WELCOME TO TWO-TIER KEIR’S BRITAIN

It has been just 5 weeks since Keir Starmer’s Labour party were elected into power, and I don’t think I can recall a more tumultuous 5-week period in this country for many a year. Starmer’s ascendancy to No. 10 was met with some now infamous narrative, most notably from left-wing political commentator Andrew Marr who, in an appearance on Question Time in the days following the election, stated “For the first time in many of our lives Britain looks like a little haven of peace and stability”.

Of course, there was scant evidence to either support or oppose his claim, coming as it did within a few days of the election. Quite how Marr expected the viewing public to conclude in favour of his comments, let alone be able to see any evidence to back them up, speaks plainly to how the left wing in this country were so enthusiastic to present a narrative that, with the “grown-ups” supposedly back in charge, all of the problems that this country has faced in recent years were attributable to the dastardly Tories and their mismanagement of various senior offices of state, and all would be well now that we had a Labour government.

Marr’s comments could not have aged worse. Within three weeks, the horrific murder of three children at a Taylor Swift dance class in Southport by 17-year old Axel Muganwa Rudakubana, a second-generation Rwandan migrant from Cardiff, had sparked scenes across the UK that haven’t been seen in decades.

What started as anti-immigration protests, fueled by the spread of misinformation that the murderer was an immigrant who had entered the UK illegally on a small boat in 2023, quickly escalated into multiple instances of public disorder, involving attacks on police officers, damage to private property, rioting and looting.

Whilst a relatively small number of individuals seized upon the situation to engage in fighting and anti-social behaviour and expressing fundamentally racist views, this masked a groundswell of public opinion from normal sensible (non-racist) Brits that this government (and those that preceded them) have failed to properly control our borders and keep our streets safe from people entering the country with an intention to do harm to its people.

While certain protests descended into violence and disorder, which was rightly condemned by all parties, the majority protesting were doing so peacefully and out of fear for their safety and that of their children. Blaming the riots solely on misinformation spread via social media (as the mainstream media were attempting to do) was disingenuous, as the protests continued long after the truth regarding the murderer’s heritage had come out.

Legitimate questions were being asked that urgently needed answering, as the public sought desperately for those charged with running the country to provide reassurances that swift and firm action would be taken to ensure their safety, particularly from those attempting to enter the country illegally.

In his response to the protests, the PM had two options. He could have used his platform to recognise the legitimate and understandable anger from the public to the murders (much as he did when taking the knee to show solidarity with BLM protestors), acknowledging the challenges and dangers that mass immigration and multiculturalism present, and pledging to control our borders and improve integration and national unity. But instead he chose to exploit the disorder to introduce a surveillance state, divert essential resources away from investigating violent crime and terrorism and into more stringent policing of the internet, and smear anyone who dared to criticise the government.

In a monumental failure of both judgement and leadership, the PM completely failed to read the room when lambasting all of the protesters as racists and “far right thugs”, whilst completely ignoring the underlying issues and tensions that were fueling the disorder in the first place. In exercising extremely questionable judgement, Starmer decided that the best way to address people angry about children being murdered, was to promise to clamp down on people showing anger about children being murdered!

Starmer’s addresses to the nation during the week of rioting represented the most racially divisive and provocative speeches from a PM in living memory. Instead of directly addressing the legitimate concerns of millions of Brits, he fueled the flames of anger and injustice, ensuring that the riots would continue for longer than they needed to, and putting the police in more danger.

This response has led to widespread anger and accusation that this government is overseeing a two-tier state, with a perception among many that white Brits with legitimate concerns about immigration are castigated for their views and labelled universally as far-right, whilst immigrants, Muslims and anyone of ethnic minority heritage is given a free pass to say and do what they like, without fear that either the police or the government will stand in their way.

When BLM supporters were rioting and tearing down statues and desecrating monuments, Starmer and Rayner took a knee for the rioters. At the time, Starmer empathised with the protestors, saying that their anger was “understandable”, and showed solidarity with their cause. In contrast, when white people were protesting against migrant murderers, he held a press conference to announce new laws to take away the rights and freedoms of indigenous Britons.

He has refused to acknowledge any challenge to his immigration policy, swerving direct questions on the topic, whilst steadfastly sticking to his claim that his “number one priority right now is to ensure the safety of the public”. He believes that the way to do so is to demonise anyone holding or expressing legitimate fears about mass immigration, labelling all who disagree with him as far-right, and directing all police intervention towards them.

He is willfully ignoring the fact that the people stoking racial conflict are the politicians who have overseen disastrous mass migration policies over decades, and who have ignored every form of civilised entreaty to put a stop to unplanned chaotic immigration, or to effectively deal with the horrendous consequences of those policies.

They have been rightly angered about the multiple examples of sexual violence against women and young girls committed by men whose origins may not be named, as well as the rabid radicals marching in many Western capitals threatening Jewish minorities, whilst police stand by the side and allow anti-Semitic chants to be chorused through the streets.

After a large group of Asian men were allowed to maraud through Birmingham armed with knives and other weapons, West Midlands Police Superintendent Emlyn Richards was questioned by Sky News on why there had been little to no police presence, in stark contrast to the heavy-handed approach taken by police when managing the anti-immigration protests. His response was an astonishing admission of two-tier policing based on ethnicity, driven by a desire to avoid inflaming community tensions, and further fueling the flames of division as the perception of two-tier policing was given further gravitas.

In his response, Mr. Richards admitted to meeting with Muslim community leaders in advance of the planned gathering, and basing the decision on what style of policing to adopt on the assurances he was given by them that there would be no trouble. He admitted that certain groups are afforded autonomy to “police within themselves”, and dismissing the many instances of threatening and intimidatory behaviour of the mobs roaming armed with knives and bats as a “small minority” that did not warrant police intervention. It is not difficult to see where concerns about two-tier policing can originate. I am not aware of any other group in society who are allowed to police themselves, or are asked to advise on how they would like to be policed by their local force.

Keir Starmer claims “There is no two-tier policing. There is policing without fear or favour”. Yet it seems beyond coincidence that police are turning dogs on English women and children in Plymouth, but are absent when Muslim men armed to the teeth are rampaging through Birmingham.

In two-Tier Keir’s Britain, the only way you are allowed to demonstrate your frustration about murdered British children is if you wear a keffiyeh, carry a Palestine flag and shout “Allah Akbar” in a loud and intimidatory manner.

When BLM activists toppled the Edward Colston statue in Bristol, there were no riot police, nobody was fast-tracked through the courts, nobody was charged for being a ‘curious observer’. Afterwards, commentators discussed the underlying grievances for months. Today, Starmer’s authoritarian government are discussing laws to prevent any conversation about migration, or expressing any kind of opposition to policy.

And the alarming march towards oppressive authoritarianism reached new heights this week, when a high court judge warned that members of the public could be refused bail even if they only watched riots from the sidelines. The judge in Belfast stated that, whether “active participant or curious observer”, anybody involved in disorder will be locked up. Yet I don’t recall any curious observers being arrested after the Harehills riots, or BLM clashes.

To enact such a stance in practice would represent state oppression so gratuitous as to extend beyond mere overreach of state powers, as well as a waste of resources and prison space. Never mind the right to protest.. in the UK you now no longer have the right to even look at a protest!

Groups of Muslims armed with blades and bats roam the streets of our cities, emboldened by the words of our Prime Minister that they will receive special protections from the government, and safe in the knowledge that the police will turn a blind eye to their actions, even if they are violent or intimidatory. And even if they are arrested for their behaviours, sentencing will be disproportionately lenient in comparison to the multi-year sentences we have seen being handed out in recent days to those attending anti-immigration riots.

Meanwhile, ordinary white British citizens are threatened with the full force of the law if they share information on social media that in retrospect turns out to be inaccurate, if they retweet hurty words, or even look in the direction of “far right” civil disorder. In possibly the most egregious example of censorial state overreach I have seen, in the past few days a man called Lee Joseph Dunn  has been jailed by Carlisle magistrates court for 12 weeks for posting 3 memes on social media over 2 days showing real images of armed Asian gangs, with the caption “coming to a town near you”.

Keir Starmer is bringing in laws so vague and broad that everyone can be said to have broken them, so his authoritarian regime can then choose who they want to punish.

And to accommodate all these additional convicts, the justice system under Starmer is releasing violent criminals back onto our streets having only served a fraction of their sentences. This week it has been announced that Lawson Natty, a prisoner convicted over the fatal killing of a 14-year-old boy with a machete in Newcastle in 2022, is to be released after just 5 months, due to overcrowding. Starmer will make room in our prisons for ordinary citizens expressing their concerns about government policy, and he will happily release violent murderers in order to do so.

Starmer can and will continue to reject accusations of a two-tier state, rigid in his belief that if he tells us something enough times then we will believe it. And why wouldn’t he believe this… he and his ministers repeated the same lies about the Tories “crashing the economy” for months in the run up to the election. This claim lacked any statistical evidence or basis in fact to support it, and has in the past week been proven to be untrue by the Office of National Statistics, who have evidenced that the economy in fact grew following the Liz Truss mini-budget in 2022.

By their own standards, Keir Starmer and his entire cabinet should be arrested and charged with disseminating misinformation online, and in his own words “face the full force of the law”. But they won’t, because in Two-Tier Keir’s Britain, it is one rule for those on the right, and another for those on the left.

His supporters vehemently defend his handling of the protests, insisting that he has shown impeccable leadership and giving him all of the credit for stopping the riots with his swift and decisive action. However, most are so shielded by their London metropolitan liberal bubble, that they never have to contend with the consequences of mass immigration policies. They spend their time labelling as racist anyone critical of mass uncontrolled immigration, whilst parading the streets with their “Refugees Welcome” placards, safe in the knowledge that it is never their communities that will be filled with hordes of illegal undocumented migrants. As a result, they are wildly out of touch with the mood of the majority of the general public.

New polling for the Telegraph has shown that the PMs approval ratings have plummeted in the fortnight since the civil unrest broke out. The first official opinion poll since the election, published by Opinium, shows Starmers polling dropped by a whopping 16 points in just 4 weeks, from +19 at the time of his election to just +3. Within a month, the “grown-ups” in charge have turned the UK into a global laughing stock.

The majority of ordinary sensible hard-working Brits can see the obvious injustices in the way that the police and the criminal justice system, under Starmer’s authority, are treating the people. The sharp plummet in his approval ratings in such a short space of time is a reflection of the lack of faith that the public have in Starmer’s ability to get a grip on immigration, or to keep our streets safe from violent criminals, rapists and knife-wielding maniacs.

The impression that Starmer has in a very short time created a two-tier state has not taken long to gain significant traction. However, the evidence for it is so substantial, and his response to recent events has been so poorly judged, that it is not going to be an easy one to shift. Evidence of two-tier policing goes back a long way, and when the government is seen to be fast-tracking new laws designed to suppress freedom of speech, and even freedom of thought, public perception of how they are being governed takes a very negative twist that is difficult to reverse.

WELCOME TO 5 MORE YEARS OF KEIR STARMERS TWO-TIER BRITAIN