Against the Murdering, Thieving Hordes of Pakistanis (Part 3)

Those who hope to read more from the diabolical El Inglés are encouraged to make a contribution to his social welfare fund. Alas, he is no longer in a situation that would allow him to write such long, involved pieces without some sort of financial remuneration. If any of his past writings have been of value to you, please consider showing your appreciation via PayPal, using the button below.


The following essay by El Inglés is the final installment of a three-part report on the Pakistanis (previously: Part 1, Part 2). It is being posted this week to commemorate the tenth anniversary of the publication of Surrender, Genocide… or What?, which caused the ejection of Gates of Vienna from Pajamas Media ten years ago today. For more on the memorable events of 2008, see this post.

Against the Murdering, Thieving Hordes of Pakistanis

Part 3

by El Inglés

The “Pakis Out!” Plan

Though we inject touches of humour in our writing as a sanity-preservation measure, all joking to one side, to read about the sheer evil that is so deeply-ingrained in the mind of the average Pakistani male is to stare into the pit of hell. I am aware of the bitter irony that the very Pakistani women who are so often on the receiving end of Pakistani male psychopathy must be rejected tout court along with those men. But Britons concerned at the ongoing colonization and destruction of their country by Pakistanis cannot allow themselves to be held back by any residual sympathy they might feel in this regard.

Reader, my heart has grown cold to the Pakistani male, who constitutes as obvious a concentration of evil and psychopathy as can be found on the surface of this Earth. The character of any group of people resides in its menfolk far more than its womenfolk, for the simple reason that by far and away the greatest capacity for violent, predatory behaviour is to be found in those very menfolk. Thus do we conclude that the Pakistanis are a pestilential people that must be kept out of Britain at all costs.

Pakis Out! — The Details

The Pakistani population of the UK must be removed, driven out, forced out, thrown out, shown the door, expelled, even ethnically cleansed if we allow an expansive understanding of the term. We must cut the Gordian knot and expel the overwhelming bulk of the Pakistani population. Here we introduce the Pakis Out! Plan.

If one is eating an apple that turns out to have a spot of rot in it, one can eat around it. But if one bites into an apple only to discover that it is more rot than apple, one will likely throw it away. The Pakistanis are all rot, no apple. The extremely small fraction of the Pakistani population that is both decent and productive is in no way, shape, or form crucial to the future of our country, and the remainder calls into question the possibility of that future existing. Cut the Gordian Knot! Pakis Out!

We must adopt an attitude of perfect callousness towards the Pakistanis. In plain English, this means that there should be no extent at all to which our policies are predicated on their interests. Given that they attach no significance to ours, this seems entirely reasonable. The Pakistanis have done as they would be done by; they have no grounds for complaint.

There is an important point to be made here. Though we advocate the driving out of the Pakistanis, we do not suggest that literally every single Pakistani must be forced out for us to consider our goals achieved. The objective is to bring substantial coercive pressure on the Pakistanis so that they start to and continue to leave in large numbers. Assuming these efforts are successful, a point will come at which the bulk of the Pakistanis have left, and the remainder consist of those who are prepared to jettison, or who have already jettisoned, enough of their inner Pakistani that they can essentially be tolerated, on the understanding that they will be dealt with great harshness should their inner Pakistani ever manifest itself in the future. Let us suggest for the sake of the discussion, that 90% of the current Pakistani population will need to be driven out to bring this about.

Needless to say, implementing the basic Pakis Out! policy would result in some substantial amount of social disruption, the scale of which would not be easy to predict. The army and police would have to be well-prepared, and it may well prove necessary to create additional forces to help contain riots, demonstrations, and other forms of resistance, whether on the part of the Pakistanis themselves, their hard-left sympathisers, or both.

It should be borne in mind that the Pakistani population is overwhelmingly endogamous, with Pakistanis, as a rule, marrying only other Pakistanis. This means that deciding who is ‘actually’ a Pakistani and who is not is much easier than would be the case with other immigrant populations with stronger tendencies to intermarry. Either way, we hope it will become clear that the measures we advocate are not heavily reliant upon explicit definitions of who is a Pakistani and who is not.

However arrogant it may sound, we suggest that the basic outline of what needs to be done to expel the Pakistani population is herein contained, and that any action taken by any European state to expel any Muslim population will consist of a more or less draconian application of these steps. We have dubbed these steps the Pakis Out! Plan.

The Pakis Out! Plan is not a single, invariant collection of procedures for driving Pakistanis out of a country. It is, rather, an understanding that there exists a plethora of steps that could be taken to this end, that exist along a continuum from the least draconian to the most draconian, and from the least transgressive of extant norms to the most transgressive of extant norms. The implementation of a gradually tightening straitjacket of restrictions, coercion and general unpleasantness, backed up by a willingness to use the violence of the state against concerted opposition, is the Pakis Out! plan. Those readers interested in the only real alternatives are invited to peruse my other essays, ‘Surrender, Genocide… or What?’ and ‘Our Muslim Troubles’ (Part One, Part Two, Part Three, Part Four, Part Five). Anyone who cares to read them will, we hope, agree that Pakis Out! is the best option available to us.

Our consideration of the details of Pakis Out! will be thematic in nature. There will be six themes in total: immigration, law enforcement, citizenship and residency, religious restrictions, the welfare state, and general malicious harassment. Each theme will feature a brief discussion of how the British state could and should tighten the screw on the child-raping Paki horde in order to drive an ever-larger fraction of it out of the country. The individual sections should not be taken as lists of things that must be done, but items on a menu that the British state can progressively select from on the basis of what seems to be working and how much success it seems to be enjoying.

The observant reader will note that we provide very few details as to the exact legislation that would need to be passed to facilitate the program we describe. There are two reasons for this. The first is that we have no legal background, and are not well-equipped to say a great deal on this front at all. The second, and more important reason, is that laws are human constructs and that a British state committed to driving out the Pakistanis will construct whatever laws it needs to bring about that end. The details of how exactly this is to be done are not of any particular interest to us.


Pakistani immigration into the UK would essentially cease, on the basis of an understanding that the holders of Pakistani citizenship would be banned from obtaining British citizenship or residency, banned from obtaining student visas etc., banned from family reunion immigration, banned from obtaining work visas, and so on. Pakis would not be allowed into the UK except under the most restrictive conditions, and then only on a short-term basis.

Those Pakistani citizens already in the UK would be required to leave when their current visas expired, assuming they actually had valid visas, unless there were specific reasons to hunt them down and expel them prior to this happening. Ruthlessly hunting down and expelling illegal Pakistani immigrants would become a priority for border control agencies. Such people would be held in special internment camps if they proved difficult to deport, and the camps would be segregated by sex.

Given that our new immigration controls would consist, essentially, of not allowing Pakistanis into the country at all, there are few additional details we need to add here.

Law Enforcement

Next, we move onto law enforcement, which interacts with the subsequent category, citizenship and residency, in important ways. In short, the most ruthless and draconian application of the criminal justice system to Pakistanis would: a) create its own incentives for them to leave, and b) provide justification for the alteration of the legal status of Pakistanis in the UK. This pertains to the principle of exclusion, an important concept that we will explain here.

The principle of exclusion is predicated on the notion that Pakistanis who have committed crimes of a certain severity must be prevented from ever being at large again in British society. Non-UK citizen Pakistanis must be deported after serving an appropriate amount of time in jail, and UK-citizen Pakistanis must be stripped of their citizenship and permanently interned until such time as they can be deported, after serving an appropriate amount of time in jail.

The principle of exclusion therefore ties together draconian law enforcement, the stripping of UK citizenship as and when necessary, internment, and deportation to rip up and remove the most evil and pestilential elements of the Pakistani population of the UK. As such, it will massively improve the welfare of the British people by radically reducing, over time, the extent to which they can be preyed upon by Pakistani filth. It will re-infuse them with a confidence that they are the masters of their country once again. It will focus, by its nature, overwhelmingly on the male half of the Pakistani diaspora in the UK. Nonetheless, by destroying families through excluding and eventually deporting the menfolk, it will create huge pressure on the Pakistani population as a whole.

Given that the principle of exclusion grows out of law enforcement efforts of one sort or another, its application will provide yet more fodder for its own growth. The draconian law enforcement it relies upon will create opposition in the form of civil disorder, rioting and the like, which will allow the system to sweep up yet more criminal Pakistanis and put them into the exclusion system.

Firstly, large numbers of Pakistanis, overwhelmingly men, could be hoovered up in sweeps aimed at addressing the most egregious and damaging aspects of their criminality, which include: the mass, systematic rape, torture and enslavement of white British girls; terrorism-related offences; and subversion-related offences. Being convicted of an offence would provide grounds for prison time and subsequent deportation in the case of non-British citizens, or, in the case of UK citizens of Pakistan origin, the removal of citizenship, prison time, and their internment until such time as they could be removed. Investigations into historic cases of sexual abuse alone could roll up untold thousands, if not tens of thousands, of Pakistani men if the courts lowered the bar in terms of the degree of evidence needed to convict.

Secondly, less Pakistani-specific crimes, such as various manifestations of organized crime, domestic violence, and fraud, should be assiduously pursued through the courts. The principle of exclusion should apply to all Pakistanis who are non-British citizens, and to all those Pakistanis who have committed crimes of at least a certain severity. The proceeds of organized crime should be pursued by the relevant authorities to allow the maximum level of repossession of said proceeds, and a maximum of damage inflicted on the ability of Pakistani families to function in the UK.

To sum up, the police and criminal justice system should be used in pursuit of two objectives: a) to sweep ever larger numbers of Pakistanis (overwhelmingly men) into the exclusion zone, and b) to inflict, to the greatest extent possible justifiable in terms of the law, damage on Pakistani family life, Pakistani social life, and any general sense Pakistanis may have that they can be secure and prosperous in the UK.

We will mention in closing that the responsiveness of the criminal justice system to crimes committed against Pakistanis would have to be expected to gradually fade away as part of the widespread general antipathy towards them in the hypothetical Britain we are discussing. This would probably constitute an additional push factor that elements criminally hostile to Pakistanis would take advantage of. It is not, however, something that we explicitly advocate as part of Pakis Out!


We have already touched on what should happen to that part of the Pakistani population of the UK who are not British citizens. Now we explore what would have to be done to start hacking through the undergrowth of those Pakistanis in the UK who do have UK citizenship.

We have already explained the principle of exclusion, and how it will allow substantial numbers of Pakistanis to be swept up and removed from the UK. It is worth pointing out that the overwhelming majority of Pakistanis being swept into the exclusion zone will be men.

However, it must be expected that substantial numbers of Pakistanis will continue to hold UK citizenship even after the authorities have made substantial progress in sweeping the more obviously criminal elements into the exclusion zone and, eventually, out of the country.

As such, the relevant authorities will need to start examining the asylum applications of those Pakistanis who have obtained asylum in the UK over the years, and see if they can turn up any irregularities in said applications. Should such irregularities be found, they would of course have to result in the revocation of legal status in the UK for relevant Pakistanis, and for any family members who had obtained legal status through them.

The same would apply to immigration/residency/citizenship applications more generally, especially those that were successful relatively recently. Any false claims made in pursuit of the right to stay in the UK would result in the removal of this status and all relevant parties’ being swept into the exclusion zone. People who obtained leave to remain after having spent time in the country illegally would have it revoked and would be removed.

Predicting exactly how many Pakistanis could be removed from the country in this fashion is not at all straightforward. It is worth pointing out that additional punitive measures, such as the aggressive confiscation of property from guilty parties to cover the costs the state would incur through their removal, would create an additional push factor.

Religious Restrictions

We stress again that this document deals with the Pakistani population of the UK, and not with the Muslim population more generally. As such, general legal restrictions on Islam per se cannot be considered here, as they would automatically widen the scope of the document and transform it into something quite different. At least for the duration of this document, therefore, we must remain stubbornly agnostic on the subject of whether or not anything should be done about Islam itself.

Nonetheless, it is not difficult to devise ways of attacking the Pakistani population at the religious level. Let us give a single example here.

Our understanding is that most mosques in the UK are relatively ethnically segregated, and one must of course expect mosques in those areas where nearly all Muslims are Pakistanis to be overwhelmingly Pakistani in their congregations. It would not be difficult to single out these mosques for special attention.

The intelligence services could investigate Pakistani-dominated mosques, their imams, and their services. Any evidence of subversive or terrorism-related behaviour would be taken as a reason to shut the mosque down. Resultant riots and civil disorder would deliver large numbers of angry Pakistani males up to be removed from the UK via the principle of exclusion laid out earlier. Health and safety, planning permission, noise concerns; any and all of these could be taken as reasons to shut Pakistani mosques down. Sharia courts could be attacked in similar fashion.


The Pakistanis should be squeezed through a gradual reduction of their ability to enjoy access to the British welfare state. Clearly, revising the guidelines underpinning the welfare state in all its various manifestations to allow it to discriminate, implicitly if not explicitly, on the basis of whether or not people are Pakistanis, will require a certain amount of sophistic wizardry from the mandarins at the Home Office. Not being inducted into their ways, I will not speculate here as to how exactly they should go about doing this, other than in suggesting that largesse distributed by the welfare state to Pakistanis should be radically reduced. Criteria should be contrived whereby benefits can be slashed in such a manner as to target Pakistanis. Suggestions include English-language abilities, willingness of the women to look for work, willingness of the parents to go along with certain aspects of the educational system.

There also exists, of course, the phenomenon of selective enforcement or non-enforcement of extant laws and regulations. Given the overwhelmingly corrupt and venal nature of Pakistani society itself, it would strain credulity to suggest that the child-raping Pakistani horde in the UK itself was not also up to its eyeballs in benefit fraud of various sorts. The vigorous investigation of fraud, along with consequent prosecutions, convictions, and exclusion, could be very effective. It would also allow the state to take a step forward with regards to the gradual impoverishment of the Pakistani community, which would constitute yet another push factor.

General Malicious Harassment

General malicious harassment is a catch-all category that would include all those alternative ways of making life hard for the Pakistanis that are not easily described by the other categories here, and that would not be responses to gross criminality on their part. They consist of measures that are not Pakistani-specific.

Most obviously, general malicious harassment consists of ways of destroying the ability of the Pakistanis to make a living in the UK. The concept of health and safety, much-reviled by many, will display its true worth, as surprise inspections at restaurants and takeaways turn up an alarming number of hygiene violations. Needless to say, such violations will necessitate immediate closures of the establishments in question.

The preponderance of Pakistanis in taxi firms across the country, a position they appear to have leveraged well in their sallies of rape and destruction against the young, white, female population, will also suffer. We all understand how important vehicle maintenance is, and what complex devices modern automobiles are. It would strain credulity to suggest that surprise inspections of the vehicles used by Pakistani taxi firms and taxi drivers would not be able to turn up an abundance of technical and maintenance problems. These problems, as and when discovered, would of course require the vehicles to be taken off the road. In extreme cases, they could require the revocation of the operating licences of the firms in question, in the interests of public safety. Prosecutions might well follow, and the system of exclusion will await particularly egregious offenders.

We have already discussed the explicitly religious factors that could be utilized to help drive the Pakistanis out of the UK. General malicious harassment will also be able to nibble away at the edges of the religious side of things, though on ostensibly non-religious grounds.

It will not have escaped the attention of those who follow such things that mosques and prayer centres tend to end up being rather a nuisance for people who live in proximity to them. The call to prayer, huge numbers of cars parked willy-nilly; what a surprise that having large numbers of Muslims congregate in your area should turn out to be so aggravating. Justice will call for the draconian application of parking regulations, accompanied by substantial amounts of clamping, towing, ticketing and the like. Noise regulations will also have to be strictly enforced, with mosques that make too much noise being shut down.

The taking over of local government by central government in heavily Pakistani-infested areas should continue apace. Events in Rotherham subsequent to the full exposure of the mass, systematic, rape, enslavement and torture of British children at the hands of the child-raping Pakistani horde, when the local council was basically taken over by the central government, should be taken as a model for destroying Pakistani influence on local government.

Other Options

There is one last topic to which we must turn our attention in this section. I have already stated that I am not merely engaged in speculative thinking in this document, but that I am explicitly advocating what I discuss in this section unless I say otherwise. Reader, now I say otherwise.

We have assumed in this document that any British government trying to drive out the Pakistani population of the UK will do so in a manner that allows it to defend its own behaviour in the forum of international opinion. It is for this reason that we have not discussed, for example, the possibility of carpet-bombing Pakistani-dominated areas of Birmingham. However, there is an additional option that will be available to a Pakistani-expelling British government that rests uneasily somewhere in the No Man’s Land between those measures that would be defensible at the next G7 meeting and those that would not. In the interests of completeness, we need to examine it briefly here.

Put succinctly, it may well occur to our future British government that the direct application of violence, up to and including the lethal, to certain parts of the Pakistani population would usefully accelerate the process of driving them out. If it does, the government will certainly try and perpetrate this violence with a maximum of plausible deniability for reasons we have already explained. What this means in practice is that there will be a high probability of government collusion with paramilitaries.

Let us explain what this means. In all Western countries which have been stupid enough to allow the creation of large Muslim communities, there already exists a substantial reservoir of hatred towards these Muslims on the part of a significant fraction of the native population. As we have already noted, substantial civil disorder must be expected to result from attempts to drive out the Pakistani population. This would result in a further worsening of relations between the British and their Pakistani fifth column and, almost certainly, in the formation of British paramilitary organizations.

This is fairly obvious. What is not so obvious, perhaps, is that this will provide an avenue for British governments to aid and abet these paramilitaries in certain ways that offer plausible deniability. Given that this section of the document concerns itself with what government will be able to do to drive the Pakistanis out, it would be remiss of us not to discuss the possibility here. We would point out that there exist strong and obvious precedents for this sort of behaviour on the part of the apparatus of state. During the Troubles in Northern Ireland, there were various episodes of collusion between Crown forces and Loyalist paramilitaries in the province.

In which ways, precisely, would this hypothetical British government seek to facilitate the behaviour of such organizations? Looking to the Troubles in Northern Ireland for clues, we can easily imagine scenarios in which such paramilitaries were provided with training, intelligence, funding, and even certain types of materiel, all of which would be strictly deniable, or as deniable as humanly possible.

Another possibility is that the British government might infiltrate and subvert these organizations to undermine them or, at the very least, moderate their behaviour. Accordingly, we cannot simply assume that the violence they engage in will be made more severe or more lethal through behind-the-scenes government interventions. Nonetheless, depending on the way the situation unfolds, it is entirely possible that the behaviour of such paramilitaries could become another arrow in the quiver of a government looking to drive the Pakistanis out of the UK.

Objections and Responses

Isn’t this ethnic cleansing?

Perhaps. But if it is, it is the ethnic cleansing of a Pakistani fifth column that, invited into the beautiful, wealthy, peaceful house of Britain, defecated on the carpet and then trod it in. Away with them, before they turn their attention to the sofa.

And once you’ve got rid of the Pakistanis, who will you start on next?

The Somalis. They don’t even make curry.

My friend is a Pakistani and a doctor. What about them?

We are sublimely uninterested in the welfare of your Pakistani friends, and will go so far as to suggest that they could easily be replaced. Be of good cheer; the country will survive without them.

You will inflict huge suffering on people who do not deserve it.

There will, of course, be individual Pakistanis who are driven out of the country despite the fact that they had not, personally, contributed to the pestilence that the Pakistanis were. As already made clear, our personal empathy for Pakistanis is nil, so we feel no qualms over the possibility.

Let us engage with the point though, which is a serious one. The presence in the UK of an ever-larger, and ever-more despicable and dangerous Pakistani diaspora inflicts horrible damage on the British people, damage not limited to that outlined thus far in this essay. Those who approve, nonetheless, of the presence of this diaspora, are effectively accepting that, year in, year out, the British people must suffer horrific collateral damage in their own country due to the aims of the multicultural ideology.

Very well. We have our own ideology, which insists that the Pakistani diaspora be driven out, and are honest enough to accept that this will result in at least some collateral damage being inflicted on the few decent Pakistanis in the UK.

Any member of the Pakistani diaspora in the UK has, by definition, been able to enjoy at least some period of having lived in a country infinitely superior to their own. This is a service already rendered to them by us. They are in our debt; we are not in theirs. Now it is time for them to leave. This is a simple point.

The Pakistanis are human beings too, you know.

Very true; but I confess to feeling a greater affection for trilobites.

This will all contravene international law in various ways.

International law was developed amongst European powers as a mechanism for attempting to amicably resolve the many disputes, of many sorts, that existed amongst those powers. If international law has metastasized, like a crocodile flushed down the lavatory, into such a beast that it can insist that European nations be swallowed up and destroyed by degenerate peoples such as the Pakistanis, then we must ignore it to survive.

This is evil.

Humbug. It is probably reasonable to say that there is some evil in what we suggest, simply in that we will have to act ruthlessly and cause suffering. But this is something that is true of human conflict in general, not a characteristic of the developing conflict between us and our Pakistani fifth column per se.

The time is rapidly approaching when we will all have to choose our evil, like it or not. What is happening to those parts of Britain most obviously overwhelmed by Pakistani immigration is also evil, an evil so great that the mind recoils at it: the mass, systematic, rape and torture of British girls at the hands of gigantic numbers of swarming Pakistani jabberwocks; the recreation in microcosm of South Asian Muslim madness throughout vast swathes of the urban UK — this too is evil, evil on a larger scale every day.

We have chosen our evil, as did our ancestors when they chose to fight in all the conflicts this country has ever fought in. The RAF firebombed German cities, killing tens of thousands of civilians, during the quintessential good war. We advocate only the tiniest fraction of this violence, against an enemy that plots against us, works against us, and devours our children on a daily basis. Reader, believe us when we say that we are comfortable with what we have chosen.

Many, perhaps most, of these people are British.

They are not British. They are the Pakistani diaspora of the UK, and they must leave.

This will destroy Britain.

Driving viciously hostile, destructive Pakistanis out of Britain will destroy it, but allowing it to be swamped by them will not? This is only true for those who insist on seeing the UK as deriving its essential nature from its willingness to act as a dumping ground for all the hopeless, barbaric Muslim peoples of all the world. For those not afflicted by this particular madness, Britain derives its essential nature from Pakistanis the way China derives its essential nature from Nigerians.

The Pakistani government will not go along with it.

The Pakistani government does not have to go along with it. The point is that the Pakistanis leave Britain, not that they necessarily go back to Pakistan. Where precisely they end up is none of our concern. Apply increasingly draconian and brutal pressure to them, and they will start to leave one way or another. Eventually, many will make their way back to Pakistan. Others may end up on a Pacific atoll, or the surface of the moon. Once they have left Britain, they are no concern of us.

Even so, we need good relations with the Pakistani government for counterterrorism reasons.

We do not need good relations with the gigantic latrine that is Pakistan, and we do not need its cooperation with respect to counterterrorism. We need to expel that part of the Pakistani population of the UK which is dangerous and contaminating, which is to say, nearly all of it, and to use immediate, extreme, and surgical violence and coercion against that part of it which is actively pestilential (e.g. terrorists, child rapists). Accepting the presence of an ever-larger, ever-more threatening Pakistani diaspora simply because we do not wish to upset the Pakistani government as it tries to feed us intelligence on the pestilential behaviour of the Pakistani diaspora that we allow to thrive because we want intelligence on the ever-larger Pakistani diaspora that rapes our children is —

But no! Reader, we have confused even ourselves. This is obvious madness. Pakis Out! Short, punchy, to the point, only two words and a mere three syllables — which part of this is so hard to understand? Pakistan has stabbed us in the guts by implanting us with its diaspora. Now it offers to pull the knife out just a tad if we will only let it stab us in the head as well? Upon reflection, it can be seen that Pakis Out! is the superior option.

You are advocating hatred of the Pakistanis.

We advocate two things: understanding, and action. We must understand the problem the Pakistanis are, and we must act to drive them out. As long as the British people understand what they must and act as they must, the exact emotional basis of their understanding and actions are not our concern one way or the other. Hate them or not, as you please. Just understand that they must go.


The measures that we advocate in this document would clearly result in a substantial amount of political turmoil in the UK; it would be disingenuous to pretend otherwise. However, despite the hardships that may lie ahead for those British patriots who oppose the colonization of their towns and cities by the Pakistani horde, we insist that the steps we outline in this document are the only way to avoid a much worse conflict further in the future, whose outcome would be even more destructive.

Patriots of Britain, unite! You have nothing to lose but your Pakis!

For previous posts by El Inglés, see the El Inglés Archives.

60 thoughts on “Against the Murdering, Thieving Hordes of Pakistanis (Part 3)

  1. [1] “The Pakistanis have done as they would be done by”
    This wording sounds vaguely Golden Ruley, but what does it mean? Paraphrase, please.

    [2] The term “exclusion zone” is used four time in this essay but is not defined. Are you proposing that part of the territory of the UK be ceded to Pakistanis, to insulate Britons from them? Where will this zone be located?

  2. While I agree that there are many problems with Pakistani’s in Britain, I really do not like your resentment towards them as a group. I’m sure that a great number are guilty of various offences that could result in their deportation or imprisonment. However, I don’t believe that only 10% are decent people. Some came to Britain to escape Pakistani culture, but find themselves pressured to follow extremist Muslim ways by family against their will. A good first step would be to ban first and second cousin marriages and not recognize those marriages made abroad. The most traditional people would likely not want to go to the UK, while the less traditional ones would finally have a chance to get out of the fishbowl by marrying unrelated people.

    • Barbara

      It’s too late for pleasantries now. I know you don’t want violence, I don’t either.

      Unfortunately over one million indigenous English and other white British girls have been tortured by those demons.

      Read this

      There is no other way. Either we die or they go, no in between now.

    • Your empathy is lovely, made me feel all warm and fuzzy. […] Do you believe that Pakistanis will stop being Pakistanis just because you will not allow them to marry their cousins? A recent Sharia ruling allowed males to feel lust for their daughters on condition the girls were at least 9 years old! Your blind multicultural agenda is actually what caused this problem to begin with – perhaps you [c]ould start to show some empathy for the little victims, not the evil perpetrators.

    • All those German Hitler supporters were pressured by the Nazis?

    • And how do you intend to enforce such a ban? Think it through, please. Truth can be very, very unpleasant.

    • One the pressure is on HARD again the “culture”, one will find everyone trying quite hard to dissociate themselves from it. The ones that truly want to have nothing to do with it (and the others, too).

      If one keeps the pressure on HARD, the vast majority will start to lead normative lifestyles regardless of what they think deep down. The problem currently is that there’s more pressure to lead an “alternative” lifestyle.

      Case in point: very few problems with Muslims in Singapore. Why? You can go to mosque all you want, wear all the hijabs that you want. But start acting like an extremist and talking nonsense, and see what happens… QUICKLY. They don’t mess around in Singapore.

  3. El Inglis is correct. They all have to go all of them. The risks to the indigenous English and other white Britons is just too high.

    They have been provided with more than ample opportunities and chanced to assimilate and fit in. They have failed time and time again.

    Already over one million white English children have been destroyed by those demons.

    They should be shown absolutely no compassion whatsoever now. They’ve cooked their goose now and NONE of them have helped us deal with the sexist grooming gangs.

    This is war and there is no other solution to this problem.

    • I would replace the word ‘failed’ with ‘refused’. They did not come to assimilate, they came to conquer as their book orders them and their Imams direct.

      Furthermore, the only practical solution may not be at first obvious in this cauldren of high treason; until those of our own who have encouraged and enabled this alien invasion and who now protect them using all of the draconian powers of embryonic Police State are dealt with and at least thoroughly neutralised then nothing can be done about this infestation.

      Then, and only then, when that is accomplished, shall the means to excise this primitive ideological carcinoma be at hand.

  4. this does not apply to pakistanis only, those who are good citizens should have more generous incentives to leave a small number who are of great benefit could stay.

    • Let’s face the facts. The British government hates it’s own citizens, they’ve been treated horribly for centuries and they need a new class to subjugate.

      I wonder how long before the British monarchy is given an islamic Romanov treatment?

      • You make an excellent point. The British establishment has nothing but contempt for the British people – and that’s how it has always been. For instance, consider the terrible living and working conditions of the British working class during the mid 19th Century, and contrast that with the British establishment’s concern at the plight of black slaves.

        • Indeed, look at how Lord Kirtchener’s “pals brigades” were sent to their slaughter on the Somme. General Rowlinson’s pep talk to the troops before the assault included a reminder that any Tommy refusing to go over the top, or returning to the trenches would be shot on the spot.

          My Frau says the best of Britain left for America hundreds of years ago, the remainers are simply satisfied under subjugation.

  5. Three of the four terrorists who carried out the 7/7 bombings on the London transport network were British-born children of Pakistani immigrants.
    Are the measures outlined by El Ingles intended to apply only to those persons of Pakistani heritage and culture who were born overseas?

    • He actually said that Pakistanis were Pakistanis whether born in the UK or born in Pakistan.

      Its in their DNA and their culture. The only solution is to expel them. Other methods have failed.

  6. Britain is too weak to take even the mildest action towards self-preservation. How is it things have reached such a severe pass? Its a variant of the same new tradition of self-loathing best exemplified by Sweden, a fixed belief the world would be better off without Swedish, or British, identity. Its a psychopathic condition. Granted its far worse in Sweden.

    Even if only 5% of Pakistanis cannot be described in these terms, then leftists would contend this entire approach should be rejected out of hand. In other words, not even the mildest government measures against Pakistani criminality & violence will ever be deemed acceptable. This is not because they care more about anything in particular, they simply feel a wholehearted willingness to see Britain subside under escalating waves of extremely violent & criminal Pakistani behavior.

    What then becomes inevitable? As Western governments refuse to act when even the most dire & systematic attacks are inflicted on citizens, it will be up to ordinary citizens to act. Is not this obvious? Reprisal vigilante groups operating outside the law will become the new normal in Britain, likely long before 2030. Government inaction will lead to this as night follows day.

    Successful vigilantism will require that police and security agencies ordered to intervene will be attacked first so that reprisal attacks against the thousands of Pakistani rapists plying their merry trade with impunity can be hunted down and removed.

    • National Action already exist. I wouldn’r be surprised if an English National Liberation Army (ENLA) forms.

    • I too wonder, “How is it things have reached such a severe pass?”

      The dire economic conditions after World War II forced many Brits to emigrate—my family was among them. We came to Canada in 1953 when Britain, with its newly crowned queen, still exemplified patriotism, personal responsibility, and duty. Somehow, in the ten years since we left the old country because of extreme lack of opportunity for the common citizen, the British government found it necessary to start bringing in immigrants from parts of the former British empire.

      On my many trips back to Scotland, starting in the 1960s, I watched the country change. At first there were only a few Pakistani traders who found their way to the north where they were generally well regarded. But by the 1980s I began to hear grumblings about the conditions in London and Edinburgh, especially as they related to masses of immigrants with decidedly un-British ways. One theme was the exploitation of government benefits – the same government that couldn’t find housing for its own people just a couple of decades previously.

      Now the country has changed immensely. Scotland is showing as much politically correct looniness as England—not all of it related to multiculturalism. Think of Count Dankula’s criminal pug.

      I recently came across mention of Kriss Donald, the 15-year-old boy brutally tortured and murdered in Glasgow in 2004 by a gang of Pakistanis. I had read this before, but why is this atrocity not burned into our collective consciousness? Apparently the media at the time (and ever since) gave it little coverage.

      Britain now finds itself near to a crisis point. This series of reports by
      El Inglés helps crystallize the options for the country. Maintaining the status quo will lead to disaster.

      • Well said. There are decisions made that can only be assessed in the long term, except for the perceptive few. Thus, the decision to boot Churchill to the curb and to bring in a government dedicated to population replacement for the sake of votes/power changed the face of Britain, not to mention its heart and soul.

        We can see a similar process in the U.S., when the Dems cynically decided to do a volte-face and become the party of welfare, but welfare of the most pernicious kind. The rot we see in our cities now, which are owned in toto by the Dems, is alarming and unsustainable. For example, there are at least 4 high schools in Baltimore where not *one* student is educated to their grade level. An environment of despair, to put it lightly.

        I loathe the ruin socialism has caused in the West. The welfare state is a coffin.

        • The Trump Administration is pretty much the last chance to get things right. If he fails, it’s pretty much lights out for at least parts of the USA, with a best-case scenario being a split whereby the “blue” states end up rotting in their own self-inflicted misery.

          The funny thing is that many “blue” areas are economically successful, and “red” areas aren’t. But things aren’t as they seem: without the “red” values keeping the “blues” somewhat under control, they’d go to hell quite quickly. What saves them is what they’re against, perversely. Left to their own exclusive devices, they’d quickly go down the route of Venezuela.

        • My impressions, based on many years of travelling back to the UK and keeping in touch with friends and family there, is that the everyday working Brit didn’t think of their country as a socialist state; instead government welfare was seen as a welcome respite from decades (centuries, really) of harsh living conditions, rationing, poverty level wages, drafty houses, outdoor plumbing, and restricted educational prospects. Gradually through the later part of the 20th century life become much much easier—but there was a price to be paid for all this largesse.

          As you say, Dymphna, Britain’s heart and soul was diminished. Along with easier living came a seeming obsession with the trivialities of life—entertainment, films, TV, movie stars, fads, and fashion. This was indulged in to a degree far beyond that of the average North American. I observed that myself and have heard comments made to that effect.

          This led to to inattention to domestic political affairs. The opening was there to begin mass immigration. Coupled with that was the rise and imposition of only politically correct opinions. The die was cast.

          • The socialism in Britain is mainly in the cities and in Scotland and Wales. The majority of English people are Conservative – they have been subject to establishment gerrymandering and rendered powerless for the moment.

        • Churchill was voted out in 1945, not least because he was seen as a representative of the old class system, especially by servicemen who’d been at the receiving end of snobbish behaviour by the officer class.

          The postwar Labour government achieved great advances in the setting up of the NHS, universal free education and a huge expansion of affordable housing.

          Churchill was great defender of democracy and human rights, and the world- especially Europe- after WW2 would have been less free without him, but he was an imperfect mortal, like all of us.

          • And the current mess of the NHS could be seen in its origins. It will end in death and chaos…or rather, the deaths and chaos will continue until someone is brave enough to put an end to it.

            Affordable housing is not where anyone wants to live if they have a choice; in fact, “affordable” housing has contributed to the artificial rise in real estate costs. That, plus not making citizenship a prerequisite for owning real estate to begin with. But that’s a mistake made all through the West, including the U.S. [The Russians and Saudis may own much of London, but the Chinese are buying up Canada, Australia, and the U.S.]

            Every time I read about the NHS, it seems to be a story about what ails it and how to fix it. To wit,


            The horrible story about Alfie probably couldn’t happen elsewhere, though if Alfie were a late-term abortion here, and he happened to arrive breathing, he’d be left to die. IOW, every single Western culture has its failings. It’s just that Britain’s seem to be in technicolor…

            As for Churchill, he predicted (correctly) what would happen to Britain under socialism. Which is why so many Brits moved to Oz, post-war.

    • A few things contributed to this problem; loss of men of reproductive age in both World Wars, contraception and abortion becoming the new sacrament of the white race, thereby truncating their future growth, destruction of the family unit and the state as substitute (socialism), substituting the state for religion, i.e., Christianity as a source of identity, unit, guidance and strength, Queen Victoria allowing for all peoples of the British Empire, as members of the Commonwealth, to be immigrants to the United Kingdom without attempting to integrate and assimilate (see Enoch Powell’s famous speech), etc. Is that a start?

      • Yes, it’s a good start. But the loss of huge numbers of men of reproductive age has happened before and to other countries, without affecting their spirit and will to survive. Perhaps the loss for Britain was proportionately higher, or perhaps the loss was qualitatively greater as the fit, courageous, and intelligent put their lives on the line. Several generations of losing the best of males in high numbers is bound to negatively affect future generations—in many ways. And yes, allowing British subjects from throughout the Empire to freely immigrate to Britain with no requirements put upon them was an ill-thought-out decision.

  7. We have the plan, now for the will.

    It really is a question of them or us – Barbara, how does one compromise on that?

  8. While reading this – and the two previous episodes- I have had a continuous vision of leftists reading this and becoming apoplectic with self induced rage while they choke on their own Marxist jargon. It is a good vision. I can’t wait to see how Nick Lowles and the other usual suspects react. In general, I agree with what has been proposed.

    There will be many problems, initially the removal of the entire UK political establishment who are so immersed in Cultural Marxism they wouldn’t be able to get past an unrestrained emission of “Waycism.”

    I think at least one of the above respondents cannot accept how bad Pakistani men are but I can vouch for the fact that El Ingles has presented a fairly accurate picture. I spent some time in Pakistan and also lived in West London for many years, 20 of which were in Hayes in Middlesex, not far from the infamous enclave of Southall. I went back to London over Christmas 2017/18 and all I saw in Southall were hairy faced men wearing maternity smocks. Not a pretty sight and ,if you are in the USA, coming to a place near you.

    • One thing is certain. If one looks at how the lefties and remainiacs behaved over the Brexit Referendum result. They are STILL not accepting it and still moaning and complaining but there’s one thing – we can see them for what they are.

      I predict that the Great Expulsion of Pakistani muslims will start within the next ten years. The left being their usual selves will side entirely with the muslims and will be severely dealt with. All it takes is a strong leader.

      • “A strong leader”. Strong leaders are dangerous. What it takes is a distributed network of people willing to take care of their little patch. The rest will happen organically. Strong opposition leaders in the UK are dealt with.

        • I’m sorry Dymphna, but it’s a strong leader that’s needed. Maybe not forever, but certainly during troubled times.

          • No. Under classic guerilla theory, a strong leader is an inviting target for assassination or arrest and execution. You need several distributed cells, all of like minds. The IRA is a model for a successful insurgency in an advanced Western state. That is my concern. The insistence of Western governments on committing genocide against their own people is just not going to end well for anybody.

          • “Troubled times” is when a strong leader is most vulnerable. What’s necessary is distributed cells. The Communists understood that quite well, as does a modern bureaucracy. If you depend on one person, especially against an entrenched bureaucratic police state (which increasingly describes Britain), that one person can be easily taken out. Ask Tommy Robinson.

  9. Won’t you make an exception for Christian Pakistanis, at least? And, perhaps, for other religious minorities whose suffering in Pakistan you have so graphically described.

    • And don’t forget x,y, and z, oh yes, and what about deserving a, b, and c? Etc etc etc

    • You can’t. We’ve already had 7/7, Lee Rigby, Manchester, London Bridge attacks and of course over 1 million English children forced into child sex grooming gangs.

      Pakistani’s are made in the image of the devil, they must go or be forced out. There is no compromise now.

      • Manchester was bombed by a Libyan. Lee Rigby’s murderer looks to black to be Pakistani but I’m not sure where he’s from.

        In the first part of this essay the writer states than when he writes Pakistani he’s referring to Muslim Pakistanis. Therefore, if not stated otherwise, this measures apply only to Muslims. The Christians and Hindus should stay.

        • I believe Lee Rigby’s murderers were from Nigeria. As with the others, his ultimate murderer was Blair.

    • He has already explained that the term Paki is used to mean Pakistani muslim. The Pakistani non muslims will not be affected.

      • Though this is indeed easy to overlook, we must admit. Perhaps communication of the plan and the reasons for it deserve a little honing still.

    • No. That is the equivalent of permitting the camel to stick its nose into your tent, a tent that you must keep free of intuders. On that path you open the door to all sorts of variations on a theme, none of which will be to your benefit.

    • Indeed. That document is somewhere in the dead letter office. Kind of like the Christian churches; or rather, the ones that Henry didn’t tear down immediately in his greed and lust for power. Now a church edifice is a signal to the literati that there is some vanishingly small remainder of fools who didn’t get the memo about Science.

        • @ECAW

          Your legal protections will evaporate, no matter what. They will either be taken away by the imposition of sharia, or they will be at least reduced by whatever authoritarian regime emerges to resist the sharia.

          There are no other choices.

          Our situation is similar to that of the Hindus who eventually became Sikhs, and violently resisted the Islamic invasion.

          Will we develop our own version of Sikhism? Or will we simply become the European version of Persia/Afghanistan/Pakistan/Indonesia?

          • Baron – I do not disagree with anything you say here. My point – too cryptically expressed, for which I apologise – was solely about El Ingles’ lack of interest in the legal and constitutional implications of his proposals. This is what he wrote:

            “The observant reader will note that we provide very few details as to the exact legislation that would need to be passed to facilitate the program we describe. There are two reasons for this. The first is that we have no legal background, and are not well-equipped to say a great deal on this front at all. The second, and more important reason, is that laws are human constructs and that a British state committed to driving out the Pakistanis will construct whatever laws it needs to bring about that end. The details of how exactly this is to be done are not of any particular interest to us.”

            I think the details of how exactly this is to be done should be of interest to anyone making such proposals. El Ingles is being irresponsible, indeed reckless, simply dismissing them. Like him I know little of our legal system and constitution but I believe he would have to drive a coach and horses through them to achieve his aims.

            He is like Pandora telling us “Go for it guys. Never mind what’s in the box. You’ve got nothing to lose but your Pakis”. We have much to lose including the civil protections which have been incrementally added to our constitution since the time of Alfred. It seems unavoidable that, as in any war (we just have to accept that we are in one, like it or not) our liberties will be curtailed or even slashed, but I think El Ingles should at least address the issue.

            I know even less about the US Constitution, only that Americans revere it. If you were to make similar proposals about the Somalis of Dearborn and elsewhere I expect that you would at least consider which parts of your constitution would have to be jettisoned before you got on with the job. Am I wrong?

          • No, you are not wrong. And the constitutional process that would be necessary has already been worked out: the first step is an amendment that specifically designates Islam as a political ideology, and not a religion. This would remove its protected status under the First Amendment, and after that certain actions could be taken.

            The problem is that this will never happen. The whole country is mesmerized by the comforting image of a husband wearing his dress and beanie, the wife wearing her hijab, and the dear wee Muslim bairns, all smiling and making this a wonderful multicultural paradise. We will not let go of this dangerous fantasy until the problem is too late to solve by normal means.

            At least, that’s my prediction. I’m too old to live to see the dénouement, so I’ll never know whether I was right or not.

  10. Cut welfare payments;

    Deport all criminals (if they’re already citizens take their citizenship away);

    Deport those who never worked;

    Deport those who can’t speak basic English;

    Stop all immigration visas to MUSLIM Pakistanis (non muslim Pakistanis should be considered refugees, real refugees);

    That will do the trick and will not be unfair to that minority of Pakistanis who actually value living in a country that is not like, well… Pakistan.

  11. How about this compromise: Everybody who claims he knows a good Paki gets to keep him under his own personal protection. Under condition of assuming full liability for any consequences.

    • That’s a bit like expecting all those who (say they) appreciate multiculturalism to live amongst it.

      • Wasn’t it already Tony Blair who said in an angry blurt at critics that he wanted to “rub their noses in diversity”, while being a prototype of those who don’t actually have to endure the consequences themselves. It would teach a lot of people a much needed lesson in reality. Of course, it will never happen precisely because of that.

  12. The authorities did not ask for our opinion when they brought in migrants. They do not speak to us. We know about what happens only from indirect references. The only way out is civil disobedience or partisan warfare.
    Or nominate politicians who will voice the opinion of the population. True, they can be imprisoned on charges of inciting hatred.

  13. I think all of Europe is too far gone down the rabbit hole. War is the only recourse left against the inevitable anti-white genocide that is being prepared (don’t believe me? The language eminating from the intelligentsia is disturbingly similar to Nazi propaganda in the 1930s). I actually believe that if caught and charged with terrorism, a white guy and his sharp lawyer could make quite a strong case for the act being a political act of defensive warfare, under the UN definitions of incitement to genocide and willful population replacement. The International Left has pushed many white Europeans into a corner
    The result will now be blood. History os a harsh teacher, and I weep in horror at what will surely come. But I see no other way out for Europeans. They are being given a choice: shut up and accept the torture of your young girls and the annihilation of your home, or fight. I admit that this situation may always simply have been beyond the capacity of the current political structures to solve. It is folly to assume that any political system is universally effective. I am not even sure this was ever rectifiable under any Western political order. But it will resolve itself somehow, some day.

    • [Intemperate recommendations redacted]. Speaking like this will become more acceptable in the years to come, as political correctness is dying.

      Brexit really may be sabotaged by keeping UK in the EU customs union. If that happens, added to the relative inaction on mass rapes of white British girls, & Islamic violence morphing from terror attacks to the current steady drip drip of jihad knife / acid / other attacks… all this escalating betrayal of Britain by the elites makes some kind of explosive reaction probable.

  14. A fellow once had a mole that took up residence underneath his bedroom window. The ugly stinky mole found no one annoyed him about his residence and thus he carried on in his ugly stinky way. Sometimes the ugly stinky mole would make a bit of noise and become extra effluent if he didn.t like our music or our food odors did not appeal to his diet of slugs and worms and Spring would bud a flower or two and the mole would be an extra annoying bugger. Well, one day we decided we couldn’t get rid of the ugly but we could rid ourselves of the stinky so we called the extermination man. He told us we don’t kill them anymore we find those who are kind enough to adopt and don’t mind the stink. Amazed we asked who could these people possibly be. He whispered in our ear and I blushed…….

  15. As noted, El Ingles specifically excludes Pakistani Christians from his expulsion of Pakistanis plan. This leads us, if one also considers the behaviour of Albanians (Muslim), Arab-Muslims, Turks (Muslims), Bangladeshis (Muslim), Nigerians (Muslim) and Indian (Muslims) inexorably to the conclusion that it is Islam that is the problem.

    Enforcing the existing laws against polygamy would be a huge and uncontroversial step in the right direction. One that involved no State violence or erosion of civil liberties. The program would be greatly furthered by the exclusion into the UK of anybody who espoused/supported/subscribed to a religion that permitted polygamy.

    Add to these measures a legal ban on first cousin marriages, with rigorous enforcement of the ban backed up by punitive measures such as the permanent removal of malfeasors and the offspring of such marriages from the safety net of the welfare state, including health and education, one has a solution.

Comments are closed.