Main Edition
US
FR
Main Edition
US
FRRioters set Sunderland aflame at the weekend (Drik/Getty Images)
Unusual for the time of year, the radiant sun was setting over the picturesque city. It was the early evening of 5 April 1992, and while some of Sarajevo’s residents were listening to the opera, lovers could be seen strolling along the Miljacka river. The following morning, the city woke up to bodies in the streets.
Admittedly, tensions had been rising for over a month as politicians and fascists politicised a murder at a wedding to sow hatred and division. But nobody expected it to come to this. How could a European city so rich in culture and on the road to development be torn apart by such brutal violence? Overnight, Sarajevo had become a byword for the dangers of ethnic division, ultra-nationalistic fervour, tribalism and wanton extremism.
The events of the past few days in the United Kingdom reveal a number of familiar traces. Southport has become synonymous with Sarajevo, in the sense that, once again, under the watchful sun a small extremist minority is seeking to politicise a brutal tragedy and turn it into something whose consequences reach across the country. This is not protest; it’s about violence, terror and a naked appeal to intimidation.
The idea of a civil war has traditionally referred to an internal conflict where one armed group seeks to wrestle power from the state. While some may brush this aside by suggesting a civil war is not something that the British do, we should not be so complacent. Remember, after all, that alongside the American version, the English civil war between 1642-51 remains one of the most instructive. As a result of this very British version of civic slaughter, the modern theory of sovereignty appeared in Thomas Hobbes’s Leviathan. Not only did it put forward the now-familiar mantra that there is no politics without security and no security without the state, it also set in place the fundamental understanding — later picked up by Max Weber — that only the state can engage in legitimate violence.
What marks a civil war from this perspective is a contesting of that very monopoly and the state’s right to use force for the preservation of order. That the police forces who appear on the front lines often become the first targets is not then incidental. But where is the line that needs to be crossed so that civil tensions become a war? Since the Seventies, critical thinkers such as Michel Foucault sought to invert the logic of civil war to explain how states are always waging a kind of silent battle upon minority groups. Through this, notions such as structural violence emerged. Presenting a civil war as a process — one that is not always about widespread slaughter but can also be measured in terms of a broader account of violence and social tensions — does have some merit. The danger with such reasoning, however, is that if everything is a civil war, nothing is.
If Sarajevo made explicit how the new emerging contours of civil war would be written in ethnic terms, it had already been shown in Somalia, Mexico and later Rwanda how the very idea of a civil war was no longer bound to single movements whose sole aim was the capture of the state. Such unbounded violence went global with 9/11, which revealed the utter nihilism of certain ethnic doctrines. It also showed how the lines between race, religion and political beliefs are far from homogenised.
To have one civil war may be regarded as a misfortune; to have two looks like carelessness.
the first was caused by a king who thought he had a divine right to rule, refused to listen to parliament and ruled as an absolute monarchy.
The second will be caused by a parliament that believes it has the divine right to rule, refuses to listen to the people’s concerns, and wants to rule as an absolute power.
The Romans must have been exceptionally slipshod, because over recorded history they had literally dozens!
The Romans also came to regret allowing millions of barbarians across their borders.
Maybe we should learn from history.
Islam shows up and within a couple generations there is civil conflict. It has happened throughout history in numerous cultures; some cultures for whom the majority has effectively disappeared. This issue is that Islamic theology is inherently supremacist and exclusionary. It was designed to function that way.
But the nastiness has only been cultivated and grown because people in power,and not the ones we see and vote for,have steered it that way.
The ‘people in power and ‘those we see’ look coordinated enough for there to be plan, especially when there’s no curiosity by the Legacy Media around the supporting destruction of the nation.
people in power – who are they if we dont voye for them? please advise as I assume you dont meant Tommy Robinson et al
Sir Humphrey and the police, for example.
If you observe that no journalist or other media organ ever seems to disagree with a professor or other academic; and that they all insist on the religious-like doctrine of “Universalism” that has as its corollaries open borders, globalization, mass migration, “refugees,” multiculturalism, feminism, tolerance of sexual deviancy, sexualization of children, and the celebration of nearly every vice together with the destruction of all taboos…
…then you will see who is really “running things.” As Hobbes notes in the opening of his “Behemoth,” the “universities” are, and have always been, the hotbeds of degeneracy.
For people asking such questions, I recommend Moldbug as the best answer yet:
https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2008/04/open-letter-to-open-minded-progressives/
The bureaucracy/administrative state.
The globalist cabal hiding in plain sight.
You may be interested in / depressed by this: https://youtu.be/C-HhIfpBdoQ?si=QZpyV7ncr8C8ZcsS
Politicians are in some ways worse as they may have limited time at the trough so act in more extreme ways, the apparatchicks can have 40 years trousering smaller amounts, but neither have legitimate authority – they are simple thieves and w/o a social contract to restrain them violence will likely fill the vacuum.
Quite so. It has always astounded me that people accept without criticism the dictum that “absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
Answer this: how can you corrupt a king? What would you offer him? He needn’t make concessions to you; he can merely take it.
It is fractured power that corrupts. And fractured power is the premise of democracy. Therefore, democracy can only be corrupt. How is this not exactly the lesson of the American “experiment,” to say nothing of the French disaster since 1789?
In a thousand years (and probably much sooner) the Age of Democracy will look to historians, correctly, as a time of mass delusion and political insanity.
“Answer this: how can you corrupt a king? What would you offer him? He needn’t make concessions to you; he can merely take it.”
Yes, but that comes with its own set of inherent dangers. If the king, being an absolute monarch, is corrupt then there are no tools to control him and limit or even prevent abuse–short of assassination that is. Case in point: the French Revolution where the king and queen ultimately lost their heads. One can argue that Louis XVI didn’t deserve death as he wasn’t an evil monarch and even implemented several reforms in accordance with Enlightenment ideas of the era, but he was weak and the people were suffering. Unfortunately, too much power often, if not usually, leads to the belief that one is infallible and above the rest of humanity. Such beliefs are a slippery slope, and abuse and violence towards one’s subjects are all too frequently a direct consequence. The idea of a balance of powers as conceived by Montesquieu is a way to limit such excesses. Democracy for all its flaws is still the best system we have. Everything else has also proven less than ideal.
I think the point of the dictum is similar to the observation that a man is only as faithful as his options. What it says is that those who possess power will eventually begin to construct justifications that frame as virtuous acts that would conventionally be considered immoral. This is the corruption that the saying refers to.
So, let’s say a king can’t be bribed by a peasant because the king simply owns the peasant and everything he has already. Now, let’s say the king desires the peasant’s wife. The king constructs a rationalization where he has the right to do with the wife whatever he wishes and his power justifies the action so that he can consider it moral or himself above such considerations. That’s the corruption of absolute power.
It seems like you’re claiming that if a king takes what he wants from the defenseless under his rule, it’s not ipso facto corrupt because he has the right to anything he wants within his kingdom. I don’t think that deals with the problem, it just defines corruption narrowly as something that can only take place when there’s a prior expectation of restraint. By this logic, if we were all slaves that would at least deal with the problem of corruption since there wouldn’t be any expectation of rights that our masters could violate.
You seem to be very close to realizing an important truth: that “democracy” has never worked and cannot be made to work.
This phenomenon, where those that we vote for are not actually the ones in power, is the key observation.
How long after this realization will a man continue to “vote,” rather than do something that might actually effect change? It does not take many men to effect such change, as Reich understood. A small, determined group of people is the only thing that has ever made any difference.
I detect a certain amount of pleasure in your prophecies, as if you’ve been looking forward to the “…bodies in the streets.”
You’ve crossed the line into nihilistic ‘manifesting’. It’s not helpful.
These thoughts are what happens when someone thinks of themselves as having “seen through” democracy. In fact, you simply haven’t understood it.
The imperfections of democracy are better understood by those whose lives have been lived in the kind of autocracy you appear to be advocating, but who’d give their lives – and have done so for centuries – to arrive at the stage where the imperfections of democracy can be realised and lived within. Only fools think themselves too clever for imperfections.
When the people in power are not those we vote for, it’s not a misunderstanding, it’s a con-trick.
The author is blaming poverty and the oppression of the working class, and considering how young white males have been forgotten by the system he is on to something. Of course this is combined with the immigration issue and the widespread crimes of Muslims in these towns.
The poverty line is misleading. The main identifying factor is that most of the protestors are non graduates. Many are well paid but they are angry and frustrated at being demonised, abused and ignored over migration.
They are angry about the colonization of their nation by cultural aliens, enabled by the traitorous elite.
And they should be.
Exactly. Who can fault them? I have been predicting exactly this for almost 20 years. It’s the old proverb about the final straw breaking the camel’s back. There comes a point where it’s too much, and all hell will break loose as a result. I am still not sure if politicians and their helpers are simply too stupid and/or cowardly to realise the connection between actions and reactions, or if they do understand and just don’t care, or if this is perhaps done by design, i.e., with intention. A part of me still believes in the old adage that stupidity and selfishness are sufficient explanations, but another part of me thinks that nobody can remain that stupid for this long.
Yes, I’m picking up a strong sense of Karma working itself out; the natural law of cause and effect. The Liberal elite are reaping what they’ve sown and it’s coming back to bite them. About time.
The white males in the video of the riots in the UK looked like the same kind of white males that make up Donald Trump’s MAGA.
Ie male & white? Hmmmmm, profound.
The same in what way?
There was a report published in 2021 but The Education Committee here’s an exert from the committee. ‘The forgotten: how White working-class pupils have been let down, and how to change it’, the report highlights how White British pupils eligible for free school meals (FSM) persistently underperform compared with peers in other ethnic groups, from early years through to higher education.
White working-class pupils have been badly let down by decades of neglect and muddled policy thinking and only a proper targeted approach will reverse the educational underachievement of this long forgotten disadvantaged group, MPs say today.
The report notes the Department for Education’s failure to acknowledge the importance of investigating the reasons for the disparities, instead relying on muddled thinking and an insistence that pursuing the same policies will somehow provide a solution.
In contrast, the Committee highlights the reasons behind the disparities and identifies five key solutions.
Statistics on underperformance (page 18)Early years: In 2018/19, just 53% of FSM-eligible White British pupils met the expected standard of development at the end of the early years foundation stage, one of the lowest percentages for any disadvantaged ethnic group.GCSE performance: In 2019 just 17.7% of FSM-eligible White British pupils achieved grade 5 or above in English and maths, compared with 22.5% of all FSM-eligible pupils. This means that around 39,000 children in the group did not achieve two strong passes.Access to higher education: The proportion of White British pupils who were FSM-eligible starting higher education by the age of 19 in 2018/19 was 16%, the lowest of any ethnic group other than traveller of Irish heritage and Gypsy/Roma.
The Committee found these disparities particularly striking because White people are the ethnic majority in the country and, while White British pupils are less likely to be disadvantaged, FSM-eligible White British pupils are the largest disadvantaged group.
ReasonsDuring its inquiry, the Committee heard of many factors that may combine to put White working class pupils at a disadvantage. It was not convinced by the DfE’s claim that the gap can be attributed to poverty alone, with pupils from most ethnic minority backgrounds more likely to experience poverty, yet consistently out-performing their White British peers.
Among the many factors that may combine to put White working-class pupils at a disadvantage are:
1. Persistent and multigenerational disadvantage
2. Placed-based factors, including regional economics and underinvestment
3. Family experience of education
4. A lack of social capital (for example the absence of community organisations and youth groups)
5. Disengagement from the curriculum
6. A failure to address low participation in higher education
Solutions1. Funding needs to be tailor-made at a local level to level up educational opportunity. (page 45) A better understanding of disadvantage and better tools to tackle it is needed – starting with reforming the Pupil Premium.
2. Support parental engagement & tackle multi-generational disadvantage. (page 33) To boost parental engagement and mitigate the effects of multi-generational disadvantage, a strong network of Family Hubs for all families is needed. These should offer integrated services and build trusting relationships with families and work closely with schools to provide support throughout a child’s educational journey.
3. Ensure the value of vocational training and apprenticeship options while boosting access to higher education. (page 49) Reform the Ebacc to include a greater variety of subjects, including Design & Technology. Ofsted must be stronger in enforcing schools’ compliance with the Baker Clause, to ensure they allow vocational training and apprenticeship providers to advertise their courses to pupils. Where there is non-compliance, schools should be limited to a ‘Requires Improvement’ rating.
4. Attract good teachers to challenging areas. (page 43) Good teaching is one of the most powerful levers for improving outcomes. Introducing teaching degree apprenticeships and investing in local teacher training centres may support getting good teachers to the pupils who need them most.
5. Find a better way to talk about racial disparities. (page 14) The Committee agreed with the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities that discourse around the term ‘White Privilege’ can be divisive, and that disadvantage should be discussed without pitting different groups against each other. Schools should consider whether the promotion of politically controversial terminology, including White Privilege, is consistent with their duties under the Equality Act 2010. The Department should issue clear guidance for schools and other Department-affiliated organisations receiving grants from the Department on how to deliver teaching on these complex issues in a balanced, impartial and age-appropriate way.
Chair’s commentsRt Hon Robert Halfon MP, Chair of the Education Committee, said: “For decades now White working-class pupils have been let down and neglected by an education system that condemns them to falling behind their peers every step of the way. White working-class pupils underperform significantly compared to other ethnic groups, but there has been muddled thinking from all governments and a lack of attention and care to help these disadvantaged White pupils in towns across our country.
If the Government is serious about closing the overall attainment gap, then the problems faced by the biggest group of disadvantaged pupils can no longer be swept under the carpet. Never again should we lazily put the gap down to poverty alone, given that we know free school meal eligible pupils from other ethnic groups consistently out perform their White British peers. In 2019, less than 18% of free school meal eligible White British pupils achieved a strong pass in English and Maths GCSEs, compared with 22.5% of all similarly disadvantaged pupils. This equates to nearly 39,000 White working-class children missing out.
So far, the Department for Education has been reluctant to recognise the specific challenges faced by the White working class, let alone do anything to tackle this chronic social injustice. This must stop now.
Economic and cultural factors are having a stifling effect on the life chances of many White disadvantaged pupils with low educational outcomes persisting from one generation to the next. The Government needs to tackle intergenerational disadvantage, inbuilt disadvantages based on where people live and disengagement from the curriculum.
What is needed is a tailor-made approach to local funding and investment in early years and family hubs. This should be alongside more vocational opportunities, a skills-based curriculum and a commitment to addressing low participation in higher education.
We also desperately need to move away from dealing with racial disparity by using divisive concepts like White Privilege that pits one group against another. Disadvantaged White children feel anything but privileged when it comes to education.
Privilege is the very opposite to what disadvantaged white children enjoy or benefit from in an education system which is now leaving far too many behind.”
Thank you for this interesting summary of parts of this report, which is illuminating, and indicates some of the many factors underlying white working class underachievement in education. One factor not discussed here, however, is family structure: how many underachievers come from what were traditionally described as ‘broken homes’? Where children are not being supported, encouraged and nurtured by two parents, especially their biological parents, disadvantage is almost certainly built in. This disadvantage can apply within other ethnic groups, of course, and does explain why some Afro-Caribbean pupil groups outperform others. The issue of sex – boys vs girls – is also not discussed above. There is a need to develop teaching approaches designed for boys and educational streams relating to useful career opportunities for them.
Can we stop pretending that schools are capable of overcoming the socioeconomic pathologies of the communities in which they are embedded? By all means fund them in a way that provides good educational opportunities for all, but until the poverty in their communities is addressed as poverty (with all of its attendant ills) these schools will continue to fail.
They sent the army in against the NUM – who i abhorr, and the poll tax crusties who are no better than the NUM. IIRC there were no Moselms in the NUM or in the “peace” camp movemrnt?
Really (your claim that the army were used against the NUM in the 1984 miner’s strike) ? This is the first I’ve ever heard of this. And some brief research suggest this is nothing more than a myth/conspiracy theory.
You might want to put up some facts.
Myself and two colleagues were traveling to Hartlepool NPS and stopped at the services near M1 j25 in Notts. We met a bunch of guys in black rain jackets and similar pants eating at a neighbouring table. We recognised several as members of a regimental rugby ream we played against. They served in a regiment stationed in the southern cathedral city where we lived and worked. Great bunch of lads and the same regiment produced a WBA world champ in the late 80s. After checking the Brass were out of earshot they explained they were off to Orgreave to give back up to cops from Yorks and Tyneside police forces. Their outfits were the same as police rain jackets but w/o the ID epaulets and numbers. TBH we thought it fair at the time… if Scargill, Foot and probably young Starmer could get USSR money why shouldn’t our side get outside help too. Once the NUM and their SWP renta mob saw the size and fitness levels ranged against them i expect they figured out that wasn’t t’owd plod!!
“similar pants” – oh my god!
No they didn’t.
We’ve been in a civil war since Blair opened the border. It’s just becoming kinetic. And about time. I hope it’s non-violent. But I hope that it’s enough for Labour and the Tories to implode, for REFORM to explode into a majority force – and for Farage to understand what needs to be done, which is:
Close border – zero immigration20 years of assimilation/integration – coercive if necessary
Declare an end to multiculturalism in all manifestations, in schools, state-funded universities. Instead, the intention must be to build a cohesive civic national society with shared (Christian) values. Multi-ethnic for sure. Not multicultural
National service for teens – they can share the experience of hating the sergeant
Life long local service for everyone -regardless of class, religion….cleaning, maintaining, schools and hospitals, roads…whatever needs to be done. Half the cost of public services. 2 weeks a year. Failure to participate leads to prison
Complete ban on leftist ideologies in schoolLords prayer and national anthem
Ban on Muslim immigration – if tiny number of asylum seekers admitted, 100% selection of Christians. There are enough YAzidis and Coptic Christians who have been killed and persecuted across Middle East
Leave European court pronto and defund UN – all but peace keeping missions.
No funding/cheap loans for undergrads to live away from home for university; strong preference for staying with parents
Radical defunding of pointless ideological social science and humanities disciplines; reduction in number of universities and places; emphasis on STEM….
Study away from home mostly reserved for post-graduates and specialist technical disciplines
Re-creation of craft colleges, polytechnics and guild system for apprenticeships
Family policy to strengthen marriage, and create the conditions for extended family (to eliminate need for childcare and reduce cost of elder care)
End to gay marriage. Civil partnerships fine but not marriageStiff automatic prison sentences for ANYONE defacing public statues
Compulsory history lessons in schools – re-establishing the story of a sceptred Isle…..Yes focusing on the contributions of all communities but with the emphasis on that to which they are contributing. Strong emphasis on the role of Britain in ending slavery
Feel free to add suggestions below
If anyone has Farage’s email – please copy and send to him
Maybe Farage is on holiday, he is certainly unusually quiet
Send it yourself Email: [email protected]
Or write to him on GBNews
Ha I forgot he’s an MP now 😉
I agree with most of this, but not with:-
i. defunding humanities disciplines. The loss of literary and cultural heritage would accelerate White deracination. By all means purge the humanities of the woke scum contamining the discipline (see below), but don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater.
ii. ending gay marriage. Gay marriage promotes assimilation.
My additional suggestions:-
a. A wholescale purging of the woke scum. Sack them from their jobs, evict them from their housing, remove their internet access.
b. An annual White British Pride week, celebrating White British culture, endorsed with state sponsorship, and to which other races and ethnicities are warmly invited.
True re humanities – studied with rigour humanities and social science can serve an open civic society AND excercise active minds. Rote marxist propaganda learned by the halfwits at todays “universities” is not the same thing. As far as coercing ppl to follow our rules i think we just need to except them to integrate as in the Republican states in the USA and they’ll gladly follow – after all many fled their s***holes to get away from the violence and intolerance typical of labour, demrats and other leftist mob rule types.
Sure purge woke scum. But 99% of humanities and social science disciplines are fallen beyond repair.
gay marriage – Hmm I disagree. It was supposed to be the end of the line. But no sooner achieved, than the next thing – polyamory, queering the kids….and transhumanism is next stop. It’s natural law or bust
to be honest, on the white thing – I see the rhetoric value. But race identity politics are hell. I prefer the original Catholic internationalism
Well it may take civil unrest, violence to rise up and quench itself. Let’s face it there’s not enough law and order available to stop it, and the politicians have their heads in the sand. The current political parties don’t have the policies or the balls to stop it. There’s a leadership vacuum. Mass immigration of a group of misogynistic, Christian terrorising killers, whose leaders cannot agree on how to interpret their own holy book; who will just radicalise their own youth, and won’t uphold the law, but want to replace it with their own religious law, well that’s insane. End of day, you-all should bend over and kiss your asses goodbye, and your donkeys too! Sorry to be blunt, but it’s a blunt problem thats real and happening now. How much worse will it get, Gee there are not any examples anywhere in the world are there?
Re introduce a need to pass a paper in Greek for entry to university which was dropped by Oxford in 1920. The thesis and Viva to be undertaken in Latin. A gentleman knows Latin and a gentleman and scholar knows Latin and Greek.
Why not Erse and Chinese? At least those languages are not dead yet
Islam had nothing to do with anything here, except a mosque being attacked unfairly. That said we shouldn’t be sanguine about Islamic immigration, or either other cultures that don’t conform. In the case of the perpetrator from Rwanda it’s pretty clear that the attack was racist. Attempts to declare a mental illness is deflection.
If the attacker were white, the victims black and the protestors non-white it’s likely that they would be celebrated, not condemned.
Instead blame our idiot elites, with their philosophy or invading the Islamic world and inviting the Islamic world. And the rest of the world.
All correct.
Now, if you can figure out why the “elites” are so hell-bent on colonizing Britain (and the rest of the West) you win the prize.
What exactly would motivate their actions?
Hint: https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2008/04/open-letter-to-open-minded-progressives/
Indeed and if the enemy trying to destroy your society happens to be one of: homosexual, drug addict, child moelster, sexual deviant or just a dumb theif what better allies than the other peoples of the Book – Jews & Moslems
“civil conflict ” tends to show up during a colonization.
Everyone keeps calling mass migration “invasion,” but this is a misnomer. Colonization is much more insidious. A people can survive an invasion; it is organized, obvious, and can be defended against. They cannot survive a colonization. Ask the “native” Americans, the Incas, etc. The “conquering” of the Incas was quick and short, but also merely political. It was the colonization over the next several centuries that obliterated their culture and genetics — in short, their race.
The Brits are running out of time to stop the destruction of their race.
I wonder who the 11 people who gave this comment a thumbs down are? They certainly never seem to engage in the forum exchange (probably because they have no arguments), and are utterly ignorant of history. I have my suspicions as to their identities, but without seeing one write a rational counterargument that remains speculation.
The worst feature of this forum is that anyone can leave a downvote without leaving a refutation. What is the first worth without the second?
Britain has very few issues as a society. The cost of living is more affordable by the day. Britain did not have the greatest transfer of wealth (ever) upwards in the last five years (did the Muslims get all of that as well?). Britain does not have food banks. Britain has affordable housing that has not been getting worse for 30 years. Britain has a wonderful safety net. Britain has been ensuring that communities have not been left behind. Britain has no deprivation. The poor are becoming richer.
I’m not saying immigration and culture are not an issue. But you lot on here are clearly trying to blame them for everything which is clearly not true. Let’s at least be sensible because hatred doesn’t seem like the clever way to deal with serious issues and some of these comments are hate-filled rather than pragmatic or reasoned.
Do we have a choice?
I note that the Middle East countries have managed to cleanse their Christian populations without resorting to war
We did that for them.
So you favour some ethnic cleansing as tried in the Balkans?
And you’d justify by saying as a bunch of sick Theocratic Middle east states might do suchlike we should too?
You seem to have become detached from our British values and appreciation of what makes us great.
Wilful misreading. We are all worrying about conflict now BECAUSE Muslims have cleansed most of the Middle East & large parts of Africa & the Far East of Christianity, Judaism & every other religion.
Western Europe has also been cleansed of Christianity.
A people of no faith will not be able to stand against Islam.
But is that actually true ?
I’ve been to Iran and seen functioning Armenian (Christian) churches. I understand there is also a small Jewish community in Iran. Yes, these are small minorities, but it’s far from the case that all Muslim countries have been “cleansed”. Last time I visited, Malaysia and Indonesia were doing fine.
Haven’t you noticed the ethnic cleansing that has already taken place with London and Birmingham now both being cities where the majority of the population was born outside of the UK? That is host community displacement on a catastrophic scale, especially as the process has established many self segregated mono cultures based on religion and ethnicity, that are clearly hostile to the British traditions you refer to.
You chose to misrepresent what I said. I pointed out that cleansing had been accomplished in the Middle East without war. Look at what happened in Lebanon in a very short period of time
Well we assisted in the ethnic cleansing of Germans from Eastern Europe at the end of WW2 and no one seemed to bat an eyelid.
As for the Balkans it might be the only way to bring an end to centuries of conflict.
This country has not been great for at least a century. We are a middle sized country trying to come to terms with our diminished and still diminishing role trying to stay afloat and chart our way in an uncertain world.
The only way British values work is in an homogenous country. They have little relevance when you import millions of immigrants who do not share those values and actively reject them.
Defeating our enemies is what made us great. Something we’d better hurry up and learn how to do again.
That’s a step to come. In COVID all churches were by law not allowed to meet. They should then have all refused to comply. But church Christianity is now almost exclusively nice people who tend their gardens and allotments,make chutney and jam,watch Songs of Praise and LOVE everybody (they dont really,no one can). They are good obedient citizens and so they obey the laws of the land. I should add the lifestyle I’ve described is LOVELY and I wish it was mine and I watch Songs of Praise but it your answer to civil unrest is to make cakes,no that doesn’t cut it.
You’d probably appreciate the words of Calvin Robinson and Cannon Phil Harris, Jane. They’re making me rethink my having left the church (in my teens) for precisely the reasons you point out.
https://youtu.be/wS3x3hRXXL0?si=rbPTiBG7OvsCZU35
I believe what you describe here is simply the legitimate, orthodox and scripturally mandated political profile of a Christian believer as outlined in the thriteenth chapter ofthe Epistle of Paul to the Romans.
Love your neighbour, live honourably and temperately, honour and obey the secular authorities,
You can’t fault the Christians for being true to their creed.
They cleansed their Jewish populations too. Its easy when you have an overwhelming population advantage and are sufficiently ruthless.
And their Jewish populations. “Cleanse” is the euphemism, drive out is the reality.
Yes, the threat of violence or decapitation and impalement is quite effective. The “religion of peace”, we are told. Perhaps it has been hijacked by extremists, but it appears to have been hijacked almost completely in many places.
On Tuesday, the Labour MP for Tamworth, one Sarah Edwards, said in the House of Commons that, “The residents of Tamworth want their hotel back.” Wes Streeting called Labour’s loss of Muslim votes, “Shaking off the fleas.” Keir Starmer has explicitly defended the measures that have given polio to the children of Gaza. And so on.
Since it is the Government, then the Government is even worse than the Official Opposition, the party of Lord Davies of Gower, Shadow Secretary of State for Wales, retired Detective Chief Inspector with 32 years’ experience on the Force, and of the view that the riots were “politically justified”; the party of Donna Jones, Police and Crime Commissioner for Hampshire and the Isle of Wight, Chair of the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners, and defender of the rioters as the defenders of “British values”.
But even if Labour were in any position to comment, then real civil wars produce giant figures, not Starmer and Stephen Yaxley-Lennon. Yaxley-Lennon has been tracked down to Cyprus, making the most of his EU passport and of his wallet full of euros. The Home Secretary ought not to have the power to revoke British citizenship. But she does, and she has no plan to give it up. Over to her.
And if Parliament had not been recalled by tomorrow morning, then all MPs worthy of the office should reconvene of their own initiative, even if they had to do it in St Stephen’s Tavern. For all Nigel Farage’s bluster, Reform UK merely abstained on the two-child benefit cap, while the five MPs elected as Left Independents voted against it. Four of them are Muslims, as are three of the seven MPs from whom the Labour whip has been suspended for their having followed suit.
Therefore, Muslims are the majority of the Independent Left that will certainly vote against the means testing of the winter fuel payment, and in favour of the New Deal for Working People should that ever make it to the floor of the House, as those MPs will no doubt make every effort to ensure that it did. Reform’s position on that means test is unclear, while it would undoubtedly vote against that New Deal.
While pre-existing conservative phenomena have been known to ally with Fascism, usually to their own ruin, it is the liberal bourgeoisie that keeps Fascism in reserve for when it might ever face any serious demand to share its economic or social power with anyone who did not have it before the rise of the bourgeois liberal order, or to share its cultural or political power with anyone at all. It activates the F-bomb by rousing exactly the Lumpenproletariat that we see unmistakably on our television screens at the moment. Meanwhile, the working class, the class that comes out as one to clean up, knows its own.
Lumpenproletariat … the working class, the class that comes out as one to clean up
Love the mythologising. That’s what home counties leftists who’d skim read a bit of Marx but never been north of Watford used to sound like before Livingstone and Mandelson invented the ‘Rainbow Coalition’. Bravo. Tres retro.
County Durham since 1982, when I was not quite five years old. A childhood in a pit village through the Strike and its aftermath.
The ‘working class’ you talk about hasn’t existed outside the public sector since the ‘seventies.
Nailed it-spot on.
I would need to see the working out on your conclusion that the British Muslim constituency (socially conservative to an almost Victorian standard, pious, hierarchical, aspirational, and defined by fierce entrepreneurial drive with a fondness for competitive, conspicuous consumption) constitutes the last remnant of the ‘Independent Left’.
However yours was a fine a thought provoking comment. A refreshing new perspective on here.
Thank you. All four of the Gaza Independents voted to lift the benefit cap, and will vote against the means testing of the winter fuel payment. See also Zarah Sultana, Apsana Begum and Imran Hussain. That is seven out of what are now 12 Independent Left MPs.
David is a voice of the old left, and very much welcome at that.
What a load of gibberish to describe what every thinking person knows to be true. When a sovereign country allows the mass immigration of a hostile, non-assimilating people conflict has to erupt. And with this particular culture, history has clearly shown us what happens. It’s hard to imagine that this is all just happening by chance.
From my perch here in NYC it seems like the whole question of ‘what to do about the Muslims’ has heated-up significantly since Oct 7. The mindless violence, the madness; and the nearly complete lack of push-back from the rest of the Islamic world have created a stark relief. A thinking person can’t not see it.
Western countries are experiencing invasion, not Civil War.
Good grief, there speaks someone I highly suspect has never been to a proper war zone where one side has invaded another
The Invasion of America by Europeans was mostly peaceful. At first.
The local Indians wanted to kill the strange group of people who had just washed up on the beach. Just kill em. But ONE shithead of them spoke words of compassion and his words won. The locals had mercy on this odd bunch and helped them survive that vital first winter and educated them in how to grow crops in this new soil,weather conditions and environment. Sadly compassion can be weaponised
We should learn from the “native” Americans, and not repeat their mistakes.
Mass migration is colonization. To damage or coerce a people, invade their lands. To destroy them utterly? For that, you must colonize.
How the native must have rued the decision not to drive them back into the sea while they still could
Tell that to the Aztecs, Incas, Floridians, Caribs etc etc etc etc!
The “native” Americans fought like hell to resist colonization of their lands. The Lakota were especially ferocious.
They lost, that’s all.
Let’s not lose, ppl. History is not kind to losers.
And you have? Don’t think so.
Migration, at any level, is not invasion. Invasion is a planned, premeditated politcal act with the aim of taking over territory and enabling regime change.
Yes there are very high levels of immigration currently, and issues associated with that, but to call this an invasion is infantile.
I assume from your name that you’re Welsh. The Britons were driven from or outnumbered across most of southern Britain. The exiles became Welsh, Cumbrian or Cornish. Today not even the most optimistic Welsh Nationalist thinks they will get England back.
The white indigenous British are on schedule to become a minority in the UK in the 2060’s. That means an indigenous baby born today will be in a minority sometime in their forties.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_Kingdom
Look three-quarters of the way down, under future projections.
Ever heard of an invasive plant?
“Invasion” is misnomer.
It is “colonization,” which is far worse.
Ask the “native” Americans, or better yet the Incas, who succumbed to invasion by the Spanish very rapidly. Yet it was colonization over the next centuries that obliterated their race and culture — not the 200 men and horses that “invaded” their empire of 12 million.
Invasion merely changes the political structure. Colonization changes the cultural structure. A people can survive invasion; they do not, by definition, survive colonization.
Colonialisation depends on a mother country.
There is no mother country that is co-ordinating this wave of immigration.
Oh thank god that’s a relief, really?
This article is a paradigm piece in the narrative of denial that the established population of the UK just do not want to be Islamised, and I agree with them. There is zero chance that mainstream Islam will, in any foreseeable future, accept the division between Church/Mosque and State, they are not even discussing it. Unless we want to undo the political disposition of the West, which insists upon this separation, Muslim immigration must be stopped, or even more and more serious social unrest is inevitable. These are just simple, obvious facts and to deny them is nothing but gaslighting
You need to get out more and actually work and meet a few British Muslims. Vast majority don’t hold the views you think they do. Yes some on the extreme do and we should bring the full force of the law onto them if they cross on a line. But be v careful about ethnic simplifications wipped up on social media whilst we sit indoors panicking.
You completely miss the point. I have worked with and talked to Moslems in the UK and overseas and all were decent people.
However survey after survey has shown that a significant minority support extreme Islamism AND that a much larger minority will support those radicals and the rest will fall into line.
The UK has far too many immigrants, it is just especially obvious and dangerous with the Moslem ones. .
The problem with any silent majority, especially the silent majority of law abiding Muslims, is that they are silent, until they are not a majority.
Just saying, but I believe moslem is considered to be quite offensive and doesn’t mean the same in Arabic as Muslim does. One means “submits to god” and the other means “an evil or unjust person”
Frankly, I don’t care. My grandparents referred to them as Mohammedans, i.e., the followers of Mohammed. A Moslem is a follower of Islam, and it was the preferred spelling for decades. The assertion you make is simply false as confirmed by a native Arabic speaker.
I’ve been teaching Muslims for a decade & a half – some of them were my best students. Thats indeed how I know that Islam is an incredibly problematic political ideology based on ‘submission’ (which is what the word Islam means).
It’s actually the people who know the most about it that are sounding the alarm right now, cf Ayan Hirsi Ali, Yasmine Mohammed, Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib, Mosab Hassan Yousef, I could go on & on.
I know you like to throw the R*cist word around liberally – like all good Leftists who actually despise working class, indigenous people – but this actually has nothing to do with ‘ethnic’ conflict and everything to do with a fundamental clash in values – not least the value that the poorest Brits are sick of being violently attacked and denigrated and paying for the privilege.
Islam means “submission to the will of God” or “Do as God wills”; rather as all major world religions would hold that God is supreme.
The problem is not “Islam.” “Islam” did not allow millions of nonwhite, non-Western immigrants into the West in what essentially constitutes a colonization.
No, Universalism did that. It is a Western ideology, or religion, basically Christianity without the supernatural aspects, which insists that all men are “equal,” that “progress” is inevitable, and that multiculturalism “works,” among many other insidious doctrines.
Either Universalism dies, or the West dies — racially and culturally. “Fascism” is, nearly by definition, the only force that opposes Universalism. (The reason “fascism” is so vaguely defined is precisely because “Universalism” conceals itself by refusing precise definition, at least publicly.)
https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2008/04/open-letter-to-open-minded-progressives/
Exactly.
I suspect most Muslims are as frightened of the zealots as our cringing politicians are. That’s why they keep quiet.
They should live in their own lands.
Those who refuse this fundamental asseveration ARE the problem. That idiotic Christian (or, in post-Christianity, “Progressive”) urge to “welcome all, love all” is exactly what led to the cultural, racial colonization of the West that is now underway.
I know one view the ‘vast majority ‘ hold: 75% don’t believe that there was murder and rape on Oct-7. That’s not ‘some’ as you put it, that’s three-quarters.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/06/one-in-four-british-muslims-believe-hamas-israel/#:~:text=Asked%20whether%20Hamas%20committed%20murder,they%20had%20or%20had%20not.
Yet, I know of not a single politician in either the Conservatives or Labour, who is willing to talk about this publicly. Leaving aside why the islamic community believe what they believe, and why British politicians are unwilling to discuss this publicly, what do you think will happen in a country in which an ethno-religious group believes this?
And yet all the Muslims in our community condemned the 7 Oct attacks and continue to do so as they reject the “free Palestine” mantra of so many. Polls are simply possible projections not actually reality. When looking at Muslims living in the UK, maybe you have to look at the countries they live in rather than treating them as a homogenous group!
Not clear what you mean by “the countries they live in” – do you mean the countries they originate from ethnically? In the UK, I cannot do other than treat them as a homogenous group because their behaviour is, um, homogeneous. For decades (until the recent breakdown towards islamic pro-Gaza candidates in the election just gone, they have voted pretty much as a block ~90% Labour. Out of curiosity what is the geographic location of your community? Because if it’s in the UK, the implication would be: communities like yours account for the 25% who do not deny the reality of Oct-7, and to account for the overall numbers in the surveys, there are communities out there where pretty much 100% are denying that anything bad happened on Oct-7.
If they would remain in their own lands, it wouldn’t much matter what they thought.
Would it!?
Well, if they start attacking others then it does matter. Islam is an expansionist ideology by design. It spread through conquest, and many Westerners fail to understand that this is an ongoing process.
You must live in some sort of utopia. Would you mind sharing where this paradise of tolerance and peaceful co-existence is located? My birthplace in rural Dorset is still more or less a tranquil place, but that’s because my small community consists of 98% white Europeans (mostly English, Scottish and Irish), and the few ethnic minorities number in the low double digits (and I mean the low 20s). I have seen pictures and videos of people dancing in the streets of London and other cities in the UK on 7 and 8 Oct.
Thank you.
You need to get out more and visit the World’s Muslim majority countries and find out how they became that way and what they were before; should be simple enough as Islam was only invented a mere 1400 years ago.
Europeans have spent the last 1400 years repelling repeated Islamic invasions.
Maybe our elites should read some history.
We’ve all worked and chatted with muslims, you utter ignoramus. Many are decent people, but will do nothing to hinder their more extremist and criminal elements. They just turn a blind eye. Their young males are allowed, encouraged even, to take whatever ‘liberties’ they choose.
Just one example: traffic laws are for fools and road carnage in high-powered vehicles their putative incomes suggest they couldn’t possibly afford is regularly wreaked in the places where i “get out”. They, and their communities, do nothing to try to prevent any of this.
Those in politics and media will likely live in places where these things aren’t apparent, then seek to take an authoritarian tone when those sections of the country who’ve had to put up with this behaviour and disdain for the rule of law for decades, finally start to react.
I don’t condone the attacks on police or the destruction of property, not at all. But your “they’re lovely people” schtick is woefully naive and your attitudes are part of the problem. You, sir, are as culpable as any of the rioters.
And yet Muslim leaders and scholars are speaking out and condemning the lack of integration and how some of their youth behave. Maybe it is a country issue not a UK issue… And while we are on it, how many Christian leaders and white community leaders have stood against the violence and the law breaking and the way white youths behave?
Name one
He/she is not able to do so. I have given up on these “progressive” apologists. Frankly, all of them spit out the same nonsense, and when you challenge them and their limited factual knowledge, they either disappear or simply dig in further. I am done with these people. They will have to learn their lesson the hard way.
And here I thought one could engage in intelligent discussion with you. I see that I was sadly mistaken, and the comments are just the standard left-wing drivel that I have come to expect from so-called “progressives”. Your fundamental mistake is that you equate Islam and Christianity. There is not one single accepted Christian denomination that promotes violence and law breaking. Not one. Are there some lunatic nutters out there who spout such nonsense? I don’t doubt it, but they don’t govern a country nor can they justify their nonsense with the Bible. Please don’t tell me that the Old Testament contains plenty of violence; yes, it does, but that is descriptive. These stories talk of events in the past, and nowhere does it say that this is the standard for being a good human. Quite the contrary! The parts that are prescriptive (10 Commandments, for example) are generally accepted rules for living in a civilised society. Don’t steal, don’t murder, don’t lie, don’t be envious, be a decent person. Who could argue with that? The Koran is entirely prescriptive as it claims to be the perfect and eternally valid word of God. Unfortunately, it includes commands to kill infidels, and some of us have a problem with that. I for one don’t want to be killed and refuse to go quietly. This will be my last response because I dislike wasting time.
Extremist Muslim, “Do what we say or we’ll kill you”
Moderate Muslim, “Do what we say or they’ll kill you”
I mix with a large number of them and they certainly hold those views and those that are silent tacitly support them
What makes you think that they tell you their true views? If they have to show their true colours and choose a side, I am willing to bet my most beautiful ball gown that they will select the Ummah and not us and our civilisation. I have a good friend who is of Lebanese and Persian heritage. Her mother is a Maronite Christian, and her father fled the Islamic Revolution figuring that his agnosticism wouldn’t be well received by the Mullahs. I dare say he was spot on. My friend understands Arabic because of her mum, and she has been saying for 20 years that the comments she overhears on public transport and sometimes even in pubs and restaurants are truly frightening. What she has heard directly contradicts your assumptions, and confirms mine that we will be mostly on our own when push comes to shove.
> accept the division between Church/Mosque and State
> Unless we want to undo the political disposition of the West, which insists upon this separation
What?
In the country you are probably from there is no such division in law. This is a good example of the Americanisation of the discourse, British people not even knowing their own constitution.
The response to this isn’t that “in practice the U.K. is secular“, because the State isn’t. Which is the topic.
And nor should it be, we need to keep our traditions and remain antidisestablishmentarianist. If we continue to think like Americans we will end up not only believing that we don’t have an established church but that we are a nation of immigrants, and that “white” is a useful term.
Oh wait.
Agreed, it’s no use trying to ignore that many British have no love of radicalised Islamist, does anyone in the middle east? I notice a distinct lack of middle eastern countries accepting many of the refugees that Britian and other part of the world are insisting are immigrants.
I was checking out Enoch Powell on Wikipedia today. He knew German, French, Italian, Modern Greek, Hindi/Urdu, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian, Welsh, Ancient Greek, Latin, Hebrew, and Aramaic. And he read books, from a very early age. When you read about his take on various issues you appreciate the difference between a man of learning and a writer like Brad Evans, who is a man of the current received elite narrative.
Powell was a failure and a bitter fascist. No wonder you admire him…
Like you, ‘fascists’ are big state socialists. Powell was a small state conservative. The two things are polar opposites. He may have been a ‘racist’ but he certainly wasn’t a fascist.
I think that you need to reconsider your definition of fascism, which is about neither a big state or socialism!
Well, you don’t get much more fascist than Benito Mussolini who was a self-described committed big-state socialist.
Where would you draw the finish line, to determine the winners and failures?
Predictable the old Enoch fans identify themselves at moments like this. Yes he was a man of diverse talents and experience, but still a racist when it came to it. I guess you particularly liked the ‘piccannines’ reference ?
Don’t believe that he was a racist rather just a nationalist. Usage of such terms back then was common.
Maybe he was very aware of being a person of rarefied intellect in a world of shitheads. In the 1960s my Dad would teach us “they are as good as us”. He meant black people of afro-caribbean source. We didn’t have Asian Muslim people then in our area. The black families were Christian and really pretty British already in their way of life. The problem is you may have noticed in my Dads totally innocent and well meant words. What I mean is what if they DONT think they are AS GOOD as us. What if they think they are better,and justifiably so. If Im outside working on our communal garden in old clothes and with soil smeared hands,like a yokel of old,and my near neighbour passes me,a smart young woman dressed immaculately for her clean,well paid office job that she diligently studied and worked at school to qualify for why would she think herself “as good as me,thats a low bar” my neighbour is a young black woman,another is a young Muslim woman,I mean one is of afro-caribbean family origin, the other of more recent from Africa,probably Somali origin.
They have every reason to not see themselves.”as good as me”.they see themselves as much much better. I mean we all know that gardeners are simple illiterate folk who don’t know what day it is. This is why in my opinion trying to stop these destructive riots by baking cakes and being extra super nicey isn’t going to.cut it.
Singing won’t help much, either.
You are onto something.
It is a sad fact that the elites have set us up for genocide, civil war, massive social unrest. Was it deliberate? Or were they blind?
Doesn’t matter at this point. As George Carlin said, “unfortunately, I think a lot of people are going to have to die.”
Please provide a definition of “racist” if you’re going to use this term. Otherwise it’s meaningless.
State your definition. Then explain exactly why Powell meets your criteria.
My definition would be someone who believes that one racial group is superior (or inferior) to another for immutable (essentially genetic) reasons. Mutable reasons (culture, etc) are not relevant here.
This is not what “racism” is. This is called “racial supremacy.”
You can be a “racist” without being a “supremacist.”
Nowadays, anything that is racist is maligned as “supremacist,” since the shopworn arguments against mere “racism” are starting to fall on deaf ears.
Example: you need not think your race “superior” in order to prefer to want to live among them, and to exclude all foreigners from your homeland. However, that is certainly “racist.”
Another inconvenient fact: no one has ever demonstrated or even argued that there is something inherently wrong, wicked, immoral or evil about “racism” or even “racial supremacy.” Isn’t that interesting? They merely assert, or better, imply, and everyone goes along with it. No one dare challenge these notions.
That’s what “totalitarianism” is all about, folks. Over generations, it creates a kind of intellectual “learned helplessness.”
The races are certainly different. We can all tell them apart, with high accuracy. To say the races are different may be “racist”, but it’s a provable fact, nothing evil. To prefer to live among members of one’s own race is a reasonable preference, nothing evil.
I’m afraid that in light of present events you people are just going to have to reconcile yourselves to the inescapable fact that you people have lost the room.
Remind us: what exactly is incorrect or “wrong” about “racism,” except that it contravenes your own religious dogma, which is termed “Universalism?”
By which I mean Moldbuggian “universalism”: Christianity with the supernatural aspects surgically removed.
https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2008/04/open-letter-to-open-minded-progressives/
No one bothers to read now..They listen to a podcast or watch a tik-tok. Politicians now who deign to grace a radio studio,the days when TODAY could summon Cabinet Ministers are long over,they reply ” I dont have those figures to hand,it’s back at the office. The likes of Barbara Castle could immediately quote £200K 30 shillings and two pence. Maybe they made it up.but at least they had the presence of mind to.do that.
I recently finished reading Balzac’s Le Pere Goriot in the original French, and have embarked on Hardy’s A Pair of Blue Eyes.
‘So, just as we asked “why do they hate us?” in the aftermath of 9/11, so we must now ask “why is there so much hatred in Britain?”.’
We had a government and media which whipped up hatred against ‘antivaxxers’ and people who did not want to wear facemasks.
Hatred was weaponised by the government and the media.
Total tosh.
I suspect though the explosion of social media, allowing folks who might have griped in their own home or down the pub, to share it more widely has fuelled a growth in expressed and shared hatred.
There seems little point in your coming on here and endlessly repeating verbatim what you’ve been told by the BBC. We’ve all heard this boilerplate thousands of times before and we’ve simply stopped believing it. You’re not going to persuade anyone. It’s a waste of your time. Why do it?
You endlessly repeat material from the wilder shores of Reform; why should Mr Watson not talk a little common sense back?
You endlessly repeat material from the wilder shores of Reform
Such as? If you can’t distinguish between my views and those of the neo-liberals at Reform then I’d suggest you’re not very politically astute.
Compassion has been weaponised too.
“why do they hate us?” This what the indigenous U.K. population are asking its Parliament (yet again).
Hahaha yes, why do people whose religion faith whatever in its extremist form, calls for the killing of infidels, ie people that don’t follow their faith. They openly tell us that, and we still just think if we turn the other cheek and give them a welcome to country pack, money, a place to live, free health care, the right to worship their own gods, even if that means they want to kill non believers! Too too funny. It’s not all of that religion, but enough of them causes terror and death.
Once a good number of the Yobs are banged up in crowded cells without their access to social media bile things will calm down, much as they did in 2011 when summer riots seemed to be sweeping across our cities with the ‘end is nigh’ media frenzy as commentary. As far as confrontations go none anywhere near the Battle of Orgreave in 84. Pathetic drunken and drug fuelled bullies are not a New Model Army.
And as we can see likes of Robinson checking the clicks on his social media that helps his enrichment whilst lounging on a beach. Grifters always come a cropper in due course.
There is undoubtedly a rightful concern about how to stop illegal/Boats migration. Given 14 years of ineptitude it’s a bit rich to think Starmer can fix this in 4wks, but we can have much more confidence in competency now given some time. He and his team well know the issue must be tackled, but effectively and not performatively as Author notes.
As we saw the local Mosque in Southport sent volunteers to help clean up the streets after the riots and many locals welcomed that. There are ‘wrong uns’ on all sides but the core of folks are good and British values of tolerance, kindness and of course the ‘rule of law’ will win.
Starmer is competent?
Who is stirring up trouble? Starmer or Robinson?
There will be 24 hour courts will there, set up by two tier Kier, for the purposes of quick justice.
The trial of Axel Rudakubana, the 17-year-old accused of stabbing children in Southport, is provisionally set to begin on January 20, 2025
Totally fake I mean the trial.
totally agree
what about the Muslim that attacked three officers at Manchester Airport – as far as I am aware he is not even on remand following the faux outrage on the first video which was purposely started from the wrong position
How many police dogs and horse were let loose in the Leeds suburbs when teh Police were just trying to help a kid that had been dropped from a window – only arrest was a white woman telling the primarily Asian thugs who were throwing things at police and burning vehlices to go away
Two tier Starmenr is spot on
All on police bail pending further investigation, obtaining and viewing CCTV, witness statements, medical evidence etc. Not everything can happen within a 24-hour detention period and it rather sounds like there were a number of offences to investigate as part of the same matter. I’m sure they will be