Why the UK repels all boarders from the Euroland of no borders

AFTER losing Calais – England’s last possession in France – in 1558, just before a lethal dose of flu did for her notoriously bloody reign, Queen Mary I bemoaned, ‘When I am dead, you will find Calais engraved upon my heart’.

British monarchs aren’t often remiss at losing things. That said, fumbling King John dropped the crown jewels in The Wash, while Britain lost its American colonies under George III and Lord North was forced to quit as Prime Minister (David Cameron take note if the Scots vote ‘Aye’ in Thursday’s referendum).

Meanwhile, for four-and-a-half centuries Calais hasn’t featured on UK plc’s bucket list… until now. And it’s not that we want it back – it’s the French who want us back.

Not, I hasten to add, to repossess our ancient toehold in continental Europe, but to help stem a near floodtide of illegal immigrants using the port as a springboard for cross-Channel flits to what they perceive as the Eldorado of Ingleterre.

A dozen years ago, when a similar crisis exploded over the refugee camp at Sangatte, the French government shut it and disperse the mainly Kosovan occupants besieging the Eurotunnel entrance.

However, that typical example of quick-fix, Gallic short-termism was no solution to the challenge of what to do with displaced people from greatly afflicted, far-off lands, believing only the West – especially Britain – offered hope and salvation.

Hence, all France achieved was to move the problem a few kilometres down the coast where it resurfaced in Calais.

GATECRASHERS: Angry asylum-seekers and illegal migrants try to storm a barrier at Calais

GATECRASHERS: Angry asylum seekers and illegal migrants try to storm a barrier at Calais

So now ugly, daily scenes there see wannabe migrants – estimated at 1,500 and mostly Eritreans, Somalis, Sudanese and Afghans – try to clamber aboard lorries, caravans, booze-cruise vans and even into the boots of tourists’ cars, desperate to bid au revoir to France and hello to Britain.

Pouring in at an accelerating rate, they are overwhelming police, infuriating once sympathetic locals and fuelling a far-Right backlash.

Meanwhile, despite advanced detection technology – including carbon dioxide and heart-beat sensors, plus sniffer dogs – each day the situation worsens and 10 to 15 migrants evade the security cordon and make it through.

In their frenzied lust for freedom, the stateless ones have also refined their tactics. Last week, at least a hundred stampeded through the port, overwhelming guards and forcing one ferry to pull up its ramp and stop loading vehicles.

Freight trucks are the prime target. En route to the embarkation quays, they are pelted with stones to slow them down, so escapees can more easily scramble inside or beneath.

Truckers, who face hefty fines in Britain if caught with migrants hiding in their cargo bays, are retaliating, many now using refrigerated vehicles with stronger walls and padlocked doors.

‘But such lorries are more expensive to buy and run,’ complained a Turkish driver.

As Calais – which sees 12 million tourists and 1.9 million trucks pass through each year – hunkers down under siege, it, too, is counting the cost.

UK MUST PAY: Local mayor, Natacha Bouchart says Calais's problem is caused by Britain's 'soft' welfare state

UK MUST PAY: Local mayor, Natacha Bouchart, says Calais’s problems are caused because Britain is ‘too soft’ 

And its authorities are in no doubt about who should bears responsible for that: Britain.

Mayor Natacha Bouchart says, ‘We want the UK Government to think about the its rules, which are possibly the best in Europe for immigrants. Britain must be less soft.’

That’s why she wants the UK to foot the £12M bill for security her council pays, without a euro’s assistance from the French government or Brussels.

In actuality, Britain has contributed £3M to tighter controls at Calais and Immigration Minister, James Brokenshire, has offered to send 20 kilometres of 3.3 metre-high steel barriers, recently used at the NATO summit in Wales

The British government, he points out, also takes a tough line on illegal immigrants, denying them the right to rent homes, open bank accounts or obtain driving licences.

Still, Madam Bouchart’s anger is understandable. She’s lumbered with someone else’s problem and has enough of her own, running a town of 75,000 citizens, where unemployment is soaring.

While there is no denying the world is seeing a mass shift in demographics, the mayor misses the point: the EU’s Schengen Agreement – from which Britain opted out – renders Euroland practically borderless.

Therefore it’s entirely possible for sinister people traffickers to transport their human cargoes thousands of miles, through several conjoined states, without ever encountering a frontier post.

Schengen was meant to be a pillar of freedom, whereby citizens could travel across the EU unhindered by visa checks. But, its theory long ago parting company from reality and the treaty has become a millstone round the EU’s neck.

Since the European Court of Human Rights bans nations from returning shiploads of illegals back to whence they came, many states on Euroland’s periphery cynically play pass the asylum seeker to their next-door neighbour.

Italy and Greece comprise two main gateways into Europe from Africa and Asia.

Yet, instead of processing incomers on arrival, as the 1990 Dublin Convention demands, both tacitly usher the unwanted away, hinting Britain and Germany might be more conducive destinations.

RETURN TO SENDER: Lord Michael Howard, former UK Interior Minister, says countries must process immigrants where they land in the EU

RETURN TO SENDER: Lord Michael Howard, former UK Interior Minister, says countries must process immigrants where they land in the EU

Sharing the mayor of Calais’s frustration, former Tory leader Lord Michael Howard last week noted, ‘The general principle that every member state of the European Union has subscribed to is that people fleeing persecution should apply for asylum in the first safe country they reach.’

At least during Howard’s term as Home Secretary (Interior Minister) in the 1990s there was accord that Britain would repatriate asylum seekers who’d managed to cross the Channel back to France, where their applications for sanctuary would be assessed.

The French eventually wearied of this ‘return-to-sender’ policy, which was why, in 2012, the then president, Nicholas Sarkozy, threaten to ditch Schengen and all the unforeseen, unintended consequences it’s thrown up.

Now, only the Europrats of Brussels can resolve the problem, either by demanding EU states take full responsibility for policing the desperate souls when they fetch up on their shores or by beefing up border checks, irrespective of what Schengen says.

My guess is they’ll do neither. So Britain will continue to repel all boarders and Calais will remain an expensive open prison for the great stateless ones and dispossessed.

If Obama doesn’t want to be remembered as President Pushover he has to act NOW!

ANYONE got a strategy? Because they’re been hunting all over the White House for one. Either someone can’t remember where they filed it or nothing has yet magically emerged from Barack Obama’s gazing into his navel.

In actuality, the president fesses up to the latter predicament. When it comes to dealing with the barbarous jihadis of IS – the Islamic State formerly known as ISIS or ISIL – his legendary intellect is out to lunch or on the golf course, where he prefer to spend time nowadays.

Apart from pleading perplexity, Obama validates his inertia, saying, ‘You don’t play whack-a-mole wherever these terrorist organisations may pop up.’

That sentiment chimes with the recall of former US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton.

Chronicling her time in office in her recent memoir, Hard Choices, she said Obama’s pro-isolationist foreign policy was, in his words: ‘Don’t do stupid sh*t’ (or, in polite conversation, substitute ‘stuff’ for excrement).

As the woman who could become America’s first female head of state noted witheringly, ‘Great nations need organising principles and ‘Don’t do stupid stuff’ is not an organising principle.’

And neither are IS your average bunch of Islamo-fascist headbangers. With hi-tech US weaponry seized from the Iraqi army, they’ve already carved out a tranche of Syria and Iraq the size of Britain and proclaimed it a Sharia ‘caliphate’, slaughtering thousands of Christians, Yazidis and anyone else who disagrees with their warped worldview.

From ransoms – France is said to have paid $58M, Switzerland $12.4 and Spain $11M – bank robberies, taxes and extortion IS has amassed a war chest of $2-billion they intend to use to reconquer all former Muslim lands, from the Balkans to Andalusia and including pseudo-secular Turkey.

STRATEGY SEEKERS: Obama and Cameron ponder the IS threat at the recent NATO summit

STRATEGY SEEKERS: Obama and Cameron ponder the IS threat at the recent NATO summit

With at least 500 Britons in their ranks and more Europeans queuing to join the carnival of carnage, intelligence sources have no doubt IS poses a clear and present danger to the West. It is, they say, only a matter of time before battle-hardened jihadis drift back home and wreak havoc.

Meanwhile, as the waiting continues for the tumblers in Obama’s brain to clunk into place, the free world must kick its heels, festering – or apoplectic, as his generals are reported to be – and hoping against hope no more Westerners are decapitated, as journalists James Foley and Steven Sotloff were so gruesomely slain.

However, midway into his final term in office, Obama remains as gung-no as his predecessor, G ‘Dubya’ Bush, was gung-ho. Yet, as history testifies, neither formulated coherent foreign policies to deal with the charnel house that’s the Middle East.

Obama insists he was elected to extricate America and its allies from conflicts and, in 2008 when he first won election, the war-weary West was grateful to hail a leader who vowed to close the book on military adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Mainly due to IS atrocities and the dread of what may follow, the public mood is shifting from indifference to belligerence, even if the world’s most powerful commander-in-chief – a tag that sits uncomfortably with Obama’s peacenik default setting – doesn’t see it.

ON THE MARCH: Fighters from IS already control a huge swathe of Iraq and Syria

ON THE MARCH: Fighters from IS already control a huge swathe of Iraq and Syria

True, he’s sent a squadron of fighter jets to hamper IS progress and is arming the Kurds, albeit with pretty unsophisticated Eastern European hardware, as they manfully defend their stronghold in northern Iraq against the barbarians at their gates.

Shamefully, that’s the current extent of Obama’s bellicosity, even if he does warn, ‘Those who make the mistake of harming Americans will learn that we will not forget, and that our reach is long and that justice will be served.’

Sticks and stones, Mr. President. And we’ve heard your vacuous sabre-rattling before, apropos the ‘red line’ threat to obliterate the chemical weapons arsenal of Syria’s Bashar Assad, but which the Demon of Damascus continues to use on the sly.

The plain, if unpalatable truth is that from Day 1 of his Oval Office tenure, Obama has never put a foot right in the Middle East, the planet’s most viciously volatile region and he’s daily exposed as President Pushover for his indecision and ineptitude.

And, much as I take no pleasure in repeating it, a year ago I wrote here, ‘After seeing the hope that began as the Arab Spring lurch into an Islamic Winter and now a serial bloodbath, what is not required is a vacillating, over-conciliatory, moralising poseur, who talks the talk but patently fails to walk the walk.

Under Obama, Iraq has fragmented into its component parts, the Shia government’s authority extending little further than Baghdad, while only the plucky Kurds withstand the scourge of IS.

After three years of grisly civil war, over 200,000 deaths and two million made refugees, Syria is a multi-dimensional bloodbath, though the loathsome Assad regime remains in situ, propped up by an unholy alliance of Russia, Iran and Hezbollah.

Meanwhile, Libya – where US Ambassador, Chris Stevens, was murdered by Islamic fanatics in 2012 – is ungovernable, as tribal factions compete to grab the oil wealth.

And Obama trying to arm-twist Israel, the only sane nation in the region, to stomach the demands of Hamas’s terrorist thugs only resulted in exposing the White House’s emissary, John Kerry, as a diplomatic dunce.

Though by far not the last piece in the mangled Middle East jigsaw, much against Obama’s wishes the army stopped Egypt becoming another Sharia paradise by toppling the Muslim Brotherhood, even if it was victorious in a travesty posing as a democratic election.

Fast forwarding to last week’s NATO summit in Wales, topping the agenda of the 28 member states was Russia’s incursion – invasion more like it – of Ukraine and Afghanistan’s future, following the withdrawal of all foreign troops by the end of 2014.

It was also patently clear the heat was on a equivocating American leader to find a strategy to crush IS.

Hence Obama’s sounding out UK Prime Minister David Cameron on transforming the RAF’s recce sorties over Iraq into strike missions, though that isn’t likely to happen unless British MPs agree it.

So, as the clock ticks down on his reign, the 44th US President faces being remembered as the man whose dithering made the world a far more dangerous place.

Only if he finds the will – and a strategy – to act decisively can he avoid that ignominy.

Obama needs to do that now. Dilly-dallying any longer will be too late.

Scots will take a heart-over-head risk if they think Smart Alex will deliver

YOU’VE got to admire Alex Salmond’s balls, or cojones if you’re a Spanish reader.

The Scottish Nationalist Party (SNP) boss was hands-down winner of last week’s debate against Alistair Darling, ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer and empowered by the ‘No & Better Together’ campaign to keep the 307-year Union alive.

Either that, or the BBC – which televised the joust – had a cunning plan to fill Glasgow’s iconic Kelvingrove Hall with wildly partisan ‘Yes’ voters, who, at times, almost raised the gilded rafters with whoops of joy as their man thundered and harangued his way to victory.

Maybe schemers at the Beeb had calculated that if Scotland votes for independence in 20 days’ time, Salmond will deliver on his promise of a Scottish Broadcasting Corporation, so they can ‘free-transfer’ Newsnight’s grating Kirsty Wark back to whence she came.

Meanwhile, having been roundly trounced in last month’s Sky TV debate by Darling’s intellectual grasp of financial realities, it was clear from the outset Salmond was hell bent on turning Round Two into the verbal equivalent of a bar-room brawl.

ALLTO PLAY FOR: Pro- independence chief, Alex Salmond (left) and Better Together spokesman, Alistair Darling have drawn 1-1 in the TV debates

ALL TO PLAY FOR: Pro- independence chief, Alex Salmond (left) and Better Together spokesman, Alistair Darling have drawn 1-1 in the TV debates

Arrogant, indignant, abrasive and smugly contemptuous, the man who would be Laird of Scots merely bulldozed aside his opponent’s cogent ripostes with bluster, if not Braveheart bravura, dismissing glitches – such as a liberated Scotland’s currency – as minor impediments, if not trivialities.

Besides, according to him, it’s all been sorted.

So forget all three Westminster party bosses and the Governor of the Bank of England vetoing the GB£ as a go-it-alone Scotland’s currency – while Spanish Prime Minister, Mariano Rajoy, effectively kyboshed any pipedreams of Scots joining the euro – Salmond is adamant he’ll be sticking with sterling.

A win in the September 18 plebiscite will be a mandate from the ‘sovereign will of the Scottish people’ to demand it, announced Smart Alex haughtily, disdaining Darling’s rhetorically query, ‘What about the sovereign will of the people in the rest of the UK?’

Despite waves of approval flooding over him from the Glaswegian faithful, Salmond exposes his economy naivety by stating the good, old £ was an international currency that could be traded by anyone.

Absolutely. But, as Darling pointed out, so is the US dollar and Russian rouble.

NO GO: One voter signals his pro-Union sympathies with tea and a T-shirt

NO GO: One voter signals his pro-Union sympathies with tea and a T-shirt

However, whichever foreign currency the born-again nation choses, it wouldn’t have a central bank to back it up and could be mashed into neeps and tatties by speculators.

A lack of economic nous was spectacularly absent from the brash, tub-thumping, populist, even if an audience that could have been hand-picked by SNP apparatchiks salivated all the more over his gall.

Ditto with the party line on North Sea oil, Salmond emphasising, ‘It cannot be regarded as anything other than a substantial asset.’

Again, absolutely. But, as Darling tried to explain to deaf ears, the SNP has inflated the fossil fuel’s revenue to the tune of £5-billion a year to support its profligate spending plans. And, anyway, it’s a diminishing asset, with experts predicting oil revenues will tumble sharply in the next 20 years and could vanish by 2050.

Then there was Salmond’s claims that cuts in the English NHS budget were impacting adversely on Scotland.

What he neglected to mention was that health is the responsibility of Scottish ministers in the devolved Scottish parliament. Besides, as Darling noted, spending is actually increasing in England, with corresponding extra cash – via the block grant or Barnett Formula – going to Scots.

On nuclear weapons, Salmond repeated his vow to expel those pesky, Trident-toting subs from their Faslane base within five-and-a-half years, even if it took two decades to move the warhead storage facility from nearby Coulport.

While I’ve never quite understood the Left’s obsession with nuclear disarmament – especially since the East-West ‘You nuke us, we nuke you’ stalemate stopped the Cold War overheating – this would be at the direct cost of 8,000 jobs and countless others dependent on the shipyard workers’ spending.

YES WE CAN: Kids in the frontline of the 'go-it-alone' campaign - but the odds are still against them winning

YES WE CAN: Kids in the frontline of the ‘go-it-alone’ campaign – but the odds are still against them winning

It might also cause a rethink in Defence Ministry plans to move the entire Royal Navy submarine fleet to Faslane, along with the countless fresh jobs it creates.

Salmond’s fuzzy solution is to establish ‘very substantial’ onshore employment in that area and create a ‘considerable’ Scottish navy.

Cost? And in what currency? Who knows?

And thereby the Nats’ case for independence is exposed for what it is: the Scots, a small, feisty and highly inventive nation, are being asked to take a massive leap of faith into the great unknown, based on the say-so of a man who seems to struggle with elementary maths.

As a mere Sassenach, with no part to play in Scotland’s decision on its future, I respect Salmond’s fervour, but I question his judgement and some of the ploys his Nats have used to tilt balloting rules in their favour.

The 400,000 expat Caledonians living south of Hadrian’s Wall – who’d add 16% to the turnout – are barred from voting, yet the franchise is extended to home-based 16-year-olds, with negligible experience of life and probably less of economics.

So, as crunch time approaches, what it boils down to is whether Scots buy into Salmond’s patriotically brazen, heart-over-head vision of a liberated, real-time Brigadoon or decide that remaining part of the UK is less chancy and there’s strength in numbers.

Even after last week’s TV browbeating of Darling, the bookies still make the ‘No & Better Together’ campaign 1/6 favourites, though pollsters say that with 10% of the electorate refusing to state a choice, the referendum’s outcome is too close to call.

‘There remains a chunk of voters who flatly refuse to tell us anything and they hold the true balance of power,’ says Martin Boon of ICM Research.

For a variety of commercial, financial and emotional reasons – not merely being historically joined at the hip for three centuries – I’d prefer Scotland remains part of the UK, as, I guess, would most of the English, Welsh and Northern Irish.

Nor would I be wooed by the sweet talk of an egotistical English political hustler, who wanted to annex England from the rest of the UK.

I trust the majority of commonsensical Scots will share that view in 20 days’ time.

Why the West’s Muslims must lead the fight against the enemy within

THE video – filmed somewhere in Iraq or Syria – is beyond gruesome as it begins with journalist, James Foley, kneeling impassively before a knife-wielding man garbed in black, like a ninja assassin, a ski-mask covering his face.

Moments later the 40 year-old US reporter, who went missing two years ago, is beheaded in what his captors blandly described as an ‘execution’.

Another American newsman, Steven Sotloff, who went missing in Syria, is facing a similarly grim fate, as are up to 20 other Westerners, who have disappeared in the Middle East.

Whether you believe in capital punishment or not – I don’t, but that’s a debate for another day – this was anything but an ‘execution’.

Foley’s decapitation was an act of unspeakable barbarity; a celebration of butchery carried out by a piece of scum who desecrates the title: ‘human being’

The slaughterer said he was ‘sending a message to America’, the fabled Great Satan of Islamo-fascism’s warped mythology.

Meanwhile, to add further shock to the horror show is news that the killer speaks with a distinctive London accent and is said to be called ‘John’.

There’s no doubt Brits are among the homicidal filth parading under the black banner of the Islamic State (IS), formerly known as ISIS or ISIL, with Western intelligence sources estimating their number as high as 600.

Apparently, they are also the most bloodthirsty and take huge delight in their grisly handiwork.

VIDEO NASTY: The IS thug identified in some media outlets as a Brit named 'John', prepared to behead US journo, James Foley

VIDEO NASTY: The IS thug identified in some media outlets as a Brit named ‘John’, prepared to behead US journo, James Foley

A 16-year-old girl from the Midlands recently tweeted a photo of herself against a backdrop of severed heads, while a dead IS fighter was identified as English by his Liverpool Football Club season ticket and another by his membership card from an Ealing, West London, gym.

So, I’d wager, somewhere in Britain an impressionable kid, perhaps from a decent, god-fearing, Anglo-Asian family, will have seen the monstrous clip online and thought, ‘Hey, that’s cool and I want to be part of it, to fight, kill and die, if necessary, for the cause.’

Precisely what cause justifies such evil, perverted lunacy is beyond all comprehension. Equally so is the reason why some Muslim teens, brought up with all the advantages and values the UK provides, are drawn to it, like the student from Bristol, who chose IS, jihad and killing over studying medicine to save, not take lives.

What the cause demands, though, is chillingly transparent and intended to be delivered in stage payments of savagery.

IS is on a genocidal roll, proclaiming a Sharia ‘caliphate’ across the huge swathe of Iraq and Syria it now controls, where the bloodiest excesses of medieval cruelty are visited upon any man, woman or child who won’t embrace their fanatical take on Sunni Islam.

Hence, the spate of beheadings, disembowelments and crucifixions, the stonings to death and burials alive of minority unbelievers – including toddlers and women, who, if not murdered, are taken as sex slaves – like Christians and Yazidis, refusing to renounce ancient faiths that predate Islam.

The Kurds, Muslims whom IS considers heretics, currently stand as a bulwark against the advancing horde. But, lacking the hi-tech American weaponry IS filched from a craven Iraqi army in hasty retreat, tough Kurdish Peshmerga militia are left fighting a see-saw battle against an implacable foe.

Which is why even that most dovish of US presidents, Barack Obama, has been forced to send in fighter jets – supported by RAF planes, acting as ‘eyes in the skies’ – to curb what seems like an inexorable IS advance.

However, we are witnessing only phase one of the fanatics’ master plan.

Through its brotherhood of terror, IS’s aim is to extend the ‘caliphate’ westward and – mimicking Osama Bin Laden, whose Al-Qaeda cutthroats seem pussycats in comparison – its manifesto includes the return of Andalucía, formerly the Moorish province of El Andaluz.

Last week four civilians were found murdered in Egypt’s Sinai desert, their headless corpses the hallmark of IS, and its henchmen are said to be operating alongside Hamas in Gaza.

FLAG OF HATE: Copycat versions of IS's hideous black flag are said to have been flown in London and elsewhere in Europe

FLAG OF HATE: Copycat versions of IS’s hideous black flag are said to have been flown in London and elsewhere in Europe

In the harshest reality check so far from a European leader, UK Prime Minister, David Cameron, warned, ‘The West is embroiled in a generational struggle against a poisonous brand of Islamic extremism that will bring terror to the streets of Britain unless urgent action is taken to defeat it.’

Cameron predicted the struggle will last ‘the rest of my political lifetime,’ adding, ‘The creation of an extremist caliphate in the heart of Iraq and extending into Syria is not a problem miles away from home…it is our concern here and now.

‘Because if we do not act to stem the onslaught of this exceptionally dangerous terrorist movement, it will only grow stronger until it can target us on the streets of Britain. We already know that it has the murderous intent.’

Cameron’s warning, though, maybe too late: IS’s tentacles already snake into Europe, where copycat versions of its dastardly flag have been unfurled in pro-Hamas demonstrations in France, Germany, Holland and the UK.

Meanwhile, an estimated 260 IS thugs are said to have already returned to Britain, some vowing to raise the black standard over Big Ben.

And therein lies Britain’s dilemma. Because, in common with the rest of Europe where there are large, Muslim minorities, the nation is now in the front line of potential terror attacks from an enemy within.

Porous borders, an undermanned frontier security force and police intimidated by accusations of Islamophobia don’t instil confidence, either.

But, mindful of the harm being done to Islam’s image, moderates in the UK’s Muslim community have now said they will assist anti-terrorism officers in identifying those in their midst who harbour only hatred for the country that nurtured them.

Mohammed Shafiq, chief executive of the Ramadhan Foundation, said, ‘We are ready to support the police and intelligence agencies in their work to defeat terrorism and protect our nation.’

Those are wise and welcome words.

Because Britain’s population of approximately 3,000,000 Muslims, which can be very vocal when it wants to be, needs to stand up and be counted upon as never before in the war against the most evil scourge to plague the world since Nazism.

Memo to Bardem and Cruz: Sound off when you really know what you’re talking about

IN her ignorance, Penelope Cruz probably best summed up a tranche of addled opinion of the latest Israel-Hamas war, admitting in a letter to USA Today, ‘I’m not an expert on the situation and I’m aware of the complexity of it.’

This mea culpa was a backtrack on an earlier, incendiary ‘open letter’ she’d co-signed – along with a host of other right-on, Spanish showbiz luvvies – written by her actor husband, Javier Bardem, which essentially laid the entire blame for the fighting on Israel and lambasted Europe for ‘allowing genocide to happen.’

Renowned for his fiery radicalism, Bardem damned the conflict as ‘a war of occupation and extermination against a people without means, confined to a minimum of land, without water and where hospitals, ambulances and children are targets and alleged terrorists.’

Without understating the unimaginable horrors suffered by Gaza’s innocents, the actor’s sanctimonious rant was as misguided as the countless Hamas missiles that annihilated their own people and a shameful distortion of reality, while wilfully flouting facts.

Why, for instance, didn’t Bardem mention nearly 3,000 rockets fired at Israeli civilians, deliberately intended to incite retaliation; the millions of dollars of Israeli-supplied cement, electricity and water meant for civilian purposes, but diverted to construct a labyrinth of terror tunnels; Hamas using civilians – even reporters – as human shields and hospitals as HQs; ambulances hijacked to ferry fighters and missiles launchers; or that there’s nothing ‘alleged’ about Hamas being a gang of homicidal terrorists, because the UN, US and the EU long ago judged them so?

NO CRUZ CONTROL? Spanish actress, Penelope Cruz, and her husband, Javier Bardem, tried to backtrack over their Gaza 'genocide' accusation

NO CRUZ CONTROL? Spanish actress, Penelope Cruz, and her husband, Javier Bardem, tried to backtrack over their Gaza ‘genocide’ accusation against Israel

At least, the gobby thespian fell short of seconding Spanish writer, Antonio Gala’s viciously anti-Semitic tirade in El Mundo, reprising the 1492 expulsions by proposing Spain’s 50,000 Jews be kicked out, since ‘it is though they were not made to co-exist’.

Gala’s rabid racism, though, is not unusual in a nation of forty-five million, with an inglorious history for persecuting minorities, particularly Jews.

In a 2008 survey by the independent Pew Research Centre on global attitudes to anti-Semitism, Spain saw the worst and highest recorded rise in Europe, where the study reported unfavourable views of Jews had doubled from 21% in 2005 to 46% among Spaniards.

According to Pew, only 37% of the Spanish viewed Jews favourably, in contrast to 50% in Poland, 64% in Germany and 73% in Britain.

A later poll by Spain’s Education Ministry stoked further consternation, revealing more than 50% of students between 12 and 18 said they would not want to sit next to a Jew in class.

The level of Spanish anti-Semitism was abetted by the then far-Left prime minister, Jose Luis Zapatero, sporting a Yasser Arafat-style scarf and regularly attacking Israel at pro-Palestinian events, which usually descend into vitriolic Jew-bashing.

Zapatero was also reported to have stated that he ‘understood the Nazis’ when it came to ‘the Jewish question.’

But, while Zapatero ignored protests from angry US legislators, Bardem’s inflammatory bombast has provoked worldwide outrage, not least from fellow Oscar winner, Jon Voigt, who accused the Spaniard of ‘stupidity’ and fanning the flames of anti-Semitism.

Using the platform of the Hollywood Reporter, he provide Bardem, Cruz & Co with a history lesson about Arab attacks on Israel since 1948 ‘when the country was created through the United Nations, including the 1967 and 1973 wars. And when Israel was not fighting a major war, it was defending itself against terrorist campaigns.’

Voigt, a non-Jew and father of Angelina Jolie, called on the purblind celebs who signed ‘that poison letter against Israel’ to ‘examine their motives’, adding, ‘Can you take back the fire of anti-Semitism raging all over the world now?’

And, for extra measure, he reminded them, ‘You had a great responsibility to use your celebrity for good. Instead, you have defamed the only democratic country of goodwill in the Middle East: Israel.’

Days later, then, Bardem followed his semi-repentant wife in performing verbal acrobatics, saying he regretted using the word ‘genocide’, claiming his diatribe was only directed at Israel’s government and military.

‘I have great respect for the people of Israel and deep compassion for their losses,’ he added, hoping to wipe the plate clean of slurs.

SPAIN'S SHAME: Zapatero - in a 'terrorist chic' scarf - presided over a country with Europe's highest level of anti-Semitism

SPAIN’S SHAME: Zapatero – in a ‘terrorist chic’ scarf – presided over a country with Europe’s highest level of anti-Semitism

At least it dawned on him to withdraw any allusion to ‘genocide’, a highly emotive and abused term that – quoting Chambers dictionary – specifically refers to ‘the deliberate extermination of a racial, national, religious or ethnic group.

Nothing diminishes the carnage of Gaza… lifeless children, weeping parents, buildings reduced to rubble. But, despite Hamas’s unverified claims of 1,875 deaths – 430 of whom they said were under 15 – it was not a genocide.

Meanwhile, the terror group’s arithmetic is being contested by Israel and independent arbitrators, whose initial estimate states at least 900 Hamas fighters perished in Operation Protective Edge.

So onlookers shooting from the lip, while ignoring – or, in the case of Cruz, being ignorant of – salient facts make a mockery of their own, ill-informed opinions.

As the fog of war temporarily cleared during a 72-hour truce broken – again! – by Hamas, other, too, might be rueing their rush to judgement, including the Obama administration.

Last week the State Department’s kneejerk reaction to an Israeli attack on a rocket launcher, said to have killed 10 in a UN school, was to brand it ‘disgraceful’.

New evidence, backed by photos, strongly points to the missile strike hitting the road outside, where a crater is plainly evident, and that dead bodies were moved into the school by Hamas – with the corpse of a small girl added to hype the PR impact.

After the two, previous Hamas-Israel wars, it should be patently obvious to sensible, fair-minded folk that there are no depths to the terror gang’s skulduggery.

Even Judge Richard Goldstone was forced to retract the ‘findings’ of his notorious report on the 2009 conflict, admitting later, ‘If I had known then what I know now, the Goldstone Report would have been a different document.’

However, the blinkered Left – and its dimwit celeb cheerleaders – only see and hear what they want to, blurring fallacy into ‘fact’.

BARDEM BASHER: Oscar winner, Jon Voigt, trashed the Spanish star and his actress wife for '

BARDEM BASHER: Oscar winner, Jon Voigt, trashed the Spanish star and his actress wife for their ‘poison-pen letter against Israel’

And their abiding, pathological, obsessive prejudice against Israel now openly spills over into old-fashioned Jew-hatred, as forests of placards spelt out so unambiguously in so-called ‘peace marches’  across Europe during recent weeks that morphed into attacks on innocent Jews.

Bizarrely, I find it implausible how the Left’s saintly bigots can defend Islamo-fascists, like Hamas, whose cherished wish is to slaughter Christians, Jews and gays, subjugate women and refashion the world according to a loony, 7th Century religious dogma.

Also, I have to wonder why these self-styled do-gooders, wrapped in their ‘terrorist chic’, keffir scarfs, don’t give a hoot about Christians crucified in ISIS’s new ‘caliphate’ across Iraq and Syria – or Yazidis facing genuine genocide – Russia grabbing a huge chunk of Ukraine, China murdering Tibetans wholesale or Iran persecuting opponents of its crackpot regime.

If they do, then where are the demos?

And, lest I forget the useful-idiot apologists for Islamic savagery – Jimmy Carter, Paddy Ashdown and Baroness Warsi take note – forever claiming Israel’s defence of its citizenry only serves as a recruiting sergeant for Muslim extremism, the simple answer is: it doesn’t, as history is my witness.

Maybe they should share their judgemental folly with relatives of the victims of 9/11 (2001), the Madrid bombings (2004), 7/7 (2005) and the countless other terror outrages to see how their inanity is viewed.

So, yes, certainly protest the hideous death toll in Gaza, but, instead of continually castigating Israel, point an accusing finger at who’s really to blame – Hamas.

How others see us: we’re bad boozers, can’t eat – and Mr. Bean is one of the greatest Brits

FROM long experience I’ve developed a healthy scepticism about polls, surveys and, particularly, ‘vox pops’ – you know, those street-corner tests of public opinion the media loves to indulge in, where most answers are predictably politically correct.

Unless they are headbangers on day release from a nearby psychiatric facility or have an ardent view on the topic – anyone for fracking, capital punishment or FIFA? – people’s kneejerk reactions tend to parrot mainstream opinion, even if they’re lying through their pearly whites.

After all, who wants to be damned from their own mouths for being a racist, anti-environmentalist, male chauvinist pig…or, worse still, a UKIP supporter.

To continue the theme: how can we be certain eight out of 10 cats prefer Whiskas? None of mine did and nobody is told the total number of moggies ‘surveyed’ or what other brands were sampled.

And if Carlsberg claims to be ‘probably’ the best lager in the world, why doesn’t it refresh ‘the parts other beers cannot reach’, as Heineken supposedly does?

Yeah, yeah, I know these are just examples of admen’s creative thinking and aren’t taken any more seriously than those who believes Wonga is a not-for-profit organisation and bankers deserve even more humungous bonuses.

Nonetheless, such claims have an impact on our buying habits.

Similarly, if the ditty that wins the European Song Contest is so darned good, why doesn’t it become an instant, Top 20 hit? Or, maybe Molitva, sung in Serbo-Croat, or Sweden’s Diggi-Loo Diggi-Ley soared up charts and I didn’t notice.

SIMPLY THE GREATEST: Wartime leader, Sir Winston Churchill, topped the 2012 BBC poll to find The Greatest Briton

SIMPLY THE GREATEST: Wartime leader, Sir Winston Churchill, topped the 2012 BBC poll to find The Greatest Briton

But you don’t need to consult Graham Norton or Terry Wogan for explanations why Eurovision is a stitch-up, with groups of mutually back-scratching nations taking it in turn to vote for each other. All know the PR payback in terms of national prestige is worth chicanery more redolent of elections for the presidency of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Back in 1999 – in a campaign orchestrated by the Press and the nation’s leading politicians – the Turks tried to ‘fix’ the vote for Time’s Person of the 20th Century by balloting in their millions in favour of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk.

While he might be lauded locally as the founder of modern, secular Turkey, Ataturk is hardly a household name in Llandudno. Yet, briefly at least, he led in every category the prestigious magazine listed…warrior, statesman, scientist, artist and entertainer, even if his stand-up didn’t feature overmuch at Istanbul’s Comedy Central.

It was only when Turkey’s long-time foes, Greece and Cyrprus, rumbled the fiendish plot – and voted in their droves to counter it – that Ataturk’s stock plunged, to be variously replaced by the Sir Winston Churchill, Bob Dylan and Albert Einstein, the eventual winner.

For the record, Ataturk made the Top 100, but so did mobster, Lucky Luciano, who, Time said, ‘modernized the Mafia, shaping it into a smoothly-run, national crime syndicate, focused on the bottom line.’

A survey less tainted by gerrymandering is the BBC’s 10-yearly quest to find The Greatest Briton.

The 2012 edition attracted 30,000 votes and Churchill, the nation’s indefatiguable wartime leader, came top, squeezing out engineering genius, Isambard Kingdom Brunel, and – presumably based on enduring sentimentality – Princess Di into a highly creditable third.

A GREAT BRIT? Many foreigners see bumbling clown, Mr. Bean, as the epitome of Britishness

A GREAT BRIT? Many foreigners see bumbling clown, Mr. Bean, as the epitome of Britishness

However, the other day another poll lit up my eye: how we Brits are viewed by others. Or, to quote Robbie Burns’ Ode to a Louse – which, to the best of my knowledge, hasn’t yet been adopted by Scots Nats as a commentary on the English  – ‘to see ourselves as others see us’.

More than 5,000 people from the US, China, India, Brazil and Germany were asked to summarise their views of us and give an example of a person they most associate with British culture, without being offered a list of options.

On the whole Britons emerged with a decidedly contradictory reputation.

Those surveyed by IPSO-Mori, on behalf of the British Council, regarded us as ‘polite’, ‘friendly’ and ‘well-educated’, but also hard-drinking, xenophobic and afflicted with appalling eating habits (note: with all their slurping over bird’s nest soup, the Chinese are fine ones to talk).

When asked to list the best and worst characteristics, one way or another, British manners were by far the most common answer, cited by 46 per cent of those polled.

A quarter said the British sense of humour was a plus factor and as many as 37 per cent thought Britons to be ‘learned’.

But among less positive responses, 27 per cent said they thought the British ‘drink too much’, 23 per cent listed ‘bad eating habits’, just ahead of ignorance of other cultures and intolerance towards people from other countries.

The British Council’s John Worne said, ‘While there’s a lot to be proud of, some stereotypes still colour the way that we’re viewed overseas: boozy, bad eaters and ignorant of other cultures all figure in our worst characteristics.

‘At our best we are rated ‘polite’, ‘educated’ and ‘friendly’, and the English language, our cities, universities, arts and culture definitely make people want to visit, study and do business with us.’

So who did foreigners most associate with British culture? Literary giants, such as Chaucer, Milton or Burns?  Maybe national icons, like Churchill, The Beatles and Charlie Chaplin? Or great shapers of military history, as exemplified by Elizabeth I, Oliver Cromwell and Lord Nelson?

Not a bit of it.

While, predictably, The Queen and Shakespeare commanded the premier positions, David Beckham came third, while Churchill and the titans of English prose were relegated to also-rans behind…Mr. Bean!

It seems Rowan Atkinson’s fictional clown – with his tweedy togs, emblematic Mini and ability to overcome idiocy – is the epitome of Britishness.

There’s no doubt Bean’s antics transcend all language barriers, since he says nothing that makes any sense.

Maybe that’s where the likes of Chaucer and Co. went wrong.

PS: I wonder what the world would make of the French?

Why Hamas terror merchants want babies to die and control coverage of the carnage

IT took two days for carrier pigeons to deliver news of Wellington’s rout of Napoleon at Waterloo in 1815 – ‘a damned, near-run thing’, admitted the gumboot general – to London.

In stark contrast, today’s battles are played out ‘live’ before a worldwide audience, tooled up with hi-tech gizmos, commentary too often provided by rookie correspondents parachuted in, having read the Janet & John primer to Middle East conflicts on their flights over.

But so horrendously tragic are images of the unfolding carnage, alone they are worth a thousand words, even if they conceal a hundred lies. Or, as a German reporter on the scene noted tellingly, ‘The viewers see everything, yet understand nothing.’

SACRIFICIAL LAMBS: Women and babies are deliberately used as tools for Hamas's ghoulish PR strategy

SACRIFICIAL LAMBS: Women and babies are deliberately used as tools for Hamas’s ghoulish PR strategy

Because, epitomised by Israel’s Operation Protective Edge, the vast majority of coverage is slickly choreographed, as a TV cameraman friend told me in 2012, having covered Operation Pillar of Defence, the previous Israeli incursion into Gaza to root out the Hamas murder machine.

‘Your local ‘minder’ – an embedded Hamas PR – tells you where to go, what to film,’ he explained. ‘Since you also need a permit from them to work, don’t get the idea you can roam around freely.

‘So, it’s all carefully contrived and tightly controlled. One day it’s ‘Go to a hospital and film the injured children’; next you’re ‘advised’ where a stack of apartments has been hit, even if the damage is a Hamas ‘own goal’, caused by a misfired rocket.

‘They’ll say ‘Pick out a child’s toy or battered shoe…great colour!’ But don’t – don’t! – show any of the hordes of young men, scurrying around with AK4s, hijacking civilian ambulances or setting up missile-launchers in mosques or next to schools. If you do, your footage will never see the light of day.’

Hamas runs its PR machine with ruthless efficiency. And its greatest weapon is Gaza’s innocents – the old, the infirm, women, but preferably kids – who are expendible cannon-fodder in the ghastly name of jihad…the ‘dead-baby strategy’, as one commentator labelled it.

Even donkey and dogs are used as suicide bombers and foreign journos human shields, according to a Japanese news crew.

So the higher the body count, the greater the joy expressed by a gang of cynical, Islamo-fascist fanatics, their minds warped by a 7th Century, death-cult credo. As Hamas leader, Khaled Meshaal, spouts from the safety of his bolthole in Qatar, ‘We love death more than the Israelis love life.’

TUNNEL VISION: Israeli soldiers on patrol, looking for Hamas's underground terror network

TUNNEL VISION: Israeli soldiers on patrol, looking for Hamas’s underground terror network

Shamefully, the UN’s Relief & Works Agency (UNRWA), is complicit in the bloodbath, because twice within days they’ve been caught red-faced, when stores of rockets were found in UN schools. More shamefully, UNRWA returned them to their rightful owner – Hamas.

Meanwhile, the usual, hypocritical Left-whingers in the Western Press salivate over every Hamas porkie, like the absurdities that ‘the fighting all started when Israel retaliated’ and Israel’s response in defending its people within the legitimate rules of warfare is ‘disproportionate.’

Incidentally, ‘proportionality’ emphatically does not demand casualties must be equal on both sides or that an army use less force than needed to obtain its objective, just because the other side is weaker.

Still, it’s understandable ordinary folk can be temporarily seduced by Hamas’s odious PR, but only those afflicted by crass gullibility or driven by an atavistic hatred of Jews really buy this devious bile long-term.

At least The Times of London rumbled Hamas’s diabolical charade, stating in an op-ed, ‘The deaths of Palestinians, many of them children, are the direct and predictable outcome of Hamas’s tactics and its use of civilians as, in effect, human shields. Instead of providing good governance and economic development, anticipating statehood, Hamas practises theocratic thuggery. Palestinians are paying an unconscionable price.’

However, it can’t be denied that the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) are unwittingly helping the merchants of terror achieve their ghoulish ambition of sacrificing as much of their poplace as possible. And no amount of explanations from Israel’s spokesmen diminish the impact of the heart-wrenching, civilian tragedy.

THE THREAT BELOW: A Hamas terror tunnel, complete with scaling ladders - some stretch deep into Israel

THE THREAT BELOW: A Hamas terror tunnel, complete with scaling ladders – some stretch deep into Israel

The Jewish state, though, is continually held to higher moral account than any other nation by the pious Left, so the inevitable tragedies laid at the feet of IDF in the fog of war are immediately branded ‘war crimes.’

Yet – according to Colonel Richard Kemp, a former Commander of British Forces in Afghanistan – the IDF does ‘more to safeguard the rights of civilians in combat zones than any other army in the history of warfare.’

Unlike the Israelis, NATO troops in Afghanistan (civilian death toll: circa 23,000) and Coalition forces in Iraq (civilian death toll estimate: 140,000) never phoned ahead to give building occupants 15 minutes warning before they attacked, then aimed a ‘knock-on-the-roof’ smoke grenade at a target property before commencing to strike five minutes later.

One can only wonder, then, how the dovish Obama would react if Mexico suddenly turned terrorist and lobbed fusillades of deadly missiles into California. I’d bet the Marine Corps would be over the border within minutes.

Moreover, Israel faces the most implacable and intractable of foes. Not simply because Hamas’s denies its existence and wants to annihilate every Jew on earth, but humanitarian considerations are out of its equation.

Last week, when the IDF suspended hostilities in three, Egypt-brokered truces, Hamas repaid the gesture with more fusillades from its stockpile of 8,000 missiles. Ditto today, after Israel agreed a 24-hour ceasefire, only for the ghouls of Gaza to pour scorn on it with further attacks.

The Jewish state’s key concern, however, is not the aerial bombardment, but Hamas’s $multi-million labyrinth of sophisticated tunnels – some large enough for trucks to navigate – which burrow deep into Israeli terrority and were built with concrete America insisted be allowed into Gaza for ‘civilian purposes’.

Already 24 tunnels have been identified and intelligence from Hamas prisoners has revealed a mega-plot for waves of terrorist cutthroats to use them to infiltrate kibbutz settlements and villages, striking during the Jewish high holy days in September in a mini-reprise of the Yom Kippur War of 1973.

PRAYING FOR PEACE: But, so far US Secretary of State, John Kerry, has got nowhere with his diplomacy

PRAYING FOR PEACE: But, so far, US Secretary of State, John Kerry’s efforts have been futile

Which is why the Israelis baulked at ‘peace proposals’ from US Secretary of State, John Kerry, that – among assorted concessions rewarding Hamas – would have banned the IDF from destroying the remaining tunnels and left the terror regime free to continue subterranean ambushes, one of which killed six IDF soldiers.

After his abysmal failure to forge a treaty between Israel and Mahmoud Abbas’s West Bank Palestinian Authority (PA) – talks collapsed when Abbas invited his arch foes, Hamas, into a ‘unity government’ – America’s premier diplomat has flopped again.

Following a brief flurry of consultations in the tinderbox region, including in Qatar, which bankroll Hamas, and Paris, Kerry has retreated back to Washington, underscoring yet again America’s  growing impotence on the world stage.

So the bloody mayhem will persist until either Israel achieves its objective of destroying the terror tunnels and degrading Hamas’s arsenal or it dawns on Gaza’s Islamo-fascist crazies there are only so many babies they can sacrifice