Roberts

Light Blue. Mother of dragons (otherwise known as teen girls). Never been trampled by a rabbit. Admirer of heretics. 🎗️

[Emma @MrsEmmaWebber]

We have a press conference tomorrow morning with all three families at 10.30am.
A chance to set out what happens next and discuss a few matters we’ve been unable to due to bounds of the Inquiry.
#nottinghaminquiry 💚💛
@BBCNews @itvnews @SkyNews @Channel4News @5_News @GBNEWS @GMB @BBCBreakfast @bbcemt @ITVCentral @thetimes @TalkTV @Telegraph @guardian @nottm_post @DailyMail @DailyMirror @TheSun

[Roberts @vignettory]

@PiersUncensored @piersmorgan Crikey what are you doing to me? Badenoch and now Mesereau. That’s two too many people talking sense on
your show in one week.

[Gareth Roberts @OldRoberts953]

Starmer has unlocked feelings in me that I didn’t, after almost six decades, know that I even had. Not in a good way. I have never felt this level of loathing before.

[Roberts @vignettory]

@honestyetfz Where can one find the whole programme?

[Sam Ashworth-Hayes @SAshworthHayes]

Fundamentally the problem for Keir and his outriders is that they believe passionately in the project and principles that led the police to ignore Henry Nowak, can't compromise, and therefore are stuck with trying to deflect attention.

Something I wrote in 2020 which I think holds up is that the advocates of migration have used identity politics as a battering ram to overcome objections, while also trying to deny the majority any right to an identity of its own.

This was risky because the structure of the post 1945 European state – the ties to international law, the checks on state power, the endless quagmire of human rights – is about avoiding a repeat of the events before year zero. Hence why freedom of speech and association are weak and qualified while the freedom to move across borders based on even the flimsiest claim appears absolute and ironclad, and hence why politicians call any criticism of this structure dangerous.

Phrased charitably, I think the consensus that legitimised identity politics went something like this: ‘The majority holds a great deal of political power and will generally make rules to suit it. Some of these rules will heavily disadvantage smaller groups. When this happens, we will sometimes need organised lobbying to overcome, with the lobby largely defined by ethnic grouping. Identity politics, or a soft ethnocentrism, is therefore a necessary evil in a pluralistic state.

However, these same tools employed by the majority may result in even greater oppression of minority groups. In order for society to function, the majority must deny itself the tools of ethnocentric rhetoric, not pursue its interests as a group, and act instead as individuals. In this way, it will generally get most of what it wants, minority groups will be better treated, and we don't run the risk of direct group interest clashes’

Which was, of course, nonsense, because the toolkit used to suppress dissent was enabling levels of migration that would turn the majority into a plurality, and while doing so habituating people to thinking in terms of ethnic interests. The result of defining every group under the sun bar one and setting out appeals to their unique interests is to open the question of precisely what interests the excluded group holds.

And that's why Starmer and co are stuck: they can't concede that their policies have led to this because if they do, they legitimise the reaction they've spent decades trying to suppress.

[Paul Embery @PaulEmbery]

Tim Stanley is spot on here.

[Andrew Doyle @andrewdoyle_com]

@dianaleonie1 These guidelines, published by the College of Policing and the NPCC, explicitly reject the principle of equality before the law.

The guidelines oppose racial equality and advocate differential treatment according to skin colour.

https://t.co/q5ZI9QftoS

[Roberts @vignettory]

@DreyfusJames Ooh yes please

[Roberts @vignettory]

@MrsEmmaWebber Such courage and compassion. My heart goes out to you all x

[Barry Wall @HeadWarriorTWM]

@KonstantinKisin @JohnJamesNI https://t.co/gzfkL51Yp5

It's in schools.

[Leo Kearse - see me on tour! Links in bio @LeoKearse]

Why are political leaders talking as if this is an isolated incident that is being "exploited" by the "far-right" and "pointless rioting" instead of the final fucking straw of anti-white ideology causing the dehumanisation and death of British people?

> The security guard at the Manchester Arena didn't stop the suicide bomber because he was afraid of being called racist. The bomber killed 22 people and injured over 1,000.

> Valdo Calocane was released because authorities feared they would be called "racist" due to the overrepresentation of young black men in mental health detention. He went on to kill 3 people.

> A head teacher who raised concerns about Axel Rudakubana's "very high risk" to others was accused of "racial stereotyping" by authorities. Rudakubana went on to kill 3 young girls and wound 10 others.

> Pakistani Muslim child rape gangs were allowed to operate across Britain, targeting thousands of white and Sikh girls, partly because authorities were afraid of being called racist if they interfered.

Brits have a tremendous capacity to absorb horrors against their own people, but there are only so many times you can order us to "don't look back in anger".

By ignoring people's concerns every time they're expressed democratically and peacefully, the establishment has driven people to engage in direct action. It's dangerous and undemocratic of the government to have done this. And doubly dangerous to give people examples such as Ballymena to follow if people want their concerns to be dealt with.

[Roberts @vignettory]

@Soubriquet_ @RobertJenrick https://t.co/B5x1ZxcU03 https://t.co/B5x1ZxcU03

[Roberts @vignettory]

@RobertJenrick How to prove you were always a disingenuous, treacherous snake. Well done.

[Sam Ashworth-Hayes @SAshworthHayes]

There's a common thread that runs through the way police officers arrested Henry Nowak when his killer invoked "racism", the domestic propaganda unit wheeled out after terror attacks, the attempts to enforce Islamic blasphemy law, the cover-up of the grooming gangs, the clamp down on free speech, and it runs something like this:

The revealed preference for Britain's establishment is for unprecedented levels of migration. The repeatedly revealed preference of the population is for massive reductions in this number. Migration has been pushed on this country against its will.

The result is friction. Friction between people, friction between groups, increasingly sectarian politics as people begin to see the decision of 'who governs' as an existential one. And where there's enough friction, there's fire.

The way the state handles this is to refocus itself on reducing friction, rather than upholding what the law might actually say. A low-level counter-insurgency against its own people. A crime against an individual is unfortunate; a crime against a group is intolerable. Imperial style policing, brought home.

The difference that gives rise to the 'two-tier' element is the size of the groups involved. The 2010 and 2024 riots showed that the state would struggle to deal with any large scale disorder; by definition, any significant dissent from the majority would give rise to this disorder.

The way that the state has chosen to handle this is to treat minority groups with a certain deference and lenience, making "small" concessions with relatively limited impact that buy a degree of peace, and to treat the majority with utter ruthlessness. The Harehills riot saw the police retreat; the Southport riots less than two weeks later saw maximal deployment of state capacity and a "shared understanding" that the courts would do the bidding of Government with quick, tough sentences. This is not "policing by consent" in the old Peelian model. That was not "the public must consent to the law being enforced", but that the police would try to win the trust of the community, singular. Now there are communities, plural, with conflicting views and interests, and the result is that policing has retreated from what it sees as contested ground.

At times, the new reality is even stated bluntly. The National Police Chiefs Council states that its goal is "producing equality of policing outcomes", and that this "does not mean treating everyone 'the same' or being 'colour blind' (racial equality)".

From monitoring what you say online to reorienting policing around the management of "tensions" between groups to endless efforts to promote the idea of diversity as a good, or play down any identity-based element in incidents with a majority victim. Two-tier policing is a function of numbers. And it is by this point completely clear that the Establishment has committed to this strategy so completely that it cannot reverse it without totally discrediting itself.

[Roberts @vignettory]

@DreyfusJames The combination of the body cam & 999 call full of lies from the brother is monstrous. There have been many recent knife atrocities that have tested us all & our trust in authorities, but to watch & hear these fears and doubts played out in front of our eyes rocks one’s core

[Dr Sanjoy Kumar @drsanjoykumar]

The problem prime minister is that the IOPC are useless. They haven’t a clue. In the Nottingham attacks, we as a family have investigated more, reviewed more and pointed out more than IOPC investigators.
If I had let the Leicestershire police professional conduct panel go ahead,the fact that there was an outstanding warrant for Valdo Calocane would have been covered up. The fact that the officer knew there was a warrant and did nothing would have been covered up.
@Fhamiltontimes @Alison1mackITV @nottm_post @EmilyMayTV @10DowningStreet @LabourSJ @ukhomeoffice

[Jim Chimirie 🇬🇧 @JChimirie66677]

Multiculturalism Built The Training That Killed Henry Nowak. Nobody Is Investigating That.

The Home Secretary stood at the despatch box today and said there must be no two tier policing in Britain. The police have a sacred duty to act without fear or favour. Everyone is equal before the law.

Shabana Mahmood said this the day after the body cam footage of Henry Nowak's final minutes was released. A boy who told officers nine times he could not breathe and had been stabbed. An officer who replied I don't think you have, mate. A killer who was never handcuffed and was taken to choose his food while his victim died in the street. A government whose spokesman said, while that footage existed, that there is no such thing as two tier policing.

That statement lasted hours before political pressure made it untenable. It was withdrawn. Not because the government had examined the evidence. It was withdrawn because the evidence had become impossible to ignore. The Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle had to order the government to make a statement to MPs. A government that requires a Speaker's instruction to respond to one of the most disturbing pieces of body cam footage in British policing history does not take two tier policing seriously. It manages it.

Mahmood warned that anyone using this tragedy to stoke division should be rejected. But the division was not created by those naming it. It was created by decades of multicultural policy, progressive institutional capture and DEI training frameworks that systematically prioritised community cohesion over equal treatment under the law. Rotherham. Rochdale. Oldham. The Batley teacher still in hiding five years later. The Bradford hate crime scrutiny panel chairman sacked for naming the elephant in the room. And now Henry Nowak. The same cause. Different victims. Different towns. The same silence from the same institutions until silence became politically impossible.

The training that conditioned those officers to treat a racism accusation as more urgent than a dying boy's pleas was not an accident. It was built by the Police Race Action Plan, the National Police Chiefs Council's institutional racism declarations, the College of Policing's redesigned disciplinary framework and fifty years of DEI ideology embedded across policing, education, the civil service, HR departments, universities and every institution that shapes how Britain's public servants think and act. Gramsci theorised it. Dutschke operationalised it. Mahmood is now standing at the despatch box condemning its most visible consequence while her government continues to fund and embed its causes.

Kemi Badenoch said something that has been absent from mainstream British political discourse for thirty years. That Britain should be a multi-racial country not a multicultural country. One shared culture. One shared set of values. One law applied equally to everyone regardless of which community they belong to or which accusation they make. That distinction is the most important observation produced by any politician in response to Henry's death. Multiculturalism as a policy framework assumes that multiple incompatible value systems can coexist indefinitely in the same civic space without consequence. Henry's death is one of the most documented consequences of that assumption failing.

The powder keg that has been building for decades across Britain's towns and cities was not created by those asking the questions that Mahmood calls divisive. It was created by the political class that spent fifty years refusing to ask them. The IOPC will investigate the officers. Nobody is investigating the ideology that produced them. That is the conversation Mahmood is determined to prevent. It is the only conversation that matters.

"The powder keg that has been building for decades [...] was not created by those asking the questions that Mahmood calls divisive. It was created by the political class that spent fifty years refusing to ask them."

[Winston Marshall @MrWinMarshall]

As of 2025 the police force were told NOT to treat everyone the same. They were told NOT to be colour blind.

Two-tier policing is explicit in the 2025 Police Race Action Plan

[Roberts @vignettory]

Please let’s have more of this. Compassionate common sense. Not more of the ideological grandstanding that has infected politics, policing and all of the public sector.

[Paul Embery @PaulEmbery]

The Henry Nowak case - and especially the muted reaction to it of the political establishment - says so much about what is wrong with our country. I feel that, like Southport, it will, in years to come, be seen as a pivotal moment causing a shift in the public mood. People can see what’s going on, and they are growing more and more angry.