Keir Starmer’s Britain

Where the foxes caper unmolested, the government packs your school lunch and “Allahu Akbar” is a key indicator for “not terrorism”.

10 Replies to “Keir Starmer’s Britain”

  1. The gov’t media agency said the perps were “black British national” but at this point I question if the perp has identified as any of the reported descriptive terms.
    Did he say he’s black?
    Did he say he’s British?
    Did he appear angry or was he simply doing what is people tell him to do?
    Others on the train are now saying the perp was screaming “allahu akbar” yet the gov’t media agency isn’t reporting what the perp was saying? Why is that?

    The PM of Britain said it wasn’t a terrorist attack, yet doesn’t state what sort of an attack it was. Is he guessing? Are some attacks not to inflict terror? Was the attacker asking for money? It appears to have done nothing but inflict terror, but it’s not terror because “he said so”.

    Such a strange civilization which would do this to itself.

    1. Let me guess his motive. This black “British National of Caribbean origin” was simply sexually frustrated because no British woman would willingly accept his demand for sex. It’s the fault of the repressed British women who won’t spread their legs and meet this … “British citizens” … needs.

      So loosen up ladies! Once you been wit a black, err “British National” you never go back.

    1. In the UK, they don’t allow lowly street cops and detectives to be armed. They have their special robo-cop detachments that run around with MP5s.

  2. Hey! I have an idea! How about the MP’s from Faversham introduce a Bill that makes it illegal to deny acts of terrorism against the British people. Yes, including the police? It’s only ‘fair play’.

  3. Just the price a society pays for the “diversity is strength” mantra that covers the nihilism of the moral equivalence of all cultures. Given that the perpetrators were shouting “Allahu Akbar” as they went about their business, it doesn’t seem a leap of faith to conclude their background. When a state censors history, their citizens are forced to repeat it. Hint: the next chapter doesn’t end well.

Navigation