Once a double standards lawyer, always a double standards lawyer
Watch double standards Starmer's response to BLM Riots vs Southport Riots: the double standard of the man who pretends to be decent and a representative of justice, only to hide that he is merely a corrupt lawyer who changes standards according to what fits the mask he decides to hide behind on any given day.
Racism against immigrants has no justification, not in the UK and not anywhere else in the world. There should be no disagreement about this.
The violent riots, arson, and looting across the kingdom are not only deserving of strong condemnation but also fully justify the force that the police use against the criminals responsible for these actions.
The violent acts of protesters are unacceptable in Britain, just as they were unacceptable during the violent riots that Britain encouraged and facilitated in Hong Kong.
However, perhaps it is time for there to be no disagreement about the illegitimacy of dubious politicians passionately arguing for and against the exact same things, depending on what is currently serving their personal political interests, in complete contrast to the public interest and the minimal standards of integrity that every elected official and public servant must adhere to.
Starmer, just like his crooked predecessor Rishi Crooknak, falls into this category.
The principle in every democratic country must be the same: the role of the police is to prevent acts of violence, arson, and looting, and they not only have the authority and power but also the duty to use all reasonable force at their disposal to prevent these criminal and unacceptable actions.
On the other hand, in a democratic country, every citizen not only has the right but also the duty to protect other citizens from unjustified governmental violence. This includes the democratic right to tackle, neutralize, and handcuff any police officer who uses unjustified violence against a citizen and to take them to the nearest police station to ensure justice is served. Of course, violence should not be used against them; it is mandatory to use all reasonable force to prevent them from committing unjustified acts of violence against citizens.
In the case of George Floyd's murder, for example, if the citizens had tackled the officers instead of taking selfies during Mr. Floyd's final breaths, and had handcuffed those criminal officers and taken them to the nearest police station for continued detention and charges, George Floyd would be alive today and those officers would not be serving life sentences as they are now.
The right to enforce the law is not a monopoly of the police but a civic duty of every citizen in a democratic country.
The violent riots, arson, and looting across the kingdom are not only deserving of strong condemnation but also fully justify the force that the police use against the criminals responsible for these actions.
The violent acts of protesters are unacceptable in Britain, just as they were unacceptable during the violent riots that Britain encouraged and facilitated in Hong Kong.
However, perhaps it is time for there to be no disagreement about the illegitimacy of dubious politicians passionately arguing for and against the exact same things, depending on what is currently serving their personal political interests, in complete contrast to the public interest and the minimal standards of integrity that every elected official and public servant must adhere to.
Starmer, just like his crooked predecessor Rishi Crooknak, falls into this category.
The principle in every democratic country must be the same: the role of the police is to prevent acts of violence, arson, and looting, and they not only have the authority and power but also the duty to use all reasonable force at their disposal to prevent these criminal and unacceptable actions.
On the other hand, in a democratic country, every citizen not only has the right but also the duty to protect other citizens from unjustified governmental violence. This includes the democratic right to tackle, neutralize, and handcuff any police officer who uses unjustified violence against a citizen and to take them to the nearest police station to ensure justice is served. Of course, violence should not be used against them; it is mandatory to use all reasonable force to prevent them from committing unjustified acts of violence against citizens.
In the case of George Floyd's murder, for example, if the citizens had tackled the officers instead of taking selfies during Mr. Floyd's final breaths, and had handcuffed those criminal officers and taken them to the nearest police station for continued detention and charges, George Floyd would be alive today and those officers would not be serving life sentences as they are now.
The right to enforce the law is not a monopoly of the police but a civic duty of every citizen in a democratic country.
