There’s an excellent article by Dr Richard North over at Turbulent Times on the subject of the Royal National Lifeboat Institution (RNLI). In this piece he takes aim at both the massive bureaucracy of the RNLI and also it’s role in the current small boat invasion which is helping to bring ponces, rapists, criminals and extremists to Britain’s shores.
Reading this article I find myself in agreement with much of it. The RNLI is now very heavily politicised and has been for some time. This politicisation has ranged from the sacking of RNLI volunteer crew members for possession of coffee mugs with naked women on them right through to the RNLI doing the government’s dirty work of importing dangerous human dross and calling such actions ‘saving lives’. The RNLI might be saving the lives of Channel Invaders but they are doing nothing to save the lives of those Britons who might end up being killed or abused by the human dross that the RNLI is helping the government to import.
Because the RNLI has turned into a glorified taxi service for foreign rapists and ponces wishing to set up shop in the UK there has been increasing and increasingly vehement criticism of this organisation. Dr North said that Len Shackleton, a Daily Telegraph writer, has stepped up to defend the RNLI from criticism but as Dr North points out there’s much to criticise about the Telegraph article itself.
The RNLI is not, as Dr North pointed out, either the oldest nor the only rescue service operating in Britain’s waters. There are as Dr North said many other organisations of volunteers who save lives at sea that are not part of the RNLI and who sometimes have access to specialist equipment that the RNLI does not possess. As these organisations are not currently involved in being a taxi service for migrant rapists and chancers I agree with Dr North that maybe the public who want to contribute to saving lives at sea should support these independent entities rather the bloated, politicised, politically correct RNLI?
I come, on my paternal side from a family of seafarers, people who served in the Royal and Merchant Navies with distinction and dedication. Supporting the RNLI was for me a very natural thing because of my family’s association with the sea. But I can’t in all good conscience support the RNLI any longer. It’s one thing to support an organisation that might rescue a sailor in distress but it’s quite another to support an organisation that is helping to import third world rapists arriving on rubber dinghies.
Dr North said:
The “lives” that the RNLI purports to be saving are criminals, furnished with boats and equipment by organised gangs, who deliberately place themselves in harm’s way for the sole purpose of circumventing the UK’s immigration laws.
As such, under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), they do not enjoy the “right of innocent passage”. As such, these criminals – for that is what they are – should be picked up and arrested by Border Force vessels, arrested and detained. A dedicated rescue service should have no part in a process which is essentially one of law enforcement.
I agree here. The invaders are criminals and criminals by the simple fact that they are invading Britain and evading the usual immigration controls. This is a law enforcement issue not one of saving lives. Every invader the RNLI assists in bringing to Britain is one more potential rapist, criminal, religious extremist or chancer that we don’t need. Every one of those brought in by the RNLI is a potential threat to Britain and its citizens. I can’t morally or financially support that.
If as Dr North quotes the apologist for the RNLI says that only 1.2% of RNLI launches are to bring in Channel Invaders then that’s 1.2% too many in my view.
Dr North added:
If it is not laying claim to saving lives, it would seem very hard to justify the expenditure of so much effort in what amounts to assisting Border Force in its law enforcement activities. It is up to the government to ensure that Border Force is properly resourced for that work, rather than abuse charitable funds for the purpose.
Thus, to my mind, Shackleton’s argument falls apart and while one might not run to picking on individual crew members, it strikes me as entirely legitimate to criticise the institution for allowing its resources to be abused.
That the organisation apparently has no qualms about acting as an agent for the government (something it would not even do doing WWII) – and robustly defends its stance, therefore, does lend merit to calls for it to be wound up.
Spot on there Dr North. The RNLI should have no role in what is essentially a law enforcement matter and charitable funds should not be abused for that purpose. I like many others are no longer going to contribute to either the abuse of charitable funds by the RNLI nor contribute to the importations of dangerous military age men. If we want to give to save lives at sea then maybe we should focus our attention and our charitable giving to those rescue organisations that are unconnected to the RNLI?
I would be pretty unconcerned if the RNLI was wound up because it’s more than likely that independent rescue services would step in to fill the breach in coverage without the politically correct corruption that has afflicted the RNLI in recent years. It’s right and proper to want to save lives in that most inhospitable of environments, the sea, but maybe this can be done without assisting those who clearly and obviously mean harm to Britons.
The criticisms aimed at the RNLI are both politically and morally justified so keep these criticism coming.
Links
Dr North’s Turbulent Times article on the RNLI
https://www.turbulenttimes.co.uk/news/front-page/immigration-lifeboat-flak/
RNLI crew sacked for naked woman mugs
Be the first to comment on "From Elsewhere: Wither the Royal National Lifeboat Institution?"