The Enemy Without and Within

Britain is beset by two unspeakable evils: the enemy without and within. To all intents and purposes, these are faces of the same coin. First, there are the Axel Rudakubana’s of this world - those for whom the death penalty is too lenient, as you could only hang the bastard once. These savages are omnipresent throughout our history, the difference now being that they receive state sponsorship for their crimes.

Then there are the traitors like Keir Starmer; another matter entirely. These quislings crowbar the borders open, pretend they are incapable of puncturing the arrival of dinghies along the south coast of England, cover-up the relentless criminality their actions aid and abet, manipulate the law to block access to the truth, and when the public put two and two together, they jail them. Rudakubana’s savagery is heinous but honest - him and his ilk tell us every day of the week what they are up to. It’s the traitors we need to deal with. And the fact that such a traitor is comfortably ensconced in Number 10, is the gravest indication that Britain on its current trajectory is finished.

As details emerge in the Southport case, it’s impossible to ignore the almost biblical juxtaposition of good and evil. Rudakubana ‘systematically’ stabbed little girls, as they sat making friendship bracelets. He ‘gloated’ about the murders, glibly reflecting that he was “glad the children were dead”. Seven-year-old Elsie Dot Stancombe was subjected to 85 stab wounds, but that wasn’t good enough for poor little Bebe King, who received 122.

While the victims begged for mercy, the authorities cried out for the deployment of the mental health card. But Rudakubana's lawyer, Stan Reiz KC, refused to give it to them. "There is no psychiatric evidence before the court that could suggest that a mental disorder contributed to the defendant's actions”, he said. No. Rudakubana was cold and calculated, targeting the girls because they were ‘vulnerable and easy prey’ - a fate tragically common for expendable white girls in Britain today.

As the full devilry of what transpired in Southport comes to light, it’s essential to remind ourselves of what the authorities told us: it wasn’t terrorism; he wasn’t a Muslim; there was no immediate threat to the public. These were outright lies, lies the Prime Minister has confessed to. And yet mysteriously, the Judge Sir Julian Nicholas Goose did not feel Rudakubana’s actions met the threshold for terrorism. I’m no expert on the law of course, but you might think that knives in your schoolbag, three Prevent referrals, a genocide fixation, a Do-it-yourself jihadi manual and the manufacture of enough ricin to wipe out a moderate-sized town may have gotten him over the limit?

Rudakubana’s crimes are so heinous, the necessary cover-up was extraordinary - so much so, even the Old Bill were caught trying to do the right thing. Merseyside detectives wanted to release information about Rudakubana’s terrorist material, but were ‘gagged’ by the Crown Prosecution Service - that’s Keir Starmer’s former stomping ground incidentally. In order to cover his arse therefore, the Pillsbury Doughboy-in-Chief took some time away from his wife’s wardrobe, and deigned to address the nation in his customary manner - with all the gravitas of a retiring headmaster, three gins deep into his assembly monologue.

Starmer’s speeches are perennially devoid of content, but this one was different. Knowing that we knew, that he knew, that we knew he’d been caught with his pants down, the PM continued in a manner Pinocchio would be proud of. He made four reference to the “new threat” Britain was facing, “extreme violence perpetrated by loners, misfits, young men in their bedroom”. No Prime Minister, you do not get to rewrite history - Britain and Europe have been awash with jihadi scum for decades. He made three reference to drawing a “line in the sand”. Tough talk, but it’s ten years now since world leaders marched arm-in-arm in Paris, defiantly clutching pencils to ‘honour’ those massacred at Charlie Hebdo. We were told it was ‘a line in the sand’ back then - how’s that working out?

Shamefully vainglorious, Starmer made 26 references to himself: "I was the prosecutor who first spotted failures in grooming cases at my institution the CPS fourteen years ago. And I was the prosecutor who first did something about it, by bringing the rape gangs in Rochdale to justice.” Perhaps Sir Keir, although as head of the CPS celebrating failure is rarely a good look. Here’s what he did not say: there were zero references to Axel Rudakubana, to the role of Islam, to jihad, or even to religion. Zero.

Instead, we got what we always get with Starmer: excuses and deflections. “The law of this country forbade me or anyone else from disclosing details sooner”, he told us. Except, when it was Jo Cox’s ‘far-right’ killer or the ‘far-right’ thugs rioting in Southport, we had their names, addresses and Reform UK membership numbers within minutes. We need to “protect our children from the tidal wave of violence freely available online”, he said, as though Rudakubana were the victim. Except, it’s been known for decades that the link between violence and violent media (e.g. television and computer games) is practically non-existent. Then he treated us to his theory that the widespread availability of knives was to blame:

“Time and again, as a child, the Southport murderer carried knives. Time and again, he showed clear intent to use them. And yet tragically, he was still able to order the murder weapon off of the internet without any checks or barriers. A two-click killer. This cannot continue.”

A cutlery issue then.

None of these excuses withstands the vaguest scrutiny. Starmer has been getting away with two-tier justice for so long, perhaps he’s forgetting to lie about it. Can you imagine if the Southport killer had been a white male, Reform-voting Tommy Robinson supporter, who’d showed up outside the local mosque? It doesn’t bear thinking about.

Even according to Keir, it is finally time for questions: “We must of course ask and answer difficult questions. Questions that should be far-reaching, unburdened by cultural or institutional sensitivities and driven only by the pursuit of justice.” Too bad those charged with asking them are sublimely incapable of grasping the nettle. With an open goal in front of her, Kemi Badenoch refused the opportunity to quiz Starmer over Southport at PMQs this week. Meanwhile, the limp-wrested media who toed the line obsequiously before the verdict, are still spitting in the face of the victims with front pages like ‘The Amazon Killer’ (The Sun), quotes like “Why are we always talking about terrorism and extremism?” (Sky News), and the crowning turd BBC Wales, desperate to prove not all Welsh choirboys are jihadis, decided to run this headline, ’Far-right group exposed in undercover BBC investigation’.

With the authorities and their bedfellows conniving as usual, it will be left for the public to ask the appropriate questions (and naturally, to risk jail for doing so):

• Rudakubana’s father had stopped him leaving the house a week before the massacre, over fears of his son’s behaviour. What exactly did he know? Did he inform the authorities? And if not, why have the whole family not been deported?

• Why have those Southport ‘conspiracy theorists’, imprisoned for accurately deducing that Rudakubana was a Muslim terrorist not been immediately pardoned, released, and given formal apologies and compensation?

• Most of all, why has Starmer not been impeached for lying to the public and attempting to pervert the course of justice?

What cannot be overemphasised, is that Starmer knew all of this. He knew when he visited Southport briefly to lay flowers, which is presumably why he could not look anyone in the eye. He knew when he smeared and jailed the mythical ‘far-right’ for objecting to the slaughter. And he knew what had truly occurred, when he proceeded to join celebrity Labour cronies for drinks just hours later. Boris Johnson was dismissed for his ménage à deux with Mr Kipling, don’t forget. Every second that Starmer remains in power is an insult to those beautiful angels he pretends to honour; a stain on the arms of justice; a mockery of Britain and her people; and a hideous lie where the unvarnished truth ought to reside.

The Rudakubana case is not a ‘new threat’, but the long-established reality of Britain. The great and the good have sold out our lands for votes, money, and their pitiful egos. The aggressive, alien cultures and their footsoldiers will not stop coming, because traitors like Starmer care more about the office they hold than the lives of the nation’s children.

The solution to the Rudakubana’s of this world is as simple today as it ever was: seal the borders, deport all foreign criminals and illegals, and enforce the law. In addition, I would strongly recommend a referendum on the return of capital punishment - for cases such as this, where guilt is uncontested.

The solution to the Starmer’s of this world however, is a far thornier problem. Reinstatement of the treason laws might be a place to start.

Frank Haviland is the Editor of The New Conservative, and the author of Banalysis: The Lie Destroying the West.

If you enjoy my work, please consider buying me a coffee - it would really help to keep me going. Thank you!