The Southport Cover Up

sixthswan said:
You have proof then that Starmer represented the father, rather than a 42 year old Rwandan woman?
Any documentary proof about the father bei
Click to expand...
Doesn't really matter either way, he was doing his job as a lawyer, making sure the law is followed and applied correctly.

I'm these fine upstanding citizens would want representation if they found themselves or any of their friends and family in court. Or does it only apply in certain cases?
 
The Court case in question was brought by six illegal immigrants against H.M. Government

They did not 'find themselves in Court' - they started the legal action (all funded by UK Taxpayers)

The played the 'asylum' card but not when they entered the Country at Port of Entry as they should have

Anyway - Keir got paid so all is good
 
Led By Donkeys said:
The Court case in question was brought by six illegal immigrants against H.M. Government

They did not 'find themselves in Court' - they started the legal action (all funded by UK Taxpayers)

The played the 'asylum' card but not when they entered the Country at Port of Entry as they should have

Anyway - Keir got paid so all is good
Click to expand...
Legal process applied by a lawyer 👍 thanks for confirming.
 
Led By Donkeys said:
The Court case in question was brought by six illegal immigrants against H.M. Government

They did not 'find themselves in Court' - they started the legal action (all funded by UK Taxpayers)

The played the 'asylum' card but not when they entered the Country at Port of Entry as they should have

Anyway - Keir got paid so all is good
Click to expand...

Here is the actual judgement.
The Labour government were trying to take any support away from asylum seekers, if they didn't fill in their asylum claim quickly enough.
The case only related to people who were destitute.
Whose only option would be to sleep on the streets and rely on charitable handouts.


Though this has zero relevance to the Southport case...
 
sixthswan said:
Here is the actual judgement.
The Labour government were trying to take any support away from asylum seekers, if they didn't fill in their asylum claim quickly enough.
The case only related to people who were destitute.
Whose only option would be to sleep on the streets and rely on charitable handouts.


Though this has zero relevance to the Southport case...
Click to expand...
I never said it did - it came from the incorrect assertion that Twotierkeir represented the immigrant father of the 'Welsh' choirboy. I already know that Twotierkeir has made himself very very wealthy by working against the best interests of the the UK.

Thanks for posting the link although I've already seen it previously (it is very old news) and have already read the judgement.

You do understand that these topic threads do drift off from time to time don't you? It normally happens when the 'Progressives' get involved (including those that claim not to be left-wing but follow the same deflection tactics and misrepresent the facts with overly emotional language - as you have done).
 
Post #58 - FoxInEssex - wasn't me that mentioned the court case.
But once it was mentioned in the thread, I think it's fair to discuss it.
For the record, I'm not a Progressive, nor left-wing.
I think Southport was a terror-inspired attack, but there still needs to be proof that it fits the criteria as a terror attack.
 
sixthswan said:
Post #58 - FoxInEssex - wasn't me that mentioned the court case.
But once it was mentioned in the thread, I think it's fair to discuss it.
For the record, I'm not a Progressive, nor left-wing.
I think Southport was a terror-inspired attack, but there still needs to be proof that it fits the criteria as a terror attack.
Click to expand...
I never said that you did ,mention it

It fitted the criteria but was covered up
 
Led By Donkeys said:
You do understand that these topic threads do drift off from time to time don't you? It normally happens when the 'Progressives' get involved (including those that claim not to be left-wing but follow the same deflection tactics and misrepresent the facts with overly emotional language - as you have done).
Click to expand...

OK.
Explain the deflection tactics and misrepresentation of the facts and overly emotional language that you've claimed that I have "done"?
 
Just in case anyone still needs convincing that Govt departments colluded in delaying charges against Rudakubana and that the PM and his ministers have been selective in telling us the truth and suppressing information

Source:
@thetimes
"Government delayed Southport suspect terrorism charge over riot fears"

The Merseyside Police, ready to charge Axel Rudakubana with terrorism related offences, including possession of a biological weapon, were finally given approval (as confirmed by the Chief Constable on October 29th) by the Crown prosecution service on October 15th. As many as 1,000 riot police were immediately placed on standby amid fears of fresh public anger and disorder in response to the new information.But the CPS first had to seek the go-ahead from the Attorney General whose consent is required in the case of such offencesAnd the Attorney General withheld consent for a further 2 weeks Why? Because at this time a Metropolitan Police marksmen was on trial for murder after fatally shooting a suspect. His trial was still ongoing and Government officials were told that a guilty verdict would likely result in his fellow firearms officers going on strike. So the Attorney General’s office withheld consent until the not-guilty verdict and only then did the CPS announce the new charges on 28th October.
 
This was known about way back in early November 2024.
You're suggesting that there was no opportunity to release the details until 15th October. Which is when the CPS gave the go-ahead.
The riots had already happened long before that.
Riots which were a result of the spreading of lies. That the murderer was an asylum seeker...
What difference did the two week delay make to the case?
 
sixthswan said:
This was known about way back in early November 2024.
You're suggesting that there was no opportunity to release the details until 15th October. Which is when the CPS gave the go-ahead.
The riots had already happened long before that.
Riots which were a result of the spreading of lies. That the murderer was an asylum seeker...
What difference did the two week delay make to the case?
Click to expand...
They found Ricin the day they searched his house. They found the books when they searched his house.

The issue is, as it was at the time, was why they ruled out terrorism without having questioned him or searched his parents property especially given his past history.

The disorder was only partially driven by the asylum seeker rumour - calling them riots is a falsehood anyway
 
By Matt Goodwin: Nails it

I want to know why Axel Rudakubana's father did not stop him. I want to know who these people are and what they believe. I want to know why his father did not march his son to a police station, not least after he found him preparing a school massacre. I want to know how a boy can turn up at school TEN times with a knife and not be sectioned. I want to know why Prevent is not preventing horrific attacks like this one and is clearly no longer fit for purpose. I want to know why the school, social services, the local council, and others did not stop this psychopath despite countless warnings. I want to know why Prevent and the state appear utterly obsessed with the right-wing when 70% of terrorist attacks in this country since 2018 have been Islamist and three-quarters of MI5's caseload is Islamist. I want to know why Westminster and legacy media fell over themselves to share details of other terrorist attacks but went silent over this one. I want to know why Keir Starmer has previously tweeted about attacks on the actual day they occurred calling them "terrorism" but refused to do so in this case. I want to know why the state keeps letting people who murder our children, from Axel Rudakubana to Manchester bomber Salman Abedi, fall through the cracks. I want to know why the media gaslit us by presenting this boy as a nice Dr Who choirboy from the Welsh valleys when they knew he had a long history of violence, had been referred to Prevent, and had ricin. I want to know why Keir Starmer casually branded many people in this country "far right" before they even went to court but now is suddenly obsessed with contempt of court procedure. I want to know why Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner derided people for spreading "fake news" and "conspiracy theories" when they suggested this was linked to terrorism when we now know that SHE knew this guy had been referred to counter-terrorism authorities three times. I want to know why much of the political, media, and cultural class in this country piled in on Nigel Farage, even trying to describe the unrest as the "Farage Riots", when everything he was saying about the truth being withheld was right. I want to know why, even today, they are not apologising. I want to know why Keir Starmer is now trying to convince us there is a 'new' form of lone-wolf terrorism when, from David Copeland in 1999 onwards, this has been obvious to everybody for decades. I want to know why if this had been a white British boy who stabbed three black girls to death and injured many more, who was then later found with far-right literature and ricin, we all know the response from Starmer, Cooper, Rayner and much of the media would have been entirely different. I want to know why Keir Starmer talks about "protecting our children" while *literally* not being able to tell us who is coming into our country through our broken borders and why. I want to know why, as with the rape gangs, nobody in positions of power, in these state authorities, is on primetime news apologising to the country. And I want to know why we are now having this utterly ridiculous debate about Amazon, 'buying knives online' and social media when, in reality, what this is about is how our leaders continue to let masses of people into our country from high conflict, highly violent societies who do not think like us, do not act like us, do not share our values or respect our laws, and do not care about us. Yesterday, Keir Starmer said he is "drawing a line in the sand". He should start by apologising to the people of this country for how he and his government have handled Southport as well as the rape gangs, both of which will now go down in history as powerful symbols of the total incompetence and inability of the state to keep us safe. And then he should announce he is ending the extreme policy of mass uncontrolled immigration which is destabilising our communities and nation, will do whatever necessary to fix our broken borders, will completely overhaul Prevent, will actually develop an integration strategy for this country (we do not have one!) and will start treating hardworking, taxpaying British people with the respect and decency they deserve by authorising major inquiries into not only Southport but the rape gangs. That would be a start. We want to know the truth. And we want to change the direction of our country.
 
There were riots. There was looting. Criminal street damage. Attacks on the Police.
The attacker didn't use any Ricin and as far as we know, the material he read which went way beyond the Al-Qaeda stuff, had no relevance to the carrying out of the attack. some of it was right-wing nut job stuff. So what?
Other information might prove differently, but it is not known publicly.
So the criteria for terrorism was not met, under the current guidance of the law.
Asylum-seeker hotels were attacked and targeted. That to me indicates the asylum-seeker lies were very relevant to the riots.
 
sixthswan said:
There were riots. There was looting. Criminal street damage. Attacks on the Police.
The attacker didn't use any Ricin and as far as we know, the material he read which went way beyond the Al-Qaeda stuff, had no relevance to the carrying out of the attack. some of it was right-wing nut job stuff. So what?
Other information might prove differently, but it is not known publicly.
So the criteria for terrorism was not met, under the current guidance of the law.
Asylum-seeker hotels were attacked and targeted. That to me indicates the asylum-seeker lies were very relevant to the riots.
Click to expand...
There were no 'riots' - according to the Police and CPS anyway

'Other information might prove differently, but it is not known publicly' - Precisely the point - a cover up

Why did the Police confidently say that is was not Terrorism before even starting the 'investigation'
 
Go to the CPS website. There a cases of charging and pleading guilty to riot.
I mean other information showing that the attacks were terrorist, because everything realise so far does not fit the definition.
The Police hadn't found anything to indicate the motive was terrorism and still haven't found anything...

I do wonder if on day one, the release of all the information we currently have about the murderer, would have still led to riots?
 
I criticised the government in the earliest posts.
Have also stated that I personally think the murders were terrorist-inspired.
But - the law is the law, until re-written.
 
People have been asked by the Judge and Police, not to share details of the terrible injuries suffered by the poor little girls.
Quite right too...
Is this a continued cover-up?
 
sixthswan said:
People have been asked by the Judge and Police, not to share details of the terrible injuries suffered by the poor little girls.
Quite right too...
Is this a continued cover-up?
Click to expand...
Yes it is part of the cover-up

Please post a link to the Judge's request - I have have only seen the Police one
 
Last edited:
He's been sentenced to 52 years, unlikely to ever be released, but probably not long enough for you. His religion is or colour of skin is irrelevant irrelevant, yet here you are banging the same drum.

Have a read or listen to the judges comments and what some of those poor little kids had to go through. Have some respect.
 
Having read some details about this case today, I must say that those using it to make political points make me feel sick.

Many of the most ignorant comments can be answered by reading this article: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c78w7nlwz9po

I cannot comprehend the same people that demand ever greater cuts also criticising public services for not doing more. Can you not see the connection? Every public service that is cut has to apply a higher bar to when it intervenes. It happens everywhere in the public sector nowadays.

Lots of people failed these poor girls as well as those that survived who will be traumatised for life. The whole thing is incredibly sad and distressing.
 
NeuroFox said:
Having read some details about this case today, I must say that those using it to make political points make me feel sick.

Many of the most ignorant comments can be answered by reading this article: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c78w7nlwz9po

I cannot comprehend the same people that demand ever greater cuts also criticising public services for not doing more. Can you not see the connection? Every public service that is cut has to apply a higher bar to when it intervenes. It happens everywhere in the public sector nowadays.

Lots of people failed these poor girls as well as those that survived who will be traumatised for life. The whole thing is incredibly sad and distressing.
Click to expand...
Oh do just fuck off

The State grows ever larger and delivers less and less

Lots of people failed these poor girls - mostly all of them in the Public Sector buts let's start with his 'parents' would be an idea (cuurently in a safe-house at tax payers expense)
 
Led By Donkeys said:
Oh do just fuck off

The State grows ever larger and delivers less and less

Lots of people failed these poor girls - mostly all of them in the Public Sector buts let's start with his 'parents'.
Click to expand...

In 2010 there were 2.9m people working in Local Government roles - all those jobs directly involved in 'failing' in this case. The latest stats say that figure is now 1.9m.

With a growing population, the real terms reduction is even greater.

If you effectively halve the people responsible for maintaining local services, what do you expect to happen?

I feel for the poor fuckers that have to choose between cases, making impossible decisions on who to intervene with and who to cross your fingers and hope for the best with.
 
NeuroFox said:
In 2010 there were 2.9m people working in Local Government roles - all those jobs directly involved in 'failing' in this case. The latest stats say that figure is now 1.9m.

With a growing population, the real terms reduction is even greater.

If you effectively halve the people responsible for maintaining local services, what do you expect to happen?

I feel for the poor fuckers that have to choose between cases, making impossible decisions on who to intervene with and who to cross your fingers and hope for the best with.
Click to expand...
'Prevent' isn't Local Government
Police isn't Local Government
Prisons isn't Local Government'
'Border Force' (PMSL) isn't Local Government
Immigration Policy isn't Local Government

Now fuck off
 

​

What did Rudakubana's father know? When did he know it? Was the father aware of his intentions? Did the father prevent Rudakubana from attempting to murder school children? What potential action did he take? Did he inform the authorities? What did any of the family know? What action did anyone take?On what grounds was his father in our country to begin with? On what grounds is he still in the country?All questions that need answering, urgently.
 
Led By Donkeys said:
'Prevent' isn't Local Government
Police isn't Local Government
Prisons isn't Local Government'
'Border Force' (PMSL) isn't Local Government
Immigration Policy isn't Local Government

Now fuck off
Click to expand...
Personal responsibility isn't down to Local Government, either.
Nor is a person making shit decisions and prioritising 'sensitive community issues' over doing the right thing.
If anyone thinks society has shot it, but the main cause is economic cuts to a local council, I'd say that person has a much bigger faith in money and local authorities than I do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top