You might have heard the “Islamists” are taking over Europe and they are starting here

Anyone who knows Tower Hamlets will be surprised to hear about it being a terrifying “no-go areas” for non-Muslims.

In case you don’t know where Tower Hamlets is, you are in it when you visit the Tower of London, or cross over Tower Bridge. Brick Lane, Bethnal Green, Victoria Park, and Canary Whalf in Docklands are all in Tower Hamlets.

When my son got a job in London last year, I encouraged him to move into the borough because of the proximity to his place of work and the bus network. And because I knew it would be a great place to live.

It’s been 25 years since I worked in the borough, and I had a network of friends who lived and worked there, so perhaps I’m a little out of date. Has it transformed into a terrible place?

Do I need to tell you that my son and I are not Muslims and are as white and as English as it is possible to be?

Actually, I spoke to my son today. He lives very near Bromley by Bow tube station, and he described the area as “gentrified.”

Three of them are renting a flat for over £2,500 pcm, and it isn’t gold-plated. On top of that, they have to pay bills, food, travel costs, and so on.

The average price of a flat in the borough is £521k according to Rightmove, and the typical semidetached house is well over £1 million. And it isn’t cheap to rent a room there either.

Would people pay all that money to live in a “No-Go” area?

Let’s step back and examine the claim made by Paul Scully MP that parts of Tower Hamlets in east London are “no-go areas” for white people and/or non-Muslims.

In a later interview, Scully:

• apologised for his use of the words but also
• doubled down on his views that non-Muslims are intimidated in areas of Tower Hamlets

He claims that in the recent past (if not today), there were Muslim patrols in the area that intimidated and scared people who didn’t share the same religious beliefs.

Scully says:

“If I’ve spoken mistakenly or created division then I apologise, but there are a handful of people who will always seek offence, and there are people who come in behind that.

“This isn’t about tropes. There is no doubt there are people in this country that are fearful of going out not just because of Muslim gangs but because of other gangs.”

Mr. Scully doesn’t live in or near the area, and his constituency isn’t in or near the area. It seems he probably doesn’t know Tower Hamlets at all but had heard some stuff and swallowed the story.

Did I send my son to live in a NO-GO area for WHITE NON-MUSLIMS?

And a racist disaster zone?

Demographics of Tower Hamlets

There’s been a substantial Muslim population in Tower Hamlets for a number of decades:

• It is the most
• Unemployment and social deprivation are higher than average.
• The largest Bangladeshi population in the country — 35%
• The  — 40% ( a rise from 36% in 2001)
• Only 6.5% of the national population are Muslim.

However, other statistics prove that the large Muslim population doesn’t scare other minority groups away. In fact, people choose to live in the culturally diverse area.

• The grew by 22% between 2002 to 2021, to number 122k residents — proving brown Muslims don’t scare away white people!
• The 2021 census identified 1,341 Jewish people (0.4%) and roughly 10,000 people who identified as Sikh, Buddhist, or Hindu. It’s a multi-cultural and religiously diverse area.
• 27% have no religion, and 22% are Christians.
• The large is far bigger than the national average. It suggests LGBTQ people positively choose to move into the borough because they feel safe and confident to be open about their identity when living in the area

The raw census statistics only confirm what anyone knows if they know Tower Hamlets. It’s vibrant. People want to live there.

For nefarious reasons of politics or money, various bad actors are stirring up division.

No one in Tower Hamlets is going to fall for it, but perhaps if you live far away, perhaps, you will believe this made-up fiction about the dangerous Islamists who are taking over.

I tell you the scare stories are fiction!

I’m a middle-aged white Anglo-Saxon living in England, and I still hold dear some of the things about right and wrong that I learned as a child.

In particular this:

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” Edmund Burke

And this is why I can’t watch people stoke division and hatred without speaking out.

I attended the village church as a child, was baptised and confirmed, and attended Christian schools. In all ways, I had a typical English upbringing.

Most of my extended family is just like me. Most folks married other white Anglo-Saxons just like us. A few have married Muslim immigrants from various countries, so we’ve welcomed Muslims into the wider family.

And through that family member, even as a child, I knew that the Muslims shared the same bible stories with us, from Adam and Eve to Jesus.

Back then, I wasn’t interested to know any more about Islam. It just didn’t figure in my childish thoughts.

Throughout my adult life, I’ve had various reasons to interact closely with Muslims, particularly through work when I lived in London, but they’ve also been neighbours and generally in my community.

Today, there are 3.9 million Muslims who make up 6.5% of the UK population.

Where do Brits go to enjoy the sun, apart from Spain?

Brits visit Turkey and the Muslim countries of North Africa: Egypt, Tunisia, Morocco, Gambia.

Like many British people, I’ve traveled in Muslim countries where I’ve found the people to be most:

• friendly,
• welcoming,
• hospitable
• caring

I’ve been particularly impressed by the people I’ve met in those countries and how safe I’ve felt in Muslim countries.

I’m not Muslim, and I’ve not married a Muslim, but I’ve had enough positive interaction with many Muslims in this country and others to dismiss the Islamaphobic nonsense — it jut doesn’t match my real lived experience.

We Brits aren’t frightened by stories of Islamists threatening our freedom because it is not happening — it doesn’t match with our real-world experience.

We’re aware of the Taliban, ISIS, Iran, and Afghanistan, not all Muslims are like that. In fact, I’m aware of wacky Christian extremists and terrorists as well, and I know they aren’t typical of Christians.

The rise of this story about Muslim No-Go areas is part of a rise in anti-Muslim sentiment expressed at the highest levels in British society. Blatent falsehoods and racism appears in our media frequently. Consider why that might be.

If you are interested: the idea of .

What do you think?

Please leave a comment

Do politicians represent their constituents and prioritise the interests of the British people? Have the strict rules about funding failed us?

Only today a friend said to me — why has Keir Starmer accepted £50,000 from Israel? Why would he do that? And what does Israel stand to gain? And why isn’t it illegal?

He’s the leader of the opposition party and poised to become our next Prime Minister — why would he do that?

That’s such a good question.

I stress — this article isn’t about the Middle East situation. I want to understand the hows and whys that mean UK politicians appear to accept money from foreign lobbying organisations.

For one thing, we have the NEW National Security Act 2023, which is supposed to protect the UK from espionage, interference in the political system, sabotage, and assassination.

I’d like to think we were already protected from those things.

It doesn’t seem like it should be legal for foreign governments to give money to British politicians, but we’ve all that rumour, so is it true? And is it legal?

As a British citizen and parent, can I trust our politicians to have the best interests of the country at heart when they make decisions?

It’s tempting to think that even though Tories & Labour promote different paths, most of our elected representatives do at least want a prosperous and safe future for all our people — they just think there are different ways to achieve that goal.

Of course, there might be a few mistakes made and a few rotten apples — surely, we have a very robust system to safeguard us from corruption.

I’d like to think we can trust in the overall integrity of the British democratic political system that has developed over hundreds of years.

I’d like to think that — They Work For Us — but am I wrong?

Now, I’m not accusing anyone of corruption — I really don’t know. It just makes you wonder, though, how some of those politicians have made their money since being elected.

It is not just me asking this. In recent years, I’ve seen many ask the same question:

Politicians: Whose interests are they really representing? Are they really there to fill their own pockets and take the perks of free travel abroad?

• We’re wondering about the profits.
• Private companies work for a profit.
• So, who gets to pocket the profit?
• Who shares in the profit?

Who benefits when governments place lucrative big contracts

• with organisations to supply PPE,
• or Barges to house asylum seekers,
• or the software that runs our post office accounting system?

Where do the profits go that are made by essential utility companies?

• when the cost of heating our homes has soared
• and people live in freezing cold homes because they struggle to pay the bills
• but they still have to pay a massive standing charge even if they don’t use any electricity or gas at all.

Why do water companies pay out millions in dividends?

• when our sewage system has not been updated for decades
• and spills untreated sewage into rivers and seas
• so they aren’t fit for swimming.
• And it never used to be like this!

We know some people and companies are creaming big profits from British taxpayers without delivering a stellar service.

• It is questionable how some of these companies win these big contracts.
• We do hope our politicians aren’t involved in these grubby little deals.
• Same for our local councillors and civil servants.

Politicians Work For Us — Don’t They?

Pretty much everything about our politicians is not secret but open to public scrutiny.

The websitemakes it very easy to track individual voting records and extra jobs, and other income, along with donations they received and travel funded by benefactors.

I’m not going to say they are corrupt because I really don’t know. I’m just saying I’m not confident that they make decisions for us or for themselves. Politicians have an image problem. We don’t trust them!

Let me introduce you to:

The Corruption Perceptions Index

The CPI is a very useful global indicator, but it is limited to experts’ and businesspeople’s perceptions of corruption in the public sector.

At the time of writing, even though the UK is perceived to be among the better countries of the world (i.e. Less corrupt than many), we’re warned:

“Public trust in government is worryingly low after a string of political “sleaze” and , which showcased how easily political access could be bought by private interests and exposed loopholes that let public officials .”

It is bad enough to think that perhaps people in powerful positions award big contracts because of personal connections and for personal gain.

How that might work:

Personal Financial Benefits for UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak:

Here is just an example of the problem. Sunak’s family sees huge wealth moving into their personal bank accounts because of government decisions.

• The PM’s wife has a 0.91% stake in her family’s IT business Infosys and received dividends of £13m in 2023.
• The UK public sector paid Infosys £4.7million in 2022 (Tussell for LBC) and increased that by 50% in the following year.
• Shell Oil is a major client for Infosys.
• And while , he also appears .

Lobbying the Right Honourable Members of Parliament

There are safeguards — the UK isn’t ruled by one person so the fact that we elect over 600 MPs SHOULD counterbalance individual interests.

But does it?

Dig deeper, and you find:

Oil companies, petrostates, climate contrarian think tanks, businessmen, and unions have given at least £5m to MPs over the past 10 years in the form of donations, expenses-paid trips, salaries, and gifts.

Details at this link:

And:

Now, I think it is OK that big businesses might fund the education of public servants through expenses-paid trips and conferences.

I don’t think that’s necessarily suspicious and wrong.

But there has to be balance and some way to ensure businesses can’t have too much pressure.

But look,

“”

Is it way out of hand?

Most of these MPs aren’t scientists and can’t be expected to “do your own research” in their spare time to the level required to gain an informed and balanced view when faced with a well-funded barrage of information from one side.

What About All Expenses Paid Trips Abroad?

I’d love one. Thanks for asking.

Look most families in the UK can’t afford trips a broad on any regular basis but politicians get to enjoy trips paid by foreign companies and foreign governments and that’s perfectly legal!

And it is not just a bit of fun, it’s a real problem:

To show the scale of this problem in Azerbaijan, Russia and Bahrain. It finds:

At least £333,000 spent on flights and accommodation for British parliamentarians to visit Azerbaijan between 2007 and 2017–84 per cent of which was paid for by the government or lobbyists and institutions connected to the regime

12 British MPs’ paid at least £93,700 in total to appear on Russian state TV since 2014

Two UK parliamentarians provided advisory services to the King of Bahrain, including when the country engaged in a brutal crackdown of Arab Spring protests in 2011…

Transparency International argues that when British parliamentarians are influenced by foreign interests it can:

Undermine the credibility of those who engage in these activities.

Undermine efforts of other parliamentarians, UK Government departments and NGO’s to pursue democratic change in repressive states.

Harm the UK’s standing and reputation as a beacon of democracy and a defender of the rule of law.

Why Are You talking about Holidays and Oil and not Israel?

Fair question — it’s a way to obviously explain the issue of conflicting interests using the political party that is in power and our prime minister with information that’s widely known and understood.

We can understand why a company might lobby politicians, why politicians take their money and gifts and expenses-paid trips, and why that might be a problem but isn’t always a bad thing.

Now, let’s talk about

Can Politicians Accept Money from Foreign Countries?

No. They can’t.

In general politicians and political parties pretty much can’t take money from foreign companies, governments, or individuals. .

• There that mean .
• And cheating will be even .
• So, foreign money could find its way as a donation to a political party despite the rules against it.

NOTE: I am NOT suggesting any politician IS accepting illegal FOREIGN MONEY

We have great public records here in the UK, and we can examine the funding of our politicians.

The Pro-Israel Funding of the British Labour Party

Using public information, John McEvoy investigated the funding links between the pro-Israel campaigners and the British Labour Party.

He uncovered:

from pro-Israel lobbyists,

of which

£50,000 was a donation to fund Keir Starmer’s leadership campaign.

McEvoy concluded that Israel has a significant level of influence in British politics.

Over 20% of all sitting Labour MPs, 41 individuals, since becoming MPS have accepted funds from Pro-Israel lobbyists, including:

•  — whose source of funding is unclear,
• pro-Israel figures in the business community, such as ,
• the Israeli Ministry for Foreign Affairs, which funds trips to Israel and is within the rules — over 50 trips have been funded

Chinn and his father before him were key funders and promotors of the Zionist movement. He has been involved in funding select key individuals in the Labour and the Conservative party.

The figure of £280k above doesn’t include all the pro-Israel funding for the Labour Party.

For example, it doesn’t include this:

.

There has been an historic link between large donors to the party and wealthy benefactors also belonging to the Labour Friends of Israel.

However, wealthy businesspeople who happen to support Israel may also have many other political concerns and interests. It is wrong to assume that their sole reason for helping the Labour Party is to influence politics on one issue.

So, to be clear, it isn’t that Starmer or the Labour Party are accepting illegal money from a foreign country (not as far as I know) but they openly accept legitimate funding from UK-based/British pro-Israel lobbyists.

But WHY would the Labour Party accept money from Pro-Israel groups?

Because they can?

Because

• Some members already supported the Israel project, and others were open-minded to visit the country.
• We in the UK have heard great stories about Jewish kibbutz, I’m sure many people would have been curious to visit.
• And that open-minded curiosity is a really good thing.
• To build international alliances
• Political parties are funded by donors
• Funding from unions and membership has decreased.

But now, why is Starmer accepting the pro-Israel funds? my friend asked.

Why does anyone do anything?

Starmer’s Labour Party need the cash.

Follow the money…

Anyone who has followed the ups and downs of the Labour Party over the past few years will know that the party was financially sound with good reserves and a massive membership in 2019.

In record time, it found itself plunging into a financial abyss, losing funds from unions and from individual members who didn’t support the new direction and lurch to the right of the Labour Party under Starmer.

Three in April 2022, two years after Keir Starmer became leader in April 2020.

The most obvious reason for Labour’s financial difficulties is the loss of income as the party membership contracts.

When Starmer was elected 550,000 members were paying between £2.34 to £4.67 a month.

By July 2023, the membership had fallen to less than 400,000. That is a substantial loss of income each year.

…self-inflicted loss stems from the loss of trade union funding.

As trade unions didn’t like the direction of travel either. The jump to the right was huge as Starmer abandoned Labour’s traditional support for the workers and poorer sections of society.

Starmer’s leadership chose to forfeit large sums of money for the sake of gaining an advantage over its left-wing opponents.

An example is a £600,000 out of court settlement of a libel action. According to the Guardian, £180,000 of that sum went directly in damages to the BBC journalist John Ware and seven former Labour officials who had appeared as star witnesses in his Panorama documentary “Is Labour Antisemitic?”

By all accounts, there was no case to answer. Had it gone to court, the Labour Party wouldn’t have lost the case. The party wasn’t antisemitic, and Corbynistas would have been exonerated.

In other words, it was politically expedient for Pro-Israel lobbyists or careerists in the labour party to settle that court case — because doing so:

• damned Corbyn and his supporters as antisemitic.
• supported the spurious idea that Ware had uncovered antisemitism in the Labour Party.
• gave support for the witchhunt and expelling of leftwing party members who supported Corbyn
• or who supported the Palestinian cause or were anti-Zionist such as members of Jewish Voice for Labour

Before 2020, there have always been Zionists and anti-Zionists co-existing within the party. Anti-Zionism never used to mean antisemitism, this is a new definition.

Under the new leader, funds were wasted on an expensive and controversial witchhunt against antisemitism. The end result:

• safeguards Starmer’s seat at the top and kick his opponents out of the party.
• the Labour Party has embraced a that doesn’t allow any criticism of Israel.
• the old party has effectively ceased to exist — gone is the broad church that included leftwing members and those who were pro-Palestine and/or anti-Zionist.
• the old rules were torn up, and many longstanding members were expelled.
• many , because criticism of Israel is not allowed in Starmer’s party and is considered antisemitic.
• support of Israel has become an essential condition for membership for the first time in the party’s history.

Starmer’s takeover of the Labour Party has been a coup.

The pro-Israel supporters who’ve been able to step in to fund Labour have arguably been essential for the ongoing existence of the party. The party is beholden to its pro-Israel supporters.

CONCLUSION

Here on Medium Bob Pitt says there’s another way to consider the donors issue. He says the real story is that recent donors to the Labour Party are significantly more rightwing that Corbyn was and they are coughing up the cash because they believe Starmer shares their vision.

The Canary and conspiracies (pt 2) – the case of Keir’s campaign funding

I don’t know if anything underhand is going on, but having free holidays and bunce money from some kind of allegiance to a foreign flag just isn’t a good look.

Any flag — not specifically Israel.

The UK is one of the richest countries in the world. It shouldn’t leave itself open to allegations of bribery and corruption over what is actually very small sums of money in the grand scheme of things, even though it is a lot to individuals.

And then there is the question of how political parties are funded. Substantial sums have come from a list of wealthy donors (who are or may be also strongly pro-Israel, or pro-Oil, or in denial about climate change).

Such as does depend on the leadership’s stance on Israel.

This isn’t a new issue and it’s not just a Labour Party matter.

In the dying days of the last Labour government in 2009 a spotlight was turned on the for the political party via its wealthy members being £10 million over eight years, a figure that was disputed. Along with allegations that the donations come with strings and influence.

What do you think about the issues I raise?

Is there a danger of foreign countries influencing British politics via funding?

Please leave comments and links to articles or your own writings.

If you enjoyed reading this:

Here on Medium Greg Hadfield has written much about the wars within the Labour Party. For instance, he has written about the huge influence of Lord Sainsbury who has been both a Friend of Israel and a major source of funding directed at influencing the direction of the Labour Party.

You might like to read more of my writing:

Terrorists, Race, and Religion: the Bad Guys in Films | by Hel P! | calamity countdown: it’s serious | Feb, 2024 | Medium

World War Three — When Did it Start? | by Hel P! | calamity countdown: it’s serious | Jan, 2024 | Medium

Israel and Palestine Ripping the World Apart | by Hel P! | calamity countdown: it’s serious | Jan, 2024 | Medium

Foreign Bribes & UK Politics was originally published in calamity countdown: it’s serious on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

The terrorists who refused to cooperate with the Imperial occupier forced the brutal colonial regime out of Kenya

How history will judge current world leaders and their actions: Putin? Netanyahu? Biden? Others?

And what about the people currently called terrorists? Will the world’s bad guys get a make over and become heroes after all?

When history is written by the victors — are we on the right or wrong side of history.

I can’t predict the future but I know what’s happened in the past.

You don’t have to go too far back in history to find many examples of lies and corruption at the highest levels that eventually become exposed.

And many criminals, trouble makers, and “terrorists” are celebrated when they are redefined as heroes, freedom fighters, and national leaders such as Ho Chi Minh, Sukarno, Michael Collins in Ireland, Garibald in Italy, Begin in Israel, Suu Kyi, Gandhi, and Mandela

Nelson Mandela in South Africa

Nelson Mandela might be the most famous man of the twentieth century who rose through the ranks from terrorist to the elevated position of President of South Africa. He didn’t change, but society did. He spent 27 years in prison and international pressure, including sanctions and boycotts forced Africa to abandon apartheid.

Mehdi E. wrote about Mandela the terrorist here:

http://jeetwincasinos.com/lessons-from-history/why-was-nelson-mandela-considered-a-terrorist-3d3034ffbe14

Jomo Kenyatta in Kenya

You’ve heard about Mandela and apartheid.

But you probably haven’t heard about the resistance fighters who sought to overthrow the brutal British colonial regime in Kenya.

In 1953, the Kapenguria Six were (wrongly) sentenced for leading the Mau Mau uprising. One of the convicted men was Jomo Kenyatta, who, in the 1960s, became the Prime Minister and then the President.

British Occupation meant Violence in Kenya

It can’t be overstated just how awful the British were in Kenya or how many people they killed. The transatlantic slave trade is well known, but few people are aware of the shameful behavior of the British on the African continent.

The British conquered the Kenyan land in the late nineteenth century “scramble for Africa”. A few years later, settlers arrived, taking great swathes of land — the prime agricultural land — into their own private ownership, thereby disrupting traditional ways of living and land usage..

The British ruthlessly imposed a new way of life as if the natives had no right to use the land as they had previously done. With lives uprooted and land fenced in, the indigenous people were forced to work for low wages.

The African Reserves and Rise of Mau Mau

Over time, the people were gathered into “reserves” (the African Reserves formalized in 1926), where the imperialist masters governed their entire lives and movements. They were enslaved on the African continent.

The Mau Mau were an outlawed resistance movement.

The Mau Mau were not one or two leaders but thousands of people — rural peasants who wanted control over their live and access to land.

In the new British Channel 4 documentary, A Very British Way of Torture, we see how, at the time, the British described the Mau Mau as terrorists and devils, using language that demonized and dehumanized them, which also helped to make violence against them tolerable.

The Mau Mau fought back against brutal oppression for years, but by the late 1950s, depending on your viewpoint, they appeared defeated, and it seemed hopeless.

It turned out this wasn’t true.

Terrorists made the African Colonial Project Too Costly

Keeping the rebels down was costly, and the relentless resistance over many years made lasting occupation an unattractive and unviable proposition.

Eventually, the financial burden of suppressing the Kenyans simply didn’t stack up. In addition, pressure was mounting inside the British government because it knew an unacceptable torture regime was being used in Kenya’s prison camps, which resulted in injuries and deaths.

Public Face and Moral High Ground

They were sitting on a potentially huge damaging scandal if it came out the the British was behind systematic torture. People were tortured to death. Men were castrated. People were blinded.

There were thousands of people, suffering inhuman torture, and it’s estimated 20,000 Kenyans died. It isn’t possible to come up with a true figure for the numbers who died.

Legitimacy

All this torture was because some people rejected the legitimacy of the British to seize all the land and they refused to cooperate in the imperial project.

The British withdrew, and Kenya achieved independence on 12 December 1963.

Freedom Fighters Won In Africa

From around the world, resistance fighters against colonial oppression can draw encouragement from the Mau Mau because it shows results are possible from a seemingly hopeless position. It show what can be achieved by sticking together.

They certainly aren’t the only natives who eventually drove out the occupiers.

The impact of colonialism and resistance has been huge and lasting.

In Kenya, the land was only under colonial rule for seven decades. It was long enough to

• destroy how people had once lived;
• wipe out families and communities;
• murder countless people;
• displace people

The .

In 2013, to 5,228 elderly Kenyans who had suffered torture and abuse at the hands of the British.

Britain paid an out-of-court settlement and admitted no liability.

Keeping the case out of court helped to keep much of the details of the barbaric torture camps out of the focus of the media and the public. Full details are in the Channel 4 video, A Very British Way of Torture.

I’d encourage you to read these by Kenyan writers on Medium:

Of Mau Mau Rebellion and my mother’s birthday | by Judy Wanjiku Jørgensen | Medium

Kenyan Independence: Appreciating the Mau Mau | by Diva Shah | Medium

Myself, I studied Kenya as a university student in 1980s London. That’s also when I came across the fiction of Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o, in the public library. Hungry for insight, I devoured his novels and I have since bought my own copies of them. He wrote vivid stories set in those times.

CONCLUSION

I am delighted the dark days of Kenya under colonial rule isn’t getting forgotten or brushed to one side.

The details are being explored and shared so that we can understand why such terrible events took place and guard against such evils occurring again.

Living through events is very different than viewing thing them from a far off distant place.

It appears that certain sadistic people are attracted to those posts where they can torture without any restraint and people higher up are willing to cover up such horrific deeds if it will reflect badly on them or their organisation.

We must reject the bland sanitizing of Kenyan history.

• There was a brutal invasion at the end of the 19th century.
• The British stayed by force and manipulation.
• They had cruel sadists in key positions who would do things most people couldn’t.
• They had a divide and rule strategy of promoting a few natives to do the dirty work and labelling a section of people as “loyalists” when they were not.
• The rebels were too great to silence. Thousands stood together in the face of torture and death because life under colonial rule was that bad.
• The colonizers were forced out by the continued resistance.

The British did not willingly end their colonial project. They didn’t willingly end the occupation of Africa. They didn’t graciously hand over power to local people.

The British were forced out of Africa by the heroic resistance of thousands of ordinary local people who were expected to exist in intolerable conditions. If you know Kenyan history, there is no other way to read it.

Civilised or Savages: Natives or Terrorists? was originally published in calamity countdown: it’s serious on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.