“It doesn’t matter.”
The murder of three British girls—aged six, seven and nine—at a dance class by the 17-year-old son of a Rwandan immigrant.
“It doesn’t matter.”
The tens of thousands, maybe even hundreds of thousands, of white British girls targeted, raped and abused over decades, some even murdered, by Asian Muslim gangs, simply for being white and non-Muslim.
“It doesn’t matter.”
The deliberate social and political transformation of Britain through mass immigration, beginning with Tony Blair’s New Labour and continuing for the last 27 years under successive governments on both sides of the political aisle—which the British public never voted for and on numerous occasions voted explicitly to reject.
It doesn’t matter. None of it matters. That’s exactly what British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said on Sunday—he used those very words: “It doesn’t matter”—as he made a televised public statement about the disorder that has convulsed Britain in recent days.
“Do you believe that everyone taking part in this disorder is part of the far right, and do any of the scenes we’re seeing give you pause for thought about divisions in the country or how you approach other broader domestic policy areas?” a journalist asked the Prime Minister after he read his prepared statement.
“If you target people because of the colour of their skin or their faith, then that is far right and I’m prepared to say so. But it doesn’t matter what apparent motivation there is. This is violence. It is not protest. It doesn’t matter what the motivation is.”
The possibility of understanding the protests and violence, of addressing the root causes—the deep-rooted anger and frustration at the effects of mass immigration—has been totally foreclosed. Instead, the state will pursue retribution and nothing else.
“Be in no doubt, those that have participated in this violence will face the full force of the law,” the Prime Minister said, addressing the camera like the proverbial small mammal trapped in the beam of an oncoming car.
Still, the determination in his voice was clear.
“The police will be making arrests. Individuals will be held on remand, charges will follow and convictions will follow.
“I guarantee you will regret taking part in this disorder, whether directly or those whipping up this action online and then running away themselves. This is not a protest, it is organised, violent thuggery, and it has no place on our streets or online.”
The arrests and convictions have already begun, and no doubt in the coming days, weeks and months we’ll see a whole raft of measures designed to combat the “far right” in Britain and other boogeymen of the British uniparty establishment, including the Russians and their dreaded disinformation machine, which has already been blamed in the liberal media for helping to whip up anger against Britain’s Muslims. Labour has previously said they want to ban VPNs and end internet anonymity too, so don’t be surprised when new legislation targets those things as well. The government will tell us it’s all part and parcel of the same dangerous phenomenon.
It didn’t have to be like this. A day earlier, on Saturday, Hampshire’s Police and Crime Commissioner Donna Jones broke ranks and issued a statement calling for calm and a measured response. Ms Jones didn’t excuse the violence or vandalism—she later reiterated that “those acting outside of the law should expect to feel the full force of it”—but she made clear that prosecution could not address the deep causes of the unrest, and she even went so far as to acknowledge the nobility of the motivations of many of those who were protesting.
“The commonality amongst the protest groups appears to be focused on three key areas—the desire to protect Britain’s sovereignty, the need to uphold British values and, in order to do this, stop illegal immigration.”
“The government must acknowledge what is causing this civil unrest in order to prevent it,” she added.
“Arresting people, or creating violent disorder units, is treating the symptom and not the cause.”
For putting her head above the parapet and saying what many reasonable people are thinking, people who abhor violence and wish for nothing other than a peaceful, functioning society, which Britain once was—a place where young girls were not stabbed as they danced and laughed like children should do, or hunted in the streets at night by gangs of sex attackers imported from alien regions thousands of miles away—Ms Jones has been roundly criticized and will no doubt lose her job soon.
Mr Starmer owes his job as Prime Minister to popular anger at mass immigration. He knows this, but he cannot acknowledge it. It was disgust at the Conservative Party’s repeated failures to stem mass immigration, despite explicit manifesto promises over decades to reduce it to manageable levels “in the tens of thousands,” that led to the massive defection from Conservatives to Reform and handed Starmer the keys to Number 10. Starmer rules with a huge majority in the House of Commons but only the explicit backing of 20% of the British electorate. He is one of the least popular Labour leaders since the end of World War II, for reasons that have been on clear display over the last few days and will become even clearer with the passage of time. Only cranks and oddjobs like Michael Foot and Ed Miliband have inspired less confidence in voters.
Reform got four million votes, 15% of the total, but just five seats in Parliament. The system is broken, of course, and people know it.
I’m not condoning the violence. I’ve not encouraged it either. I’ve merely watched, stunned and surprised at the depth and extent of the anger and determination among my fellow Britons, who we’ve been told until now are a “conquered” population, reconciled to their eclipse and eventual replacement, not even a century after the sun set on the greatest empire the world has ever seen.
Whatever your thoughts on the violence, it should be obvious that treating a population the way the native British have been treated for the last three decades or longer is going to create a very dangerous situation indeed.
Every other demographic in the UK is allowed to speak up and represent its own interests. Every other demographic is allowed to protest and to organise on the basis of its own supposed interests, and even to use violence or the threat of violence as a tool to get what it wants. During 2020, when the Summer of Floyd madness crossed the pond and black groups like “Forever Family” started drilling in the streets of London, in military uniform—in contravention of the Public Order Act of 1936—politicians gushed about anti-racism and “took the knee” in solidarity. One of those politicians, surprise surprise, was Keir Starmer.
The second-class status afforded the native people of Britain, dhimmis in their own homelands, has been on full display throughout the official response to the disorder. Scarcely believable footage showed a police officer with a bullhorn urging a Muslim mob to return to their local mosque and deposit their weapons there. We all know that such treatment would never be afforded a mob or even a group of white British men. Armed or unarmed, white British protestors and even bystanders face the rather different treatment that can only be administered by jackboot and baton. The mainstream media has done its very best to hide the fact that roving gangs of armed Muslim men chanting “Allahu Akhbar!,” including a group calling itself the “Muslim Defence League,” were present and attacking protestors—and anybody white they could get their hands on—with gusto.
By telling white British men and women that their opinions about mass immigration don’t matter, Keir Starmer wasn’t telling them anything new. They already know their country isn’t their own. They know their voice will not be heard. Instead, the Prime Minister was simply reaffirming his support for the project to transform Britain by replacing its people, and in doing so, ensuring the violence will continue. Nice one, Keir.
BOMBSHELL PROOF: Acting Secret Service Director Caught In Massive Perjury
