There's a lot of chat going on about the terrorism charges levelled at the Southport child murder suspect...
Here's an attempt at a fair summary of events and what it might mean.
Starmer could be in serious trouble.
Thread 🧵
Earlier today, police announced that they have formally charged 18-year-old Axel Rudakubana, the suspect of the vile Southport child murders, with two new offences.
In addition to the murder charges of 3 beautiful young girls—Bebe King, Elsie Dot Stancombe, and Alice da Silva Aguiar—Rudakubana was charged under Section 1 of the Bio Weapons Act 1974, and under Section 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000, for possessing an al-Qaeda training manual.
The additional charges, discovered during an investigation of Rudakubana’s home in the Lancashire village of Banks, include production of ricin and possession of a PDF titled ‘Military Studies in the Jihad Against the Tyrants—the al-Qaeda training manual’.
Given the lethal nature of ricin and the links to jihadist material, one would assume that Counter Terrorism Police would classify the case as terrorism. However, they’ve refrained, citing lack of evidence of a “motive.”
At a press conference earlier today, Merseyside Police Chief Superintendent Serena Kennedy cautioned the public against assumption:
“I would strongly advise everyone to avoid speculation about the motivation in this case.”
Kennedy emphasised that the criminal proceedings are ongoing and warned that any commentary could compromise Rudakubana’s right to a fair trial.
Her advice seems ironic. Kennedy had no hesitation in labelling protesters who gathered in Southport as “far-right" on July 31st.
It was a quick judgment on her part in comparison. No official, thorough investigations had determined their motivations behind the protests.
The discovery of extremist material takes on further significance, considering some of the media’s reactions following the stabbings.
On August 19th, the BBC declared “false online rumours” fuelled the violence associating Rudakubana with Islam—later supplementing it with more articles theorising about online chatrooms “fanning the flames”.
For context, a recent Sky News investigation revealed that most of the influential accounts driving "disinformation" and "orchestrating" "far-right" riots in the UK originated from overseas users.
Other outlets, such as the Mirror and the Daily Record, frequently referenced the suspect’s Christian father and his prior involvement in a local choir.
British-Nigerian lawyer and activist Adeshola Mos-Shogbamimu, a frequent figure in the progressive media, stated Rudakubana was a “Black British Christian… born and bred in the UK” and emphatically “NOT Muslim.”
Indeed, possession of extremist religious materials does not equate to motivation, yet it strongly suggests an ideological link.
The government and authorities agreed that “misinformation” sparked widespread unrest. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper repeated such concerns in the House of Commons days after the murders.
Even our broadcasting regulator agreed, saying there is a clear link between “misleading content” and violent disorder.
In reality, determining the true reasons—objectively— behind public anger remains complex; the govt's assertions of “misinformation” sidestep the possibility that protestors and/or rioters had broader concerns, whether over immigration or perceived inaction by authorities.
Earlier this month, MI5 Director General Ken McCallum said that roughly 75 per cent of terror threats his teams were dealing were “Islamic inspired”, with 25 per cent relating to “far-right” extremism.
But then Telegraph and Critic journalist Charlie Bentley-Astor dropped the real bombshell…
She revealed that police on the scene had informed a Reform party candidate that Rudakubana’s actions were motivated by Islamic extremism.
The question begs: was the information deliberately withheld from the start? When did police know of the link?
In an equally scandalous development, outlet Guido Fawkes revealed that when they published an article last week questioning why Rudakubana’s case had been delayed, authorities went to the extent of directly contacting and pressuring them to pull the story.
The implications of concealing such details go beyond this case alone, touching on a deeper, more systemic issue of public trust, as does the authorities’ attempt to pressure a retraction.
The terrorism charges also touch on the prosecution and sentencing of those for saying supposedly “inflammatory” things online. The Free Speech Union thinks a number of alleged offenders could have grounds for lawsuits.
Many ppl arrested in Aug for social media posts about the murders faced intense police pressure to plead guilty.
Did police anticipate news of a link to an Islamist training manual would surface, potentially weakening the case for conviction?
If our police and the Prime Minister encouraged the systematic targeting of individuals aware of the suspect’s potential links to Islam for “stirring up racial/religious hatred” despite its truth, the cultural—and possibly political—repercussions could be seismic.
Something went very wrong with Britain’s medical watchdog.
At the heart of it? One career civil servant.
Meet Charlie Massey, the man who transformed the General Medical Council beyond recognition.
How did he do it? And at what cost?
Thread 🧵
Massey became chief executive and registrar of the GMC in 2016.
He is a career civil servant, having previously worked in HM Treasury, the Cabinet Office, Department for Work and Pensions, the Pensions Regulator and the Department of Social Security.
The GMC regulates doctors in the UK, ensuring they are properly trained, competent, and held accountable.
It is supposed to be independent, funded by doctors via fees and managed by an ethical head to safeguard patients.
Britain’s state-backed weather & climate service has been up to some astonishing things.
And at the center of it all? One woman most have probably never heard of.
Penelope Endersby, chief executive of the Met Office.
Her agency’s actions might leave you speechless.
Thread 🧵
Endersby has led the Met Office since December 2018.
The agency operates as a trading fund under the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, supplying climate data that shapes government policy.
It manages hundreds of temperature stations across Britain, frequently cited in policy announcements, and serves as the UK's primary weather forecaster.
There's been a lot of talk about British policing of late...
Some say they're politically captured, but opinions are divided.
So here's a comprehensive summary of past incidences of bias (speaking to policy) so you can judge for yourself...
Thread 🧵
Misconduct Probe for Saying “Whiter Than White”
In Sept 2018, a senior Metropolitan Police officer faced possible dismissal after using the phrase "whiter than white" when addressing colleagues.
The detective, who worked in anti-corruption, was suspended from duties and investigated for gross misconduct.
Discrimination Against Straight White Recruits
In Feb 2019, an employment tribunal ruled that Cheshire Police unlawfully discriminated against an "exceptional" candidate under so-called "positive action" policies.
Matthew Furlong, 25, applied to join the force, following in the footsteps of his father, a serving detective inspector. But despite passing the interview process, he was ultimately denied the role.
He was told “it was refreshing to meet someone as well-prepared as yourself” and that he “could not have done any more.”
Yet, his application was rejected—not due to merit, due to being a straight white male.
Sir Keir Starmer—one of the most aggressive Covid vaccine advocates—is trying to speed up approvals for experimental medicines/treatments.
And he's using his new 'Regulatory Innovation Office' (RIO) to do it.
Thread 🧵
In October last year, Starmer launched RIO to help new medical technologies enter the market quicker.
Its stated goal is to reduce regulatory barriers, stimulate economic growth, and position the UK as a global hub for innovation.
"If there is an innovation which can benefit the health of the nation, can contribute to economic growth, why do we just let it get mired down,” Labour science minister Peter Kyle said during the launch.
British veteran Jamie Michael—persecuted by the British state for a Facebook post—sat down for an exclusive interview 8 days ago.
Until now, little was known about how non-violent Southport protestors were treated post-protest/riots.
This interview changed that.
The key revelations🧵:
1. Arrest
Not only did police tell @jamiemichael369 that his “offence” could carry a maximum 7 year sentence, but they also aggressively handcuffed him and kept him on remand for 3 days—all before his initial hearing.
(For a non-violent crime... Meanwhile, violent suspects are routinely released far sooner.)
He was denied his right to a phone call, warned that he might face an additional terrorism-related charge, and threatened with the arrest of his partner.
(He has a young daughter—meaning if police followed through, she would have been left with no parent to care for her)
2. Duty Solicitors
Now his initial duty solicitor told Jamie something very interesting.
He said if Jamie posted the video 3 months before he did, police would probably have ignored it.
The laws are the same. The police are the same. The only thing that's changed is the Prime Minister.
This same solicitor later advised that he should entertain pleading guilty to reduce the potential sentence by a 1/3.
He even suggested Jamie was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder because he posted a meme.
So after this, Jamie sacked him and enlisted the help of @SpeechUnion