I thought the claims were that the riots were organised by the far-right, which is slightly different to calling individuals involved far-right, but could be deemed as far-right thuggery as it was organised or hijacked by far right groups. Maybe to detach it from political left and right, we could just call it domestic terrorism, which I assume would carry an even longer sentence so I assume those involved wouldn't want to be tarred with that brush either. The UK's Terrorism Act 2000 defines terrorism as the use or threat of action that: involves serious violence against a person, involves serious damage to property, and endangers a person's life. As this article suggests, it may not apply to all cases but it certainly must apply to some... https://www.theguardian.com/world/a...-double-standards-far-right-islamist-violence
There's an awful lot of misinformation being pushed by the media about the events. There is no organised far right in the UK, they're just a bogeyman invented by the governments and continued by Starmer and pushed by the mainstream media. The event organisers made a big play of the message being for peace and unity, and the events were very diverse, with people from all political persuasion and creeds. The people rioting were largely the local scrotes taking advantage of the situation. Going to prison will not bother most of them in the slightest. Conversely, the agitators were largely the same people that get bussed in to many events and they have been organised for decades. I know this from first hand experience where solicitors are on call and fines paid on behalf of anyone convicted. The left v right is misdirection to take the focus away from the governments failures at the border, and the problems they generate including the issues with grooming gangs.
Writing social media posts saying 'Kill all muslims' and 'burn down the hotels with asylum seekers' during a riot is a ****ish thing to do. It's normal that you deserve repercussions for doing it. Going round town setting fire to hotels full of innocent human beings, attacking mosques and looting deserves punishment too. Crying about it and reading headlines instead of understanding the sentencing is low-IQ behaviour. All these 'all he did was shout at police' excuses are from people that haven't spent 2 minutes looking into why they got a small sentence. I challenge any one of you to find me one example of an unfar punishment. Just one. One simple example. Apparently there are loads?
For those that follow events deeply or have an open mind, no explanation is necessary, for those that simply follow a sub editors headline, no explanation is possible, largely because they refuse to see it anyway. The same people reveling in the sentencing, are silent about calls for death and destruction from other groups even though those groups have a history of following through on the threats. It means those that are silent are racists.
Being America it's on a bigger scale, but here's an example of the organised agitators. It's very similar in many parts of the west, and was seen at recent events in the UK and the question of who funds it can be an interesting rabbit hole. There is no equivalent on the mythical right wing.
https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/sahel-the-new-front-in-the-ukraine-russia-war Ukraine...supporting Jihadists in Mali There's that terrorist link again
Those that should won't listen to this, but it gives a reasonable insight into why the narrative in the mainstream media is framed as it is, and doesn't represent reality. Some people still cling to their favoured sources, despite there being so many ways to look for the raw truth.
QED, and so quickly too. It's interesting to see that some find boring little DMD a more interesting topic than world events and politics. #transparentandpredictableasfuck
