(without "twisting the facts")

Okay then - misreading them and (deliberately?) misunderstanding them to fit your increasingly perplexing ideas on Englishness. Scholarship doesn't start, or even end, with conclusions, WAV - just the facts, which need constant analysis, understanding & scrutiny, an approach not altogether conducive to harbouring pet theories which, obviously in your case, just get in the way of seeing things as they actually are.

I do not doubt that the tin whistle as we know it today is essentially the idea of Robert Clarke, but to call the tin whistle an English instrument would be as absurd as calling the Saxophone a Belgian one. The key to this lies not in the hardware, rather in the cultural software that gives musical instruments their meaning and identity. When one thinks of tin whistles, one immediately thinks of traditional Irish music, the jigs, reels & airs to which the whistle is naturally suited; just as when one thinks of Saxophones, one thinks of African-American jazz - the playing of John Coltrane, John Gilmore, Rahsaan Roland Kirk et al, whose work would be inconceivable without the ingenuity of the inventive Belgian, just as their work would have been inconceivable to him! In other words - Adolphe Sax came up with the hardware, but it took the genius of the African-American musicians to give it its musical voice, without which I dare say the saxophone would be as obscure as the rest of his innumerable musical hybrids and inventions.

Your nice multi-cultural world doesn't consist of isolated cells festering away in their indigenous ethnically pure in-bred idylls, rather a seething mass of collective interactivity, diversely manifesting & cross-pollinating across the planet as human history, both cultural and political, collective and individual, takes its wondrous course.