Britain Is Failing to Keep Its People Safe

Screengrab X

Deng Chol Majek had been in the UK for less than three months when he murdered hotel worker Rhiannon Whyte. Almost exactly a year ago, he stabbed the 27-year-old mother 23 times with a screwdriver while she waited for a train at Bescot Stadium station, Walsall. After throwing Whyte’s phone into the river, Majek left her for dead. He then went to buy some beers and returned to the Park Inn Hotel, where Whyte was employed and which had been turned into an asylum centre. One witness described him as “drinking, smoking and just chatting amongst his group of friends … having a good time.” 

Whyte’s injuries were severe—11 of the 23 blows delivered to her body struck her head. One of them pierced her brainstem. But she did not die straight away, instead lying unconscious in hospital for three days before she finally passed away. In court last week, Majek showed no remorse for what he had done, and even tried to claim that the DNA and CCTV evidence were “wrong.” He also tried to lie about his age, telling the court he was 19 years old, when he is more likely to be in his mid-20s. No motive has been established for the attack, but, thankfully, Majek has been found guilty and awaits sentencing later this year. 

Whyte was simply going about her usual routine. She went to work at the Park Inn Hotel and was trying to get home after her shift. For reasons unknown to everyone—including perhaps Majek himself—her life was callously taken from her by a man who likely shouldn’t have been in this country in the first place. Majek had arrived in the UK via small boat in 2024, after having made his way from his home country of Sudan to Libya, Italy, and then Germany, where he was denied asylum. 

By all accounts, Majek wasn’t the only migrant causing problems at the Park Inn Hotel. During Majek’s trial, it was revealed that, on multiple occasions, “police were called after migrants harassed women and followed them home” and “made threats to kill, to blow up the hotel, that they had a bomb in their bag.” It was also apparently common knowledge that the asylum seekers kept weapons, “including zombie knives and axes, in their bedrooms.” But staff were not allowed to enter the rooms and confiscate these items, to avoid disturbing the asylum seekers’ privacy. Migrants also “would arrive at the Park Inn Hotel with dozens of reports against their name,” suggesting that many of them already had run-ins with the law. 

Whyte’s death was completely unavoidable. But the UK government will likely learn no lessons from it. Nor will it learn anything from another senseless murder this week at the hands of yet another asylum seeker. On Monday evening at 5pm, a 49-year-old binman named Wayne Broadhurst took his dog out for a walk in Uxbridge, Greater London. He, like Whyte, was killed in what looks to be a completely random attack. The suspect is a 22-year-old Afghan refugee named Safi Dawood, who was charged yesterday with the murder of Broadhurst, as well as two counts of attempted murder. It has been reported that Dawood was initially chasing these two other victims—a 14-year-old boy and 45-year-old man, who was Dawood’s landlord. Broadhurst attempted to intervene in this altercation, at which point Dawood allegedly stabbed him to death. The other man is currently in hospital with life-changing injuries. It may come as no surprise that Dawood came to this country illegally. The Home Office has confirmed that he arrived in the UK via lorry in 2020, and was granted asylum and leave to remain two years later. 

A few days after Wayne Broadhurst was murdered and Rhiannon Whyte’s killer was convicted, Haybe Cabdiraxmaan Nur was jailed for life for the murder of a man in a bank. In May this year, Nur—a 47-year-old asylum seeker from Somalia—stabbed Gurvinder Singh Johal to death unprovoked in a busy Lloyds Bank in Derby. The details of the case will be tragically familiar to many people by now. Nur came to the UK in a small boat in October last year and had a number of convictions in at least four European countries, including for robbery, assault, and resisting a public official. For some reason, none of these records were shared with local police in Derbyshire. 

Nur had also recently had his asylum application rejected, something that spurred his attack against Johal. Less than two hours before the murder, Nur called a charity, Migrant Help, to angrily complain about this rejection. He warned that he was “going to kill 500 people” and suggested that he would specifically target “doctors, police or people working at the Home Office.” He told call operators that he felt his rights were being denied and he was being kept “in an open door prison.” He also threatened to take his own life, after killing as many other people as he could. 

In the UK, it is no longer safe to stand in a train station, take your dog for a walk, or go to the bank. These ordinary, everyday activities now carry the risk of being randomly murdered by someone who, by all rights, should not be anywhere near you. These are not isolated incidents by any means. In Britain alone, we see attacks by illegal migrants and asylum seekers with alarming regularity. In 2023, Moroccan asylum seeker Ahmed Alid stabbed his housemate and killed a 70-year-old man in the streets of Hartlepool. A year before that, Lawangeen Abdulrahimzai murdered aspiring Royal Marine Thomas Roberts outside a Subway sandwich shop in Bournemouth. Abdulrahimzai, of course, had arrived in the UK illegally and was on the run after facing murder charges in Serbia. Just last weekend, we witnessed the farcical exploits of Hadush Kebatu, the Ethiopian sex offender who was accidentally released onto the streets of London when he was supposed to have been deported. 

How many more people have to be attacked, sexually assaulted, or murdered before the government starts to take this seriously? After the humiliation surrounding the Kebatu case, the authorities proved that they could deport people swiftly, provided that enough negative press was kicked up. But most of the time, there is zero political will to enforce this country’s laws. As David Shipley pointed out in the Telegraph last week, all these crimes are completely unavoidable. Violent foreigners do not simply materialise on British soil and leave us no choice but to accommodate them. The deaths of Rhiannon Whyte, Wayne Broadhurst, Gurvinder Singh Johal, and far too many others were not random accidents. They were not inevitable. They were the result of decades of deliberate choices, made by our political and legal elites, and mindlessly supported by the mainstream media. 

The decision to allow in hundreds of thousands of illegal migrants without knowing virtually anything about who they are and where they came from is just that—a decision. There is no good reason why we should have to live this way. Law-abiding citizens should not have to fear leaving their homes, in case the state has waved through yet another anonymous, dangerous criminal. The most basic duty of the state—to protect its citizens—has been utterly neglected. 

Until our political class finds the courage to enforce existing laws, there is no reason to expect the stream of cases like these to end. How many more innocent lives must be brutally cut short before our elites take notice? What will it take for the most ordinary of acts—waiting for the train, walking your dog, visiting the bank—to become safe again? This is the bare minimum that any serious country should promise its people. 

europeanconservative

Historic low approval rating for French President Macron

Is it all just a coincidence? I don’t think so!

French President Emmanuel Macron has cemented his status as one of the Fifth Republic’s most reviled leaders, with a new poll showing his approval rating collapsing to 11 per cent.

With this, he matches the all-time low set by his predecessor François Hollande in 2016.

The Verian Group survey, conducted among 1,000 respondents and published in Le Figaro Magazine, marks a five-point drop from September’s already dismal 16 per cent.

Macron now shares the unwanted crown of France’s least popular president since the early 1970s, when Verian’s predecessors first tracked such metrics.

Hollande, Macron’s erstwhile mentor, hit that rock bottom in late 2016 amid crippling unemployment and security woes, prompting him to forgo re-election.

The President’s erosion of support cuts across demographics, with a stark 11-point plunge among over-65s – traditionally a Macron stronghold – and a nine-point dip among retirees.

Even within his centrist base, backing has frayed: Some 71 per cent of his own Renaissance party back him, while 53 per cent of MoDem and Horizons’ backers view him favourably.

Right-wing sympathisers, at 94 per cent negative and left-wing voters with just 11 per cent approval from La France Insoumise supporters, amplify the apparent disdain.

Other polls paint a similarly bleak picture.

An Ipsos survey from earlier this month pegged Macron at 19 per cent, while Odoxa’s mid-month reading found only 20 per cent deeming him a “good president”, still edging Hollande’s 2014 trough of 13 per cent.

An Elabe poll in early October had him at 14 per cent, underscoring a relentless downward spiral.

Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu fares better, gaining six points to 25 per cent on the back of perceived stability after surviving multiple no-confidence bids.

Conservative opposition figures lead in the popularity polls.

Former centre-right interior minister Bruno Retailleau, though, also saw his popularity slip since leaving the government.

In France, a large majority of respondents told Verian that “things are getting worse”, fuelling fears of social unrest as budget battles loom.

The latest poll arrives amid broader European malaise. UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Germany’s Chancellor Friedrich Merz both are also scoring in the low numbers.

brusselssignal

Overton Window Speedrun: British Voters Now More Right-Wing on Immigration Than Americans

Screengrab youtube

British voters across the political spectrum are much more likely to hold strong views on immigration and even ethnic homogeneity than Americans, with 70 per cent of right-wing voters saying it’s bad for society “if white people decline as a share of the population”.

Britons have long been considered to be comfortably to the left of their American cousins on practically all political matters. While this remains largely true, new research shows that Britons from both the left and right are considerably more forthright than their American counterparts on immigration policy questions.

Voters for British right-wing parties are radically more likely to agree with statements such as “it is bad for society if white people decline as a share of the population” and “society is weakened by being made up of many different races, ethnicities, and religions”, the polling finds.

The remarkable results come from a preview of a forthcoming paper by the National Centre for Social Research, entitled UK and US Attitudes: Two Sides of the Same Coin? trailed in finance-focused British globalist-centre-left publication, The Financial Times. The organisation took questions already well polled and understood by U.S. pollsters and asked exactly the same of British respondents, giving a realistic side-by-side comparison.

With 2,000 respondents asked, it isn’t a mega-poll, but it is still twice the size of a typical UK political pollster’s sample.

It found the United Kingdom remains to the left of America on every national policy and social issue question — such as taxation and abortion among others — except for questions of immigration and diversity, at least suggesting that decades of British governments ignoring popular sentiment on border control has pushed the population rightward.

Some of the gaps in willingness to show agreement on some migration concepts between British and American respondents are vast, and all the more astonishing given that expressing some of the sentiments that seem to enjoy widespread support among the British would likely invite a police investigation in the UK, where there are no constitutional guarantees of free speech.

Asked whether they agree with the statement “We risk losing our national identity if we are too open to people from all over the world”, a massive 81 per cent of people who voted for either the Conservative Party or Nigel Farage’s Reform Party at the last General Election said they would agree, compared to 65 per cent of U.S. Trump voters. Among British Labour Party voters, there is no majority for this notion, but it is still striking that 34 per cent agree, compared to just 12 per cent of 2024 Kamala Harris voters.

Indeed, British left-wing voters are to the right of Kamala Harris supporters in every one of these metrics.

On the statement “It is bad for society if white people decline as a share of the population”, 70 per cent of UK right-wingers agree, a full 27 points ahead of Trump voters, who agreed 43 per cent of the time. On the left, 24 per cent of Labour voters said yes, while just 9 per cent of Harris voters agreed.

Asked whether they are “uncomfortable with people speaking a foreign language in public places”, 66 per cent of British Conservative and Reform voters agreed. Trump supporters do not share this sentiment as broadly, with just 47 per cent agreeing, followed by Labour voters at 28 per cent, and Kamala Harris supporters at 17 per cent.

Again, on ethnic homogeneity, a majority of right-wingers in Britain said they agreed that “society is weakened by being made up of many different races, ethnicities, and religions”. A majority of 52 per cent said that was the case, well over double the number of American conservatives who said they thought so, who came in at 19 per cent. Those Trump voters only came in a little ahead of British Labour supporters, who agreed 14 per cent of the time. Least of all were Kamala Harris voters, who agreed with statistically negligible frequency at three per cent.

The Financial Times cited Sir John Curtice, a renowned British psephologist and political scientist, who said the results once again underlined the new dividing lines in British politics. These lines, which had been over economic policy in past decades, now revolve around social issues, characterising the right as more concerned with sovereignty than fiscal probity. They share this with U.S. President Donald Trump, who said that they “think that Britain should run itself”.

breitbart

UK: Asylum seeker strangled and sexually assaulted woman in ‘petrifying’ attack – ‘I have nightmares’

Fawaz Alsamaou admitted to sexual assault and intentional strangulation | SOUTH WALES POLICE

An asylum seeker left his victim “unable to sleep” after he strangled and sexually assaulted her under a bridge, a court has heard.

Fawaz Alsamaou followed the woman out of a nightclub before he tried to strangle her and put his hands under her dress.

The victim was heading home from Pulse nightclub in Cardiff city centre back to the student area at 4am when she noticed she was being followed.

The Syrian refugee waited until the woman was underneath a railway bridge before he grabbed her by the neck | GOOGLE

The Syrian refugee waited until the woman was underneath a railway bridge before he grabbed her by the neck, forced his hand under her dress and groped her crotch whilst sexually assaulting her for seven seconds.

Prosecutor Tabitha Walker said the terrified victim managed to push her attacker away before fleeing the scene and alerting police.

Speaking in court, the victim said the assault continued to affect her mental health, adding: “I’m always looking over my shoulder and thinking the worst.

“At the start, I didn’t leave my house for six weeks. I feel really uneasy when it’s dark outside.

“It has really affected my social life and I don’t go out like I used to. I suffer with my mental health generally but this incident really hit that harder.”

The woman continued: “I can barely sleep and I have nightmares relating to it. I’m working to get over it but this isn’t something you can just recover from.

“The impact has pulled me back from doing everyday things and stopped me going out with my friends.”

The attack also had a lasting effect on her professional life as she was unable to return to her office for around three months due to overwhelming anxiety when in public and surrounded by people.

She said: “The time I had to have off work caused additional stress in my life and additional meetings with HR.”

Authorities were able to identify Alsamaou, from Lockwood in Huddersfield, after combing through CCTV footage.

He admitted to sexual assault and intentional strangulation.

However, mitigating barrister David Pinnell argued that despite pleading guilty, Alsamaou did not accept that he was in fact guilty of the offences.

Mr Pinnell added that the 33-year-old would be deported after his conviction at Newport Crown Court.

Judge Celia Hughes said: “It was a horrible attack on a woman alone at night in Cardiff. She was entitled to walk home alone at night without being attacked by you, a predatory man.

“You say that you’re a practising Muslim but your behaviour that night casts doubt on the practice of your faith.

“It must have been a petrifying incident for her and had lasting impact on her life.”

Alsamaou, who had no previous convictions in Britain, was sentenced to 37 months in prison for sexual assault.

gbnews

Cardinal Müller says ‘progressivism,’ not tradition, is ‘splitting’ the Catholic Church

Arcybiskup Gerhard Ludwig Müller. Wikimedia Commons.Jolanta Dyr,CC-BY-SA-3.0

Cardinal Gerhard Müller said it is “progressivism,” not tradition, that is dividing the Catholic Church in light of a statement by Pope Leo XIV that the tension between “tradition and novelty” can be a “harmful polarization.”

“Progressivism is the ideology that’s splitting the Church,” Müller, former prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), told EWTN’s Raymond Arroyo on a Thursday episode of The World Over. Arroyo had quoted a recent statement by Leo that he said seemed to emphasize the Vatican’s “discomfort with tradition.”

The “progressives” within the Church, who are in reality unorthodox, are “making moral compromises” and “relativizing the sacrament of marriage, a revealed truth, with the blessing of homosexual couples,” said Müller, referring to the Vatican’s permission for such blessings under Pope Francis via Fiducia Supplicans.

“That is the splitting of the church. And not the traditions.” The cardinal pointed out that tradition is an “essential” pillar of the Church along with Holy Scripture and the Magisterium. Catholic tradition itself is also solidly founded, Müller noted, since its content is “the revealed doctrine of the apostles.”

Asked by Arroyo why he thinks there is “such antagonism” against the Traditional Latin Mass, Müller said, “I cannot understand these people.”

He said he has concluded that there is no deeper theology behind the restriction of the Latin Mass. “The only argument they have is, ‘We have the authority,’ he said, with no reason involved.

“They must explain what is wrong with the older form of the liturgy,” but have not done so, he noted.

He defied Cardinal Blase Cupich’s claim that the old Mass is a “spectacle,” stressing that “we cannot say” that the centuries of bishops and popes who offered the old Mass “were interested in a spectacle.”

Müller suggested that Cupich’s statement is not a theologically based position but was made “for headlines.”

With that claim, “You cannot pass an examination with me in dogmatics,” he added.

Arroyo went on to highlight Pope Leo’s point, made to Crux in September, that “You can say the Mass in Latin right now. If it’s the Vatican II rite, there’s no problem.”

“What about the idea that we can just go to the Novus Ordo in Latin?” Arroyo asked Müller.

“The council never said we must invent a new liturgy because the old form was wrong,” the cardinal replied. The main idea, he said, was to make the Mass easier to follow, “because they didn’t speak Latin.”

“But the (traditional rite) is “the same we’ve had since the 6th or the 4th century,” said Müller, as if to suggest that one cannot simply toss away such an old, time-honored liturgy.

Müller referred to the attack on the Traditional Latin Mass as a “superfluous struggle” and called for the Church to “avoid” such an attack. “We can struggle with those who are denying the divinity of Jesus Christ but not” those who prefer traditional liturgies.

He believes that the Latin Mass crackdown is about a “demonstration of authority” and not about “the salvation of souls.” It is a problem, moreover, that the pope is usurping the authority of the bishops by ordering the suppression of traditional Masses, Müller said.

Arroyo also asked the cardinal his thoughts on the Vatican’s recent celebration of Nostra Aetate and the “odd” footage of Eastern and Middle-Eastern music and dance performed in the Paul VI Hall.

“We have to avoid this impression that … all religions are the same,” Müller said. They are not “all an expression of a basic religion of mankind,” he stressed. Nostra Aetate itself is marked by this false ecumenical attitude, since it does not encourage conversion to the true faith, but instead suggests that men can reach God through pagan religions such as Hinduism and Buddhism, in stark contradiction to the longstanding teaching of the Church.

“We cannot mix it all. We are not all Fratelli Tutti,” he concluded, referring to Pope Francis’ encyclical “on fraternity and social friendship.” Fratelli Tutti is widely argued to promote religious indifferentism and was condemned by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, the former papal nuncio to the U.S., as promoting a “blasphemous” form of brotherhood without God as well as “religious indifferentism.”

Asked by Arroyo about the installation of a prayer carpet for Muslims in the Vatican Apostolic Library, Müller said such a move was driven by “relativism,” and that it is “a self-relativization of the Catholic Church and of Catholic belief.”

“They don’t know the doctrine of the Church,” the cardinal said. He believes Muslims will “triumph” over having stepped foot inside the Catholic Church, and will “interpret it as a sign that we have accepted their superiority.”

lifesitenews