Riots against liberty

The latest excuse for oppression

I largely sat on the side-lines and watched the UK disturbances unfold in July and August 2024.  It has been clear for some time that certain forces have been seeking to engineer exactly the type of violence that we have seen in the past two weeks.  I made a number of videos about this in the recent past¹,  including about the amplified social media account Radio Genoa².  I covered the two underlying issues (the politics of division) here³ and the immigration catastrophe here⁴.

There seem to be a number of bad agendas behind efforts to inflame tensions, including a desire to advance divide and conquer politics and increase general anti-Muslim sentiment, all overlayed on top of valid concerns that U.K. immigration is too high.

Many people have spotted the classic problem, reaction, solution dynamic at work where any problem always seems to lead to ever increasing levels of state oppression of the general populace.  The latest disturbances are now being used to justify increasingly Orwellian levels of state control, including the increased use of facial recognition technology in the U.K.

The immediate triggers

There were a number of events in quick succession in July, which have been amplified and distorted in order to create enough discontent to tip simmering levels of frustration over into riots.  Three key events were;

• Lt Col Mark Teeton was stabbed in Kent (23^rd July 2024).

• Fight in Manchester Airport (23^rd July 2024).

• Three young girls were killed in the Hart Space dance studios in Southport (29^th July 2024).

It is possible that parts of these events could have been embellished, but oftentimes the objective facts around an event are less important than the emotional responses that are triggered.  This was illustrated by the COVID no-virus debate, ultimately the fatality of any virus was less important than the fear that was created and used to ensure that people accepted lockdowns and clamoured for vaccines.  For this reason, I am not going to question the veracity of the events but look instead at the anger created.

The fight in Manchester Airport was probably the best example of deliberate division as the video from this event was released in two carefully cut sections.  The first video section showed a police officer kicking a restrained Fahir Amaaz in the head.  The second section of the video which was released later showed the key context to this incident and showed Fahir Amaaz and his brother Amaad Amaaz punching police officers.

The first clip would likely have enraged the Muslim community and the second clip would likely have enraged police supporters, so two communities angered from the two pieces of video footage from the same incident!

The “usual suspects” poured fuel onto these flames.  By “usual suspects” I mean people with a significant social media presence that regularly post/amplify divisive messages.  I tend to subscribe to Miri AF’s assessment that if you know the name then they are in the game. The “game” in this particular case was to inflame general tensions and enrage their respective follower bases.  Interestingly, I had covered the role of almost all of these “usual suspects” in 2021.

The “usual suspects” are often pushing agendas which have nothing to do with punishing wrongdoers or addressing underlying problems.  On the contrary, the “usual suspects” are trying to leverage these events in order to further their own agendas, be that to increase anti-Muslim sentiment in support of a Zionist position, or playing to the gallery for political purposes.

There were several important tweets/posts that served to inflame tensions.  Firstly Reform UK’s Lee Anderson heaped praise on the police officers in Manchester Airport incident.  The image of a policeman kicking a man on the floor in the head should have been shocking for most people.  Although the shock would have been reduced after the release of the second segment which provided context, it is still not reasonable to praise a policeman kicking a floored detainee.

Actor Lawrence Fox piled in with the outrageous suggestion that Islam needs to be removed from the U.K., this implies that 3.9 million Muslims living in the U.K. should be removed, or prevented from worshipping.

Another inflammatory account is Bernie’s Tweets, an account which I flagged up in 2020 when under a previous incarnation it was receiving a large amount of fake amplification.  Her 29^th July tweet claimed that the Southport attacker was called Ali-Al-Shakati and that he was an asylum seeker, who arrived by boat.  In fact, the alleged attacker was Axel Mudakabana, who was born in Cardiff to Rwandan parents.  Despite the fact that her claims were false, tensions would have been stoked as soon as the tweet was sent, the subsequent retraction would have been irrelevant.

At this point you now have matches, kindling and good dose of lighter fuel to get a summer riot going.  When the street violence did flare up, Sir Keir Starmer’s pre-prepared narrative was rolled out via the mainstream media and went roughly as follows;

It was reasonably clear from papers produced by The Fabian Society and by Sir Keir Starmer himself in 2021 that this government would have oppressive totalitarian tendencies (see government of disservice article).  Starmer spoke favourably about the collectivisation achieved under COVID lockdowns and specifically identified censorship of free speech (tackling misinformation) as an area that he intended to pursue.

His immediate response to unfolding disorder was to smear pretty well all of the people protesting, without acknowledging a widely shared and deep sense of anger over governments’ repeated failure to rein in either legal, or illegal immigration.  His own speech was in fact inflammatory.

I suspect many people see the direction of travel of an increasingly oppressive state using any excuse to curtail God-given liberties.  Although the excuses change from a seasonal coronavirus to the weather (climate change) the “solutions” are always the same, increased powers for the state and correspondingly reduced powers of the individual. 

At the moment we now have sections of the populace fighting amongst themselves, this is a classic divide and conquer strategy and constitutes what I call horizontal opposition rather than vertical opposition. 

I believe that many “right wing” talking heads have assisted Starmer to get to this point both by seeding and amplifying inflammatory rumours. 

At the end of the day, the real threat to “British values” probably doesn’t come from mass immigration, or even from Russia/China, but is likely to come from increasingly oppressive Leftist governments.  It was a tragedy for me that people failed to get behind actual libertarian parties like Heritage and the Alliance for Democracy and Freedom at the 2024 elections and instead fell for the Reform charade, or pursued futile ballot spoiling.

Buckle up for a bumpy ride.

Let me have your thoughts below and please don’t forget to circulate our material and support our work, we have already had to suspend various parts of our activities due to lack of funding!

Alex Kriel is by training a physicist and was one of the first people to highlight the flawed nature of the Imperial COVID model⁵, he is a founder of the Thinking Coalition which comprises a group of citizens who are concerned about Government overreach (www.thinkingcoalition.com)

1. https://rumble.com/v3w6hz1-the-establishment-provocateurs.html

2. https://rumble.com/v43rrt1-social-media-manufacturing-ethnic-hatred.html

3.

4.

5. https://twitter.com/ThinkingSlow1/status/1257578069797339137?s=20