It is becoming increasingly obvious today that the British public has lost the trust of the British state. An official attitude of fear and loathing can be observed wherever one looks. The recent hysteria over the Netflix drama Adolescence, for instance, suggests that in Britain’s teenage boys, the powers that be see a gurning, misogynist army of would-be killers in need of urgent re-education. The internet is now viewed as a frightening force to be censored and controlled; dissenting opinions or sentiments published thereon are aggressively punished. Rape-gang survivors righteously demand thorough investigations and accountability for these horrors – but inquiries are repeatedly put on ice lest the abuse that is found be so shocking that it provokes a backlash. On all issues of importance or sensitivity, the public, it seems, are to be treated like mushrooms: kept in the dark and fed BS.
So it is that a report this month into the Southport response by the Home Affairs Select Committee has denied the well-founded public grievance that it involved any two-tier policing. This is obviously not true, most glaringly in how Muslim sectarian mobs were allowed to run around unpoliced, while violence at asylum hotels was (rightly) dealt with robustly. As ever, rather than risk engaging with this important, thorny issue, the response is to deny, deny, deny.
Still, the self-serving protestations of this 11-member committee, seven of whom are Labour MPs, are hardly unexpected. Where the report is most interesting is
Discussion
Comments
This week across the site:
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to the Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Whenever I hear or read the initial response to any atrocity being labelled ‘not terrorist related’, you can be assured that it is.
Since they did the same with the Nottingham murderer why would we be surprised that the police lied once again.
This talk about not prejudicing the trial is obviously BS. Rudakubana got essentially arrested on the crime scene with the bloody knife in his hands and there were plenty of eyewitnesses. Which means his trial was more-or-less a formality as there was never any doubt about his guilt.
But second-generation black immigrant with links to islamist terror organization knifes little girls to spread fear and panic among the population (“terrorism”)
is a story the keirstablishment simply doesn’t want to exist because the story they do want to exist is white underage teenage sex maniac knifes girl he didn’t get to shag because Andrew Tate told him so in a dream. Hence, the attempt to manage or rather massage ‘the narrative’ into something more palatable to anti-racists and less damaging to their political agenda.
To paraphrase the German secretary of state Rita Schwarzelühr-Sutter (SPD)¹: Considering what kind of people are actually immigrating, the increase in violent crimes is entirely as expected aka We are doing this knowingly and don’t care about the victims.
¹ Reply to a statement blaming immigration policy for rises in violent crime made by AfD MdB Matin Hess (MdB — Mitglied des Bundestages, German acronym for… Read more »
Not acronym, abbreviation. Nevertheless a vile response from Schwarzelühr-Sutter.
Thanks. I didn’t know about the difference.
Man lernt nie aus …
Thanks for that snippet- very revealing.
Here’s a translation closer to the wording of the actual statement:
More rapid rises of the number of non-German suspects and because of this, also of immigrant suspects were to be perfectly expected, considering the present migration situation.
[…]
If a lot of young men of a certain nationality immigrate, a significantly higher burden of crime for the general population is to be expected just because of this.
I hope this makes sense. I’ve done my best to render the German gibberish this entity execreted into hopefully somewhat comprehensible English. And this comes from the party whose stance on the topic of deportation is that they must not happen in the general case because of the human rights of the people who immigrated.
Human rights of “those who’ve been living here for longer already” (Olaf Scholz’s weasel-wording to avoid admitting the existance of ethnic Germans) are obviously of much lesser importance.
Thanks. What’s her logic? Young men commit more crime?
I think that’s what she’s trying to claim. Most criminals are young men. Hence, loads of young men immigrating means the number of prospective criminals rises sharply because of their evil young-men-ness.
But that’s really just her lying into her own pocket (German idiom, sich in die eigene Tasche lügen — telling self-serving lies). It’s now the tenth year of open borders immigration for Germany and nobody knows how crime statistics had developed without it. A lot of the people she’s referring to as young men were really young male immigrants all the time.
The Establishment has deliberately created a “divide and rule” situation in the country – with decades of mass immigration, state-enforced multi-culturalism and two-tier policies designed to favour “minorities” at the expense (literally) of the majority native population.
They’ve done wonderfully with the “divide” part of the equation. But the “rule” half is in the process of collapsing. And that explains Two-Tier’s panicked response …. a desperate attempt to re-impose “rule.”
He’s going to get the response on Thursday this week.
Socialists don’t trust people to make their own decisions. Isn’t that the point?
“Emanating from Sir Keir Starmer downwards…”
…Therein lies the problem – State-sponsored storylines, misinformation and bending the Rule of Law for convenience of the rulers over the ruled.
Compare and contrast the image heading the article with the innocent schoolboy image deployed in last summer’s tragic headlines, and draw your own conclusions.
Guilty as charged, M’Lud.
Kier Starmer, the epitome of the boy that cried wolf!
More the wolf who cried boy.