Thread by @SteB777

"some of whom have clashed with riot police and could be seen throwing objects at the police line. The group seem agitated, with lots of shouting and shoving."

I've yet to see a report of any far right rally, when they have not attacked the police.

1/🧵theguardian.com/politics/live/…

But bizarrely arrests are always low, and the police never invoke the powers they have under protest legislation.

Yet the police make mass arrests of entirely peaceful climate activists and those protesting against genocide in Gaza.
2/

Bizarrely the far right makes false claims of 2-tier policing, and them being persecuted by the authorities, despite perpetrating violence, and making threats of violence, that have always been illegal. Not illegal under recent made up laws to make peaceful protest illegal.
3/

The very clear 2-tier policing, is entirely the opposite of what the far right have claiming. Very clearly, they are being given unexplained dispensation, to violently attack the police without consequences. There is clear legislation to stop this type of protest.
4/

Take the far-right's cause célèbre, Lucy Connolly. She wrote:

“Mass deportation now, set fire to all the fucking hotels full of the bastards for all I care, while you’re at it take the treacherous government and politicians with them."

5/theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/m…

This was clearly inciting people to commit arson. As far as I know, inciting people to commit violent acts such as arson, which could result in the deaths of people, has always been a serious criminal offence.

6/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incitement

In 2011 multiple people were convicted of posting social media posts inciting people to engage violent disorder, and given long prison sentences.

Not once did the right or far right complain about this, or claim it was restricting free speech.

7/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Engl…

Here are examples of how during the 2011 Riots, people were given up to 4 years in prison, for making posts on Facebook, inciting violent disorder, even though their posts led to no violent acts being perpetrated.

8/theguardian.com/uk/2011/aug/16…

Did the right, condemn this back then, as an affront to free speech then.

Of course not, the riots started over the death of a black person, and this happened under a right wing PM.
9/

It's only when far right activists, were convicted of making social media posts inciting violent disorder, and trying to incite arson, most definitely this is inciting violent disorder, did the right claim this was an affront to free speech.
10/

In fact, during the 2011 riots, some of those convicted of making social media posts and jailed, soon deleted their comments. No protests from the right. But they were convicted for doing exactly what Lucy Connolly did.
11/

Since 2011, considerably more anti-protest legislation has been bought in. But the police bizarrely never use it against far right protestors, when there is consistent violence against the police in their protests.
12/

Instead, and quite bizarrely, to my knowledge the police have only used this anti-protest legislation against non-violent protestors who don't attack the police like climate activists, and those protesting against genocide.
13/

In other words, this anti-protest legislation, is only ever used at protests, that might be considered left wing, certainly not right wing. Although most of those arrested are not classically left wing, just progressive.
14/

Nothing more clearly illustrates the bizarre protection given to far right protestors who are allowed to protest violently, and loudly, in a way protestors on the opposite side of the political divide, are not allowed to protest.
15/

The police have the powers to stop these protests beforehand. Tommy Robinson, is a convicted thug, with multiple convictions for violence, who has organized many protests where violent disorder occurred. But bizarrely, he gets a free pass.
16/

Why?

The same happened during the Farage Riots, when the police were violently attacked and injured.
17/

@threadreaderapp unroll