There’s a great article by Peter North (see link below) on the subject of the Channel Invasion and the now highly political role that the Royal National Lifeboat Institution (RNLI) is playing in that invasion. In this article Mr North describes how the criticism of the RNLI’s role in ferrying in invaders which has been growing over the last few years has burst out into the Establishment and the public’s consciousness because of the recent protests on Britain’s South Coast.

Mr North describes the targeting of the RNLI as an attack on the ‘soft underbelly’ of what he calls the ‘NGO-ocracy’ that is clearly doing the government’s dirty work for them by assisting in the Channel Invasion. Whether you agree with the criticisms and protests against the RNLI or not, it is difficult to argue that the RNLI is the sort of soft target where attacks via protest might get positive results. These positive results could take the form of the RNLI refusing to associate with the facilitation of the Channel Invasion or being weakened to such an extent that other rescue groups, of which there are many, ones less willing to do the government’s bidding, take over the RNLI’s legitimate task of saving the lives of innocent seamen in trouble at sea.

Dissatisfaction and indeed anger at the RNLI has been building for years now, it’s not a recent thing for there to be anger at the RNLI’s role in the invasion of Britain. It’s just now that the objections to the RNLI’s activities in the Channel have become too loud for the Establishment to ignore.

Mr North said:

The port blockade protest in Portsmouth over the weekend has caused a number of ripples over the last couple of days – not least widespread antipathy towards the RNLI – the cause of much establishment media revulsion.

To my mind, it makes perfect sense to protest the RNLI’s actions. The NGOcracy is the soft underbelly of the regime, and protest is a means to draw them into a political battle they would rather not be part of. Nobody should get a free pass and they shouldn’t expect an easy life if they want to continue operating the way they are.

Illegal immigrants quite deliberately put themselves in peril, with the full knowledge of the French (which is not “innocent passage” as defined in international maritime law) – and it is an operational decision on the part of the RNLI to go and collect them. As such, they are part of the smuggler’s business model by choice, thus a legitimate target for protest.

I find it difficult to disagree with what Mr North has said here, especially in how the RNLI is being drawn into a political fight that they’d rather not be a part of. However it’s not the protests that have done this, it was the initial decision of the RNLI, years ago to become part and parcel of this people trafficking scheme. If they had kept out of it and not rushed to help the UK government import these invaders then they would be facing much less public opprobrium.

Mr North is also correct when he says that the NGO’s that facilitate the invasion via the Channel are the soft underbelly of the whole issue. The public cannot protest against the government as these protests would be ignored or oppressed with extreme violence from Britain’s increasingly two tier police. However to go after an NGO like the RNLI that is deeply involved in the people trafficking is much more likely to have some impact. It forces the RNLI to accept that what they are doing is not supported by the British people and for the RNLI to do stuff like advising RNLI staff not to wear uniforms in public because of the public anger at what he RNLI is involved in, shows that public opprobrium is having an effect on how the organisation conducts itself.

Mr North added:

“Protest will cause them, and the police, to divert their resources into security and new operating procedures, which is not what they want to do. That is the object of protest – forcing organisations to do things they would rather not (not least wading into politics).

This is of limited effect, but it’s the only real soft target, so you have to pick your battles accordingly. In conjunction with other protests like the one we saw in Portsmouth, it makes it more operationally complicated. It caused diversions of RNLI boats which used up time, and fuel, and forced a formal executive response from the organisation.

What we now have to do is make it clear that we do not accept their excuses. We have seen that French rescue boats operate a hands-off approach, and we expect the same of the RNLI. It has no business making itself a part of the smuggler’s business model – especially not in calm seas.”

Spot on there Mr North. NGO’s like the RNLI need to be forced to act differently and maybe operate more of a hands off approach as Mr North says the French equivalent of the RNLI has acted.

If the targeting of one specific NGO such as the RNLI with peaceful or relatively peaceful protest turns out to be effective then I’ve little doubt that there are many more suspect anti-British NGO’s that might also turn up as future targets for protest and challenge. There are dozens of pro-invader NGO’s out there and they are every bit as disruptive and destructive to our society as the RNLI has been with regards to the Channel Invasion. Success against the RNLI, which could be measured by them stopping cooperation with the invasion, might lead to peaceful protests against other questionable anti-British NGO’s that have been equally or more troublesome than the RNLI has been. The Establishment will complain of course and their complaints should be dismissed just as the Establishment has dismissed our complaints, issued over decades, about the deleterious effects of excessive levels of and inappropriate types of immigration. They ignored our complaints therefore we should ignore theirs.

Link

Peter North’s piece on how the protest gloves are starting to come off.

https://www.northernvariant.co.uk/p/rnli-protest-the-gloves-are-coming