to uphold the democratic majority that they’re meant to represent.


Dear Sir,


Maclean, Burgess, Philby, Blunt, & Cairncross betrayed the UK.

To this list of infamy we can now add Theresa May.

She’s trying to sell out our country to a foreign power.

PM is part of an establishment fifth column trying to overturn the biggest democratic vote in our history.


Incredibly it is now alleged that the PM’s Withdrawal Agreement was hatched in Germany, in Mrs Merkel’s Berlin office.

It was written by the Germans in such a way to make it easy for the UK to re-join the EU in a few years time.

It was written by the Germans, for the Germans.


PM’s Tory Government is committing the biggest ever fraud on the British people. The Tories are telling us they are delivering Brexit. In fact her Brexit Betrayal means the EU dictators will have MORE control over us, for evermore, with no exit door. UK media are complicit in trying to deceive us about what is really proposed.


‘For Britain’ says we should LEAVE now on WTO terms.

No more dither or delay.’No Deal’ is the best deal.

We voted to get our freedom back and we will not allow a bunch of duplicitous MPs to overturn it.

Yours faithfully,


Concerned Constituent

If you want more traction then why not copy your local paper into the Brexit Betrayal letter / email. Let the rest of your constituency know how you feel and what you are doing to protect their vote.

Newport West by-election

Press Release

Date: 11.03.2019
From: The For Britain Movement
Notes: For Immediate Release

For Britain are pleased to announce that Hugh Nicklin has been selected as the party candidate to fight the Newport West by-election, to be held on April the 4th.

Hugh commented: “Newport West deserves better than Labour – and that’s why I’m standing For Britain, a party that is in tune with the public not the Westminster bubble.

For years, Labour and the Tories have failed us, and now with their Brexit incompetence and betrayal, the people of this our great country know for sure that these old parties represent nobody but themselves.

I am a retired teacher, a father, and a lover of rugby! I played for Llangwm and Narberth, a ND AM A qualified W.R.U. referee, as well as previously serving as Vice Chairman of the Welsh Schools’ Cricket Association.

I’m Welsh and know Wales and I will stand up for its decent people of Wales.  No more empty promises from career politicians, For Britain is here to bring long lasting change to politics, ignoring right and left stereotypes.

My priorities are:-

    • Brexit NOW!
    • End mass immigration.
    • End politically correct policing.
    • Protect children.
    • Protect health services.
    • Invest in local infrastructure and job creation.

Hugh Nicklin

Hugh Nicklin
Hugh Nicklin

Further Background on Hugh:

Hugh Nicklin was born in Worcestershire to an English father and a Welsh mother. He attended a state primary school and Worcester Royal Grammar school, and was awarded an Open Scholarship in History to Hertford College, Oxford, in 1961.

After graduating he obtained a Diploma in Education from Oxford University Department of Education. Inspired by the comprehensive ideal, he chose a comprehensive school at random and joined the staff of Fairham Comprehensive School in Nottingham. After a period at Bilborough Mixed Grammar School he was appointed Head of History at Haverfordwest Grammar School in 1973.

He played rugby for Llangwm and Narberth, and cricket for Burton and Haverfordwest. He retained his teaching post under reorganisation, and was Head of History at Tasker Milward VC Comprehensive School from 1978-1990. During that time he worked for school cricket, and was Vice Chairman of the Welsh Schools’ Cricket Association. He was elected a parent governor of the school.

Appalled by the National History Curriculum of 1990, he moved to the independent sector, and was Head of History, Classics and RE, and Boys’ Housemaster at The Downs School, Colwall, until his retirement in 2004. He then lived in the South of France for eleven years, writing two history books and two pantomimes for the local French primary school. Missing teaching he then spent another year as Head of History at a prestigious International School in Bombay.

Hugh now lives in Herefordshire. Up till very recently was Treasurer at a local Village Hall. He is still an active member of local Cricket and Rugby Clubs.


Further Party Information

Anne Marie Waters is available for discussion & interviews of relevant political topics.

Anne Marie Waters is the Leader of the British political party; The For Britain Movement and the author of Beyond Terror: Islam’s slow erosion of Western Democracy. She is a lead figure and voice within the Patriotic and anti-EU arm of British politics. For Britain are the UK’s only serious democratic Populist movement and voice. Anne Marie is in favour of a strong Brexit / NO DEAL, now.

Founder of Sharia Watch, Waters has a deep knowledge and understanding of the operational influence of Sharia Law & Sharia Councils within the UK, plus the growing damaging impact that Islam has on British society, culture and its people; most notably the industrialised rape and damage of young white working class and Sikh girls over the past 30 years (largely ignored by the MSM), to this end she is busy ‘sounding the alarm’.

Please take a look at Anne Marie Waters’ videos on YouTube;


The For Britain Movement is now a proud member M.E.N.F: The Movement for a Europe of Nations & Freedom. It is an alliance of like minded pan-European political parties, many in the European Parliament; it is a group that’s against the creeping power of the current federal Euro-super state.

My name is Ian Mack, I am the Press Officer here at The For Britain Movement, and I would be happy to discuss Anne Marie availability with you.

Ian Mack
Press Officer
For Britain Movement
Tel: 07419 193 878
[email protected]
For the forgotten majority

Newport West by-election

Press Release

Date: 11.03.2019
From: The For Britain Movement
Notes: For Immediate Release

For Britain are pleased to announce that Hugh Nicklin has been selected as the party candidate to fight the Newport West by-election, to be held on April the 4th.

Hugh commented: Newport West deserves better than Labour – and that’s why I’m standing For Britain. A party that is in tune with the public not the Westminster bubble.

For years, Labour and the Tories have failed us, and now with their Brexit incompetence and betrayal. The people of this our great country know for sure that these old parties represent nobody but themselves.

I am a retired teacher, a father, and a lover of rugby! I played for Llangwm and Narberth, a ND AM A qualified W.R.U. referee, as well as previously serving as Vice Chairman of the Welsh Schools’ Cricket Association.

I know Wales and I will stand up for its decent people of Wales.  No more empty promises from career politicians. For Britain is here to bring long lasting change to politics, ignoring right and left stereotypes.

My priorities are:-

Brexit NOW!

  • End mass immigration.
  • End politically correct policing.
  • Protect children.
  • Protect health services.
  • Invest in local infrastructure and job creation.

Hugh Nicklin

Hugh Nicklin
Hugh Nicklin

Brexit Betrayal

MP’s are taking voters for complete idiots.

The REMOANERS want a second EU referendum, even thought the first one has not even been implemented. 30 months after it was held. The choice on ballot paper for a second EU Referendum would be the PM’s Brexit Betrayal or REMAIN.The PM’s Brexit Betrayal will keep us under the control of the EU dictators for evermore, with no exit door.

So the choice would be REMAIN or REMAIN

MP’s are taking voters for complete idiots.

Do the REMOANER MP’s not realise the 17.4 million who voted for Brexit will not be betrayed? At  every opportunity the 17.4 million will vote against all the parties that are trying to overturn Brexit, starting with the local elections on the 2nd of May.

Ten Labour and Tory MP’s have left their parties and have formed a ‘Independent Group’. They all want to keep us IN the EU. So despite their name, they don’t believe in independence of their country.

Some Tory MP’s have formed a ‘Brexit Delivery Group’ but what they want to deliver is the opposite of Brexit, they want us to stay in.

We are living in an Alice in Wonderland world where nothing is what it seems. From the PM down, most of our politicians are lying through their teeth and telling us fairy tales.

‘For Britain’ says we should get out now.If the EU want a free trade deal that is fine. If not, we will trade on WTO tariffs and be £8,000,000,000 a year BETTER off. Which is the equivalent of giving every constituency in the UK  £12 million a year.

Happy days.

Once we are OUT, ‘For Britain’ believes the UK will boom, as we take up all those opportunities that have been denied us, whilst we have been under the control of the EU dictators for the last 46 years.

A ‘No Deal’ Brexit would give UK business the certainty they want. They will know they will be trading on WTO terms, just like they do with most of the rest of the world. If Article 50 is extended it will just extend the uncertainty and that is the last thing that UK business wants.

There is a world of opportunity out there. We should grasp the freedom that we voted for.

Cllr. Brian Silvester.

Brexit Spokesman

‘For Britain’

The For Britain Movement is now here For Wingate

Press Release

Date: 06.03.2019
From: The For Britain Movement
Notes: For Immediate Release

The For Britain Movement is proud to be fielding Local candidate Gareth Fry in the Wingate by-election on the 14th of March. Gareth Fry is a local business man, he lives in the Sedgefield Constituency. He is a former Chief Petty Officer in the Royal Navy. Gareth states he would be proud to serve the people of Wingate if elected onto the Durham County Council”.

On the upcoming election Gareth says:

In the Wingate and Sedgefield constituency, we see the problems that local people face that are ignored. If elected, The local For Britain branch will fight to take on and fix these problems, and in doing so truly represent the decent and working people of this great town.

High taxes, mass immigration, high levels of crime and unemployment are the issues that people are very concerned about. The other old complacent political parties have failed; and now it’s time to put the people of Wingate first. NHS local parking is an unresolved issue as is street littering; unimportant to the establishment perhaps, but important to us the people.

We also believe that people want to see the Brexit vote that was requested delivered upon, and that works that for good of the United Kingdom and its people.

For Britain will work hard to end waste in local government and prioritise ‘value for money’. Un-elected council officials are often paid huge salaries, and as such these people must be held accountable to the public. For Britain will make sure this happens; Public sector accountability is central to our policy. We will introduce a Public Sector Accountability Act; to hold council executives, hospital executives, and police chiefs to greater scrutiny – they must answer to the people.

For Britain offers a genuinely unique political voice and it is not be scared to tackle the sometimes uncomfortable problems and issues that the old parties fear or ignore.

Labour, Step Aside. The 'For Britain' Movement is Here.

The new, replacement for the Labour Party IS HERE! We are the new political party, the movement FOR BRITAIN. We represent the WORKING people of Britain. Join us. —READ OUR MANIFESTO: US:

Posted by For Britain – Media Centre on Tuesday, 25 September 2018

For Britain is happy to engage with the media in discussing on the upcoming Wingate by-election on the number below or [email protected]

Thank you

For Edinburgh

For Edinburgh: We held our first branch meeting in January 2019. After a general discussion, we decided that one way forward for our politics in Scotland would be to start university branches. This would be an effective way to increase our activist base over the medium term.

At present Edinburgh and Glasgow universities have no political groups other than the failing established parties. Hence, we decided to contact the Scottish Family Party (SFP) we have some joint activity in mind. We felt that the family concept was a positive For Britain campaign.

Other branch activities have been: Leafleting of both a Vegan Fair and a European Parliament meeting, also door to door leafleting.

Please take a look at our new Facebook page

Scottish politics – opportunities

For Britain has a real opportunity in Scotland over the next cycle as we have, Community Council elections (Oct 2019) – Scottish parliament elections (May 2021) – Local government elections (May 2022) and as these are held under a form of proportional representation we must stand in them all.

In general, the people are fed up of the same old and they’re ready for a new party, a new party like For Britain.

For Swindon

For Swindon: Last week we had a great meeting in Somerset with For Britain Leader Anne-Marie Waters giving a brilliant speech to a packed venue of members and supporters.


When the audience was asked ‘who would be volunteering as candidates’ there was a very good show of hands, so look out for more news on that and if you would like to stand in elections for us then please let us know. Thanks go to Richard and his team for the venue and a lovely buffet.

Locally, we held a lively meeting in Swindon, the main focus was to elect/re-elect the For Swindon Committee. Members present voted unanimously to re-elect both Ian Baxter as Chairman and Robert Baggs as Secretary.

We also discussed and agreed to organise a social event locally, for members, supporters, friends and families. So if anyone wishes to get involved with that please let us know.

Please take a look at our Facebook page

For Epping Forest

For Epping Forest: We are making great progress in our areas. We are leafleting more than ever and are doing an 8 am session to get into the flats.

Everyone is working together nicely and we feel our tactics are working out.

Last month I mentioned the good work of the other officers, special mention should go to Eddy Butler. His tactical genius and sheer hard work are a real driving force to this branch and we could not have done it without him.

Also, we plan to hold our rally on the 31st of March (see below) and we really hope we can get good attendance for that. Anne Marie will be our main speaker.

March Rally
March Rally – Sunday the 31st. Meeting at Woodford Underground Station.

For Wirral

For Wirral: We have been out delivering leaflets in the Eastham ward of Wirral. We’ve almost covered all of the Mill Park Estate.

We attended the Valentines Charity Ball in aid of Clatterbridge Cancer Centre. Which raised in excess of £10,000 for the charity.

We have continued to feed the homeless every month without fail and continue to donate clothes and toiletries etc.

Homeless care packages
Homeless care packages

Our Chairman Mark attended the candidate training in Warrington and found it very useful.

We have continued to attend GP PPG meetings and are getting stuck into some big issues locally regarding NHS services and their provision. Hot topics are the walk-in centre’s proposed closures and the phlebotomy service.

We have lots more leafleting to do and once again appeal to anyone who may be able to spare us an hour or so to assist us to raise awareness in our area. Please contact me Susan Cooper Branch Secretary.

For Manchester

For Manchester: We have Anne Marie coming to our branch meeting on 25th of March. If you’re interested in attending then please email us at [email protected]

For Britain has appointed Simon Collins as the North West Regional Organiser. Simon said – “Thanks to For Britain for placing their faith in me to take on the role of developing our North West region branch network. Our existing NW branches are well established and proactive, it’s my privilege to be working with them and providing them with the support they need to grow”.

”My first task as NW RO was to organise our NW candidate training event in Warrington last week in preparations for May’s elections. Attendance was great, we filled every seat in the venue. Majority of the attendees have now filled out their Vetting forms and got their Nominations forms ready. Candidates and branches are campaigning ahead of the May elections”.

Please contact Simon if you’d like to set up a branch in the North West, or contact Janet at [email protected].

Simon can be contacted at [email protected]

For Southend on Sea

News Bulletin:


For Southend on Sea: We regularly have a stall in the town centre, we receive positive feedback from the public. We managed to have all the official paperwork completed in a week, we’ll appear on the ballot papers for Milton ward in Southend on Sea on May 2nd.

We will be leafleting with the official party leaflets in the ward next week.

For Somerset

For Somerset: This month the branch has concentrated on holding more social evenings, with meetings in Langport, Bristol, Glastonbury and Yeovil. These were very encouraging and productive with a good number confirming their availability to join in branch leafleting activities. As these evenings develop our aim is to have them regularly in every major populated centre in the county, where we can organise groups who, working together can cover wide areas of what is primarily a large rural county.

Our branch has commissioned a further stock of leaflets and with the additional national message. The leaflets also contain our branch Facebook and email contact details. We need to pay tribute to those who are volunteering and call on others from the branch to join them. The more that join, the quicker we will get the For Britain message out there.

On 12th of February, Anne Marie visited the branch and provided those attending with a truly inspiring evening. A good attendance ensured a useful discussion and Anne Marie’s call for a show of hands of ‘those interested in standing for election‘ produced an encouraging response.

Once again, the buffet was well received with thanks to the committee. We also really appreciate the donations to the branch funds. These truly are the lifeblood which keeps us moving forward.


BBC Big Questions

Statement regarding Anne Marie Waters appearance on today’s BBC Big Questions Programme

I expect little from the BBC, but this was extraordinary even by their standards.  I appeared on BBC One’s ‘Big Questions’ on Sunday and from the moment I walked in, and heard the whispers, I knew what I was in for.  Had I not brought my press officer with me, I would have been completely alone.

Anne Marie Waters BBC The Big Questions
Anne Marie Waters BBC The Big Questions

The audience was packed with people ready to pounce – where does the BBC get this audience from, and was there any attempt to provide balance?  We shall be asking these questions of the BBC very quickly.  I will also be asking why it is that I sat and listened to people slander and smear me, throughout, and was given no right of reply.  I knew I wouldn’t be, so when I heard a lie, I answered it, until apparently my microphone was switched off (I shall be asking the BBC about this as well).  Furthermore, as I didn’t tell anyone I would be appearing, how was it that the audience was so filled with those who would obviously attack me?

I was called a fascist repeatedly, audience members implied that I should be imprisoned – thereby implying I have committed a crime, and an outright lie about For Britain’s manifesto (that it was largely about Islam) was told by a chap just in front of me.  Once again, though my hand was up, no chance to reply.

Mike Killian of the Far Left UAF
Mike Killian of the Far Left UAF

No mention of left-wing extremism

There was no mention of left-wing extremism, or the fact that I had had my life placed in danger by the very lies the BBC allowed to be propagated – I was unable to attend a Parliamentary by-election for my own safety because of left-wing thugs threatening me, and this is the direct result of the BBC’s allowance of smears to go unanswered.  Indeed, the BBC itself participates in those smears.  Every time my party has been mentioned by the BBC, it is referred to as “far-right”.  No evidence is put forward to substantiate this and there is no mention of For Britain’s actual policies – all of which are aimed at empowering the citizen against the state (the opposite of fascism, in other words).

When my life is placed in danger as a result of these lies, so starkly demonstrated by the fact that I cannot attend a hustings for my own safety, the BBC is suddenly uninterested.  Not one mainstream media outlet reported this story, but as soon as someone called Anna Soubry a nasty name, the media screams how something must be done.

I wasn’t allowed to reply for the bulk of the programme, so let me respond here; particularly to the man who said the political right have been taking away people’s rights.  If I’d been able, I would’ve told him how my right, as a Parliamentary candidate, to take part in a hustings event was denied to me, not by the right, but by the extreme and violent left which escapes all analysis or criticism from the mainstream press.

BBC slander

I fully intend to formally ask the BBC why it is that outright lies about me and my fully registered, fully legal political party were allowed on national television, with the leader in the room, but they did not allow that leader to respond.

The mainstream and the left (pretty much the same thing) still don’t understand why people are so angry.  Do they think we can’t see this bias, just because they can’t?  Their gobsmacking arrogance allows them to look down on us, dismiss us; we can’t possibly have an informed argument, we’re “far right” after all.

If this doesn’t stop, if people like me and those who agree with me (and there are millions of us), aren’t allowed to speak in a fair and balanced way, then a real far-right will rise – one that will make Tommy Robinson look like a Sunday school teacher.  When that happens, we’ll all suffer, and the mainstream media will be entirely to blame.


Anne Marie Waters,

Leader of the For Britain Movement

Policing Poetry

A docker from Hull likes a tweet which contains a poem about transgender issues. Someone complains to the police. A police officer rings the man’s employer and subsequently has a conversation with the docker, who is, apparently, an ex-policeman.
The police officer confirms the docker has committed no crime and that the matter will be recorded as a “hate incident”. The police officer tells the docker he is concerned about what he may be thinking. Hence 1984 truly arrives in our politically correct world, the police are now interested in “wrong think”.

To me, one alarming fact to arise from this is that the police officer says he has been on a course where he was taught that in the womb, brains and bodies can develop different sexes and that is where transgender issues arise. I do not even know if this is true, but what on earth is going on. In my days as a trainee police officer, we were taught about rape, murder, burglary and the like. It seems that policing has got a lot more complex and nebulous.

The problem starts with the fact that the police pay any attention to social media at all. It is not the real world yet seems to get a disproportionate amount of what these days is a very scarce resource.

Personally, I deplore the perversion of police priorities that has emerged in the last 20 years. No wonder the public are losing faith in the police when they will not even investigate a domestic burglary but have the time and resources to pursue none hate crime. I feel a certain amount of shame as the force involved was the one I retired from.

To use a rather pejorative phrase sometimes used in my day “Have they got nothing better to do?”

For Britain would abolish the concept of hate crime and concentrate on policing that matters to the public.

Mike Speakman

Mike Speakman is a retired Deputy Chief Constable and policing spokesman for the For Britain Movement.

Poll Tax on Wheels

Press Release

Friday 25th January 2019

Labour is once again declaring war on taxpayers – from 2021 the Ultra Low Emissions Charge will extend to the whole of London. Drivers will be charged £12.50 per day to drive in outer London, and £24 in the city centre.

The first stage of the scheme — called the Ultra Low Emission Zone, or Ulez — comes into effect on April 8, covering the current Congestion Zone.

Drivers of pre-2015 diesels and petrol vehicles made before 2006 will have to pay the tax. There will be no exemptions or discounts for residents, or relaxation of the rules at weekends.

The environmental impact is believed by some experts to be minimal, so Labour is once again latching on to trendy schemes based in ideology rather than the best interests of the people, and punishing the working people making their way in to London.

For Britain leader Anne Marie Waters says: “Labour is again hitting the poorest hardest in schemes that are unlikely to have any significant impact on the environment. We want a clean environment but this is not the way to go about it.   We would scrap all green taxes on fuel but improve public transport, encourage cycling, plant more trees, retain open spaces, give incentives to change from diesel cars etc. Taxing the working public once again is not the answer”.




Make Teesside Airport Part of a Joined-up Transport Plan for The Tees Valley

Press Release

Wednesday January 23rd 2019

Teesside Council has backed plans to bring the local airport back in to public ownership. The purchase of the airport will be part of Tees Valley Investment Plan for 2019-2029. For Britain supports this positive move. We have further suggestions on what action is needed in the interests of local people.

For Britain’s suggestions for transport in the Tees Valley:

    • Introduce a Road Rail Container Depot on the industrial land at Teesside Airport;
    • Take away freight transport from Teesport, one of the busiest ports in the country;
    • Replace an unused railway station with a metro style drop of point at the airport;
    • Move the proposed New Tees Crossing close to Yarm, along with a new A19 bypass, which will reduce congestion and accidents close to Teesside and make the airport readily accessible, both from the A19 and the A1;
    • Teesside airport makes an ideal location for distribution of containers and collection from manufacturing facilities across the Tees Valley;

Kevin Brack of The For Britain Movement, a new centre right party, along with the leader Anne Marie Waters (who this week came out in support of the “Save Teesside Airport” group), said future For Britain candidates will also back the new plans and will work with Save Teesside Airport candidates to support them.


Kevin Brack,

For Britain