Indian-Born Activist Lectures British On Saying ‘Thank You’ Too Much
'Pointless stream of politeness'
'Game's up, mate': Starmer refuses to resign over appointment of disgraced Epstein ally as US ambassador
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer is facing calls from lawmakers and critics to resign over his appointment of Peter Mandelson, a known associate and possible informant of sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, as the United Kingdom's ambassador to the United States.
While Starmer's right-hand man, Morgan McSweeney, resigned on Sunday over his involvement with Mandelson's appointment, the prime minister doesn't appear keen to meaningfully accept any responsibility himself — a reluctance now supported by many of his liberal allies in the British government.
A short-lived appointment
Starmer appointed Mandelson — known in British political circles as the "Prince of Darkness" — as ambassador to the U.S. in December 2024, claiming he would "bring unrivaled experience to the role."
Starmer's choice was controversial at the time.
'The game's up, mate, and it's time you recognized it.'
After all, Mandelson had not only publicly described the recently re-elected Donald Trump as a "danger to the world" and "little short of a white nationalist and racist," but was an associate of Epstein long after Epstein pleaded to soliciting sex from girls as young as 14.
A source told the BBC that when Starmer made the decision, "The Epstein stuff in broad terms was definitely known and discussed in detail before his appointment."
RELATED: Why are so many people all of a sudden saying Epstein is alive?
Emails released last year revealed that the Starmer pick was not only chummy with Epstein, but had grown close enough with the sex offender to apparently regard him as his "best pal."
The Foreign Office announced on Sept. 11 that Mandelson had been withdrawn as ambassador, noting that the "emails show that the depth and extent of Peter Mandelson’s relationship with Jeffrey Epstein is materially different from that known at the time of his appointment."
"In particular Peter Mandelson's suggestion that Jeffrey Epstein’s first conviction was wrongful and should be challenged is new information," added the Foreign Office.
It gets worse
Any hopes that Starmer's office may have had of putting the Mandelson appointment in the rearview mirror were dashed by the Department of Justice's latest release of the Epstein files, which contains emails showing that Mandelson was not only tight with Epstein but possibly furnished him with confidential government information.
The New York Times noted, for instance, that newly released emails appear to reveal that Mandelson provided Epstein with a confidential economic memorandum that had been sent to former Prime Minister Gordon Brown.
The documents also reportedly indicate that Epstein paid Mandelson $75,000 across three separate transactions in the early 2000s.
Mandelson announced earlier this month that he was leaving Starmer's Labour Party to spare it from "further embarrassment."
In a Feb. 1 letter to the party's general secretary, Mandelson claimed that he had no record or recollection of financial payments from Epstein; he regretted "ever having known Epstein"; and had dedicated his "life to the values and success of the Labour Party."
Mandelson is presently under investigation for possible misconduct in public office.
Starmer digs in heels
Days after his appointee left the Labour Party, Starmer gave a speech, stating, "Sorry that so many people with power failed you. Sorry for having believed Mandelson’s lies and appointed him."
After insinuating that he was deceived by Mandelson, Starmer suggested that he will remain in the role of prime minister to "ensure accountability is delivered."
Apparently, accountability for Starmer meant letting Chief of Staff Morgan McSweeney fall on his sword.
In a statement obtained by the Spectator concerning his resignation on Sunday, McSweeney wrote, "The decision to appoint Peter Mandelson was wrong. He has damaged our party, our country, and trust in politics itself."
McSweeney, an apparent protégé of Mandelson, claimed that he advised Starmer to make the appointment and that the "only honorable course is to step aside."
On Monday, Starmer's director of communications, Tim Allan, also quit "to allow a new No. 10 team to be built."
Neither resignation appears to have placated those in the British Parliament keen to see Starmer shoulder some blame.
Calls to resign
Anas Sarwar, the leader of the Scottish Labour Party, said on Monday, "The leadership from Downing Street has to change," reported ITVX.
"We cannot allow the failures at the heart of Downing Street to mean the failures continue here in Scotland," continued Sarwar. "They promised they were going to be different, but too much has happened. It cannot continue."
Clive Lewis, a member of Starmer's party, suggested that upon reflection, it's clear the Labour Party is "ruined" and needs to be rebuilt without its current leadership.
Nigel Farage, leader of the Reform UK Party, told GB News, "It's over; it's done. The game's up, mate, and it's time you recognized it."
"He's lost legitimacy, he's lost authority, events have moved way beyond his control, and I'm afraid it's all down to his own grievous misjudgment," continued Farage. "But remember, even before the Peter Mandelson case, he was already the most unpopular prime minister in living memory."
On Monday, Starmer stated, "After having fought so hard for the chance to change our country, I’m not prepared to walk away from my mandate and my responsibility to my country, or to plunge us into chaos, as others have done," reported the Guardian.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
London authorities ban ‘Walk with Jesus’ march in Muslim-majority neighborhood
The Metropolitan Police banned a “Walk with Jesus” event from taking place in a London borough, citing concerns it would provoke the members of the community.
'To save Britain, we must reinstate Christianity back into the heart of government.'
In a December social media post, the United Kingdom Independence Party announced a march scheduled for January 31 in Whitechapel, a predominantly Muslim community.
“Join our parade in Whitechapel worshipping Jesus Christ,” the post reads, describing the month as “dedicated to the holy name of Jesus.”
UKIP encouraged individuals who wished to participate in the march to gather outside Whitechapel Tube Station.
“Christ is King,” UKIP wrote. “All the Glory and honour to him.”
The Metropolitan Police revealed on January 23 that it was imposing conditions on the march “to prevent disorder.” Those conditions included a ban on anyone taking part in the event “in the London borough of Tower Hamlets,” which encompasses Whitechapel.
RELATED: Tommy Robinson has the last laugh after politically motivated terrorism arrest: 'Free speech won!'
“They have been imposed to prevent serious disorder and serious disruption. Breaching the conditions, or encouraging others to do so, is an arrestable offence,” the Metropolitan Police stated.
“We have encouraged UKIP to consider the very real likelihood that their presence in Whitechapel could lead to serious disruption or serious disorder and to consider an alternative proposal,” Deputy Assistant Commissioner James Harman stated. “We are not saying that the UKIP protest, in isolation, will be disorderly. But we do know that many will find it provocative and that provocation is likely to lead to an adverse local reaction.”
“We reasonably believe, based on the information available and on previous similar incidents, that the coming together of the UKIP protest with opposing groups who are hostile to its presence would be highly likely to lead to violence and serious disorder,” Harman added.
He claimed that the decision was not based on politics or whether the event would offend others, but based “solely on our risk assessment for serious disorder.”
Harman insisted that the conditions did not constitute a ban, noting that UKIP was welcome to put on the march elsewhere.
“If they will engage with our teams we are confident a less provocative location that avoids the risk of serious disorder can be identified,” Harman said.
Authorities noted that it was the second time UKIP had proposed a gathering in the Whitechapel area in recent months. However, it did not explain why the area was deemed a greater safety risk.
RELATED: Patriots flood London streets for Unite the Kingdom festival: 'Cultural revolution has begun'
UKIP shared a video from its leader, Nick Marcel Tenconi, on Friday, announcing that participants should gather at Marble Arch, which is located outside the borough of Tower Hamlets.
“Ladies and gentlemen, I believe we are fighting for the soul of our great nation," Tenconi stated. "The battle we are in is to save Britain. The war we are in is a holy war. And the crisis we face is spiritual crisis. ... To save Britain, we must unite. But we can only do this if we return to our faith before any kind of unity can be achieved. That’s why we have always failed. To save Britain, we must reinstate Christianity back into the heart of government.”
“We will be marching this Saturday, the 31st of January, meeting at Marble Arch at 12 p.m. to honor the holy name of Jesus Christ and to stand up for our faith,” Tenconi announced.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Woke UK video game backfires: 'Extremist' Amelia becomes viral symbol of British pride
Hull City Council in Yorkshire, England — an area overwhelmed by third-world asylum seekers in recent years — wasted no time setting a high bar for self-owns this year.
The local authority teamed up with the East Riding of Yorkshire Council and the woke media literacy outfit Shout Out UK to create an online choose-your-own adventure video game targeting young Britons titled "Pathways: Navigating the Internet and Extremism."
'The government is betraying white British people.'
To the chagrin of the re-education tool's makers, one of its supposed villains, a purple-haired patriotic character named Amelia, has been appropriated and used to great effect in counter-messaging campaigns by the right and other critics of the woke British establishment.
The game
Hull City Council announced last year that the game would be "made available to schools, education settings, and community and youth organizations throughout the city" and used to teach youths "about the dangers of extremism and radicalization."
One of the stated objectives of the propaganda tool was to "demonstrate the local threat picture of Extreme Right Wing activities specifically."
The game offers six scenarios in which users decide the path the protagonist, Charlie, will take.
In the third scenario, Charlie — who is referred to as "they" — watches a video that claims both that "Muslim men are stealing the places of British war veterans in emergency accommodation" and that "the government is betraying white British people."
If the player decides that "this seems unfair" and has Charlie engage with the post, Charlie ends up inadvertently sharing the content with online bad actors, sending the player's radicalization risk score through the roof.
Charlie avoids arrest long enough to attend class with Amelia in the third scenario, where she suggests that "immigrants are coming to the U.K. and taking our jobs."
Amelia features prominently in the fourth scenario, where she is introduced as a close friend of Charlie who has "made a video encouraging young people in Birdlington to join a political group that seeks to defend English rights."
After Amelia — who is depicted holding the Union Jack and a sign that says, "No entry" — asks Charlie to join a group called Action for Britain and shares a video on-theme, the player is given the option of having Charlie: ignore the video, like the video but not join the group, or share the video and join the group.
If the player chooses the third option, their radicalization risk score increases just as it will increase if they agree in the final scenario to go in Amelia's place to protest "the erosion of British values."
Regardless of inputs, the game inevitably suggests that exposure to supposedly extremist views such as love for nation, concern over wage suppression by immigrants, and cultural erasure warrant Charlie's referral to an anti-terrorism expert and re-education on "how to engage positively with ideology and the difference between right and wrong in expressing political beliefs."
The Telegraph, citing official documents, revealed last year that the British government listed "cultural nationalism," defined as the belief that Western culture is "under threat from mass migration and a lack of integration by certain ethnic and cultural groups," as a terrorist ideology.
The game concludes with the suggestion that only after receiving counseling on "harmful ideology" from a hijab-wearing counselor is Charlie able to "rebuild their confidence, find their identity, and continue their college course successfully."
New pathway for Amelia
Amelia has recently featured in numerous viral online videos and memes where she warns of the Islamification of Britain, champions national pride, promotes normalcy, and criticizes leftist policies.
In a popular Amelia meme shared by Elon Musk, the character underscores that the English people aren't "immigrants" and "didn't 'arrive' in England. They became England — over more than a millennium."
In another popular meme, Amelia is shown bonding with Charlie over their common love of country, getting married, then starting a family.
Amelia has also been depicted as the Lady of the Lake of Arthurian legend, handing an armored knight the sword Aerondight; in photo-realistic images mocking political figures; and in a multitude of other images making a wide range of political commentary.
British journalist Mary Harrington writing for UnHerd noted that "Amelia stands as a potent illustration of how desperately an officialdom accustomed to comparatively comprehensive public message control is struggling to adapt to the recursive online environment."
When pressed for comment, Hull City Council referred Blaze News to the U.K. Home Office, which did not respond. Shout Out UK for comment similarly did not respond.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!Trump sues BBC for billions over 'deceptive and defamatory' edit of his Jan. 6 speech, blasts foreign election interference
President Donald Trump filed a massive defamation lawsuit against the British Broadcasting Corporation on Monday over an edit of his Jan. 6, 2021, speech that appeared in a BBC "Panorama" documentary.
The lawsuit claims that the BBC's "deceptive and defamatory distortion, doctoring, manipulation, and splicing damaged President Trump in his occupation, damaged his professional reputation, and portrayed him as engaging in supposed calls for rioting and violence that he never actually made."
'The FAKE NEWS "reporters" in the UK are just as dishonest and full of s**t as the ones here in America.'
The complaint notes further that the "aggressively anti-Trump" documentary, which aired shortly before the 2024 presidential election and painted Kamala Harris as an optimal candidate, constituted "a brazen attempt to interfere in and influence the Election's outcome to President Trump's detriment."
A tale of two speeches
Trump originally said at 12:12 p.m. in his speech on Jan. 6, 2021:
Now it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy. And after this, we’re going to walk down — and I’ll be there with you — we’re going to walk down, we’re going to walk down. Any one you want, but I think right here, we’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them, because you'll never take back our country with weakness.
The president noted nearly an hour later after first raising concerns about voting irregularities and potential fraud in the 2020 election, "Most people would stand there at nine o'clock in the evening and say, 'I want to thank you very much,' and they go off to some other life, but I said, 'Something's wrong here, something's really wrong — can't have happened.' And we fight, we fight like hell, and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country any more."
The "Panorama" documentary spliced and reorganized Trump's remarks to make it appear as though he said, "We're going to walk down to the Capitol, and I'll be there with you. And we fight. We fight like hell, and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country any more."
In addition to creating a false narrative by coupling two parts of the speech that were divided by over 50 minutes' worth of content and omitting Trump's call for supporters to behave "peacefully," the documentary showed flag-waving men descending on the Capitol after the president spoke — despite the video having been recorded before Trump's speech.
The Telegraph obtained and reported on a whistleblower memo earlier this year revealing that there were concerns at the BBC over the apparently deceptive work.
The whistleblower memo noted that the "mangled" footage made Trump "'say' things [he] never actually said" and insinuated, with the help of the footage of men marching on the Capitol, that "Trump's supporters had taken up his 'call to arms.'"
Too little, too late
Last month, the BBC came under fire both in the United States and in the United Kingdom.
White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson told the Telegraph, "Trust in the media is at an all-time low because of deceptive editing, misleading reporting, and outright lies. This is yet another example, of many, highlighting why countless Americans turn to alternative media sources to get their news."
Donald Trump Jr. tweeted, "The FAKE NEWS 'reporters' in the UK are just as dishonest and full of s**t as the ones here in America!!!"
"This is a total disgrace. The BBC has doctored footage of Trump to make it look as though he incited a riot — when he in fact said no such thing," wrote former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson. "We have Britain’s national broadcaster using a flagship programme to tell palpable untruths about Britain’s closest ally. Is anyone at the BBC going to take responsibility — and resign?"
In the face of mounting pressure, the BBC issued a retraction, and the director-general of the BBC, Tim Davie, and Deborah Turness, the head of BBC News, both resigned in disgrace.
"Like all public organizations, the BBC is not perfect, and we must always be open, transparent, and accountable," Davie said in statement. "Overall the BBC is delivering well, but there have been some mistakes made, and as director-general I have to take ultimate responsibility."
Turness similarly assumed some responsibility for the fiasco, noting the controversy had "reached a stage where it is causing damage to the BBC" and adding that "the buck stops with me."
'The BBC had no regard for the truth.'
Turness suggested, however, that the broadcast corporation was not biased.
"In public life, leaders need to be fully accountable, and that is why I am stepping down," said Turness. "While mistakes have been made, I want to be absolutely clear recent allegations that BBC News is institutionally biased are wrong."
Samir Shah, the chair of the BBC, subsequently sent a personal letter to the White House apologizing for the edit; however, the network refused to pay compensation, claiming that there was no basis for Trump's defamation claim.
Former British Prime Minister Liz Truss encouraged Trump to take legal action against the BBC, suggesting in a Nov. 15 interview that the network's apology was insufficient "because they keep doing it again and again. They have painted a completely false picture of President Trump in Britain over a number of years. They've done the same thing about conservatives in our country."
Pay the piper
Trump's lawsuit, which was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida and demands judgment against the BBC for at least $5 billion in damages, states:
The lack of any effort by the BBC to publish content even remotely resembling objective journalism, or to maintain even a slight semblance of objectivity in the Panorama Documentary, demonstrates that the BBC had no regard for the truth about President Trump, and that the doctoring of his Speech was not inadvertent, but instead was an intentional component of the BBC's effort to craft as one-sided an impression and narrative against President Trump as possible.
A spokesperson for Trump's legal team told the Guardian that "President Trump’s powerhouse lawsuit is holding the BBC accountable for its defamation and reckless election interference just as he has held other fake news mainstream media responsible for their wrongdoing."
A spokesperson for the network said in a statement, "As we have made clear previously, we will be defending this case."
A spokesperson for the prime minister's office noted that while Downing Street will always "defend the principle of a strong, independent BBC as a trusted and relied-upon national broadcaster reporting without fear or favor," the prime minister's office has "also consistently said it is vitally important that they act to maintain trust, correcting mistakes quickly when they occur."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
'Enemy of Europe': Liberal globalists attack Trump over recognizing 'civilizational erasure' in Europe
President Donald Trump has set about bringing the "golden age of America" into existence though appears keen also to strengthen Western civilization at large. Nations across the Atlantic have, however, proven reluctant to join the U.S. in rejecting the "false song of globalism" and in turning away the hordes of unassimilable migrants who threaten to transform their lands into places both unsafe and unrecognizable.
The Trump administration made abundantly clear in its newly released 33-page National Security Strategy that European allies now have a choice to make: lean into their strengths and former greatness, reassert their national identities, and reject the liberal policies that have led them to relative ruin or continue down the path to "civilizational erasure" without the United States of America holding their hands.
'We want Europe to remain European.'
European officials and liberals on both sides of the Atlantic — including a former Obama official — have melted down over the document, attacking the Trump administration for daring to identify the threat and choice now facing Europe.
In civilizational terms
The administration has attempted on several occasions to give America's European allies a helmet readjustment.
Vice President JD Vance, for instance, noted in a Feb. 14 speech at the Munich Security Conference in Europe that it is high time to "change course and take our shared civilization in a new direction."
In addition to blasting the British and European political establishment for their ruinous mass migration polices, Vance expressed disappointment over their suppression of popular political movements, crackdown on free speech, and routine attacks on religious liberties.
RELATED: No more stiff upper lip: My fellow Brits are fed up with 'diversity'
The State Department has similarly expressed concerns about the trends weakening Europe and the need for America's friends across the Atlantic to buck up and get their affairs in order.
In a May essay shared on its Substack, the State Department suggested that the globalist liberal campaign to "usher in an era of unprecedented peace" in the wake of World War II "by overcoming the anchors of nationhood, culture, and tradition" was a colossal failure.
"This promise lies in tatters," wrote Samuel Samson, a senior adviser for the State Department's Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. "What endures instead is an aggressive campaign against Western civilization itself."
"Our relationship is too important, our history too valuable, and the international stakes too high to allow this partnership to be undermined," continued the essay. "Therefore, on both sides of the Atlantic, we must preserve the goods of our common culture, ensuring that Western civilization remains a source of virtue, freedom, and human flourishing for generations to come."
Trump's national security strategy
The 33-page National Security Strategy document released by the Trump administration on Friday signaled a continued break with the thinking of previous administrations on a number of matters, including on America's special relationship with Europe, which the document suggested is conditional on Europe maintaining its values and culture.
In a section titled "Promoting European Greatness," the document notes that Europe has lost significant share of global GDP over the past 35 years largely as the result of "national and transnational regulations," "but this economic decline is eclipsed by the real and more stark prospect of civilizational erasure."
"The larger issues facing Europe include activities of the European Union and other transnational bodies that undermine political liberty and sovereignty, migration policies that are transforming the continent and creating strife, censorship of free speech and suppression of political opposition, cratering birthrates, and loss of national identities and self-confidence," continued the strategy document. "Should present trends continue, the continent will be unrecognizable in 20 years or less."
The Trump administration's strategy document indicated that if certain NATO members continue down their present path, they might not only cease to be recognizably European but cease to remain "reliable allies."
Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau summarized on X that despite insisting upon transatlantic cooperation while wearing their NATO hats, "when these countries wear their EU hats, they pursue all sorts of agendas that are often utterly adverse to US interests and security — including censorship, economic suicide/climate fanaticism, open borders, disdain for national sovereignty/promotion of multilateral governance and taxation, support for Communist Cuba, etc etc. This inconsistency cannot continue."
"Either the great nations of Europe are our partners in protecting the Western civilization that we inherited from them or they are not," continued Landau. "But we cannot pretend that we are partners while those nations allow the EU’s unelected, undemocratic, and unrepresentative bureaucracy in Brussels to pursue policies of civilizational suicide."
With the understanding that "Europe remains strategically and culturally vital to the United States" and that the U.S. cannot "afford to write Europe off," the Trump administration emphasized its support for "genuine democracy, freedom of expression, and unapologetic celebrations of European nations’ individual character and history," and recommended its European allies get their acts together.
Backlash from the usual suspects
The strategy document was welcomed by many of those on both sides of the Atlantic who've read the writing on the wall and paid close attention to the various crises now destabilizing Europe.
British-American historian Niall Ferguson noted, for instance, "However unpalatable you may find this analysis, you will struggle to find evidence to the contrary. My better-informed British and European friends whisper it softly: 'Maybe it's true.'"
'We must stop behaving as a friend.'
Missouri Sen. Eric Schmitt (R) wrote, "America is back to practicing a foreign policy rooted in strength, restraint, and national interest, not Wilsonian fantasy. The new National Security Strategy marks a clear return to a distinctly American tradition: Realism."
Of course, those supportive of Europe's current path condemned the document.
RELATED: 'Begin repatriating': German chancellor admits it's time to give Syrian migrants the boot
Valerie Hayer, a member of the European Parliament and president of the liberal political group Renew Europe, called the document "unacceptable and dangerous," stating that the Trump administration "has no right to question what makes the European Union, its values, its democratic choices" and no right "to attempt to impose onto our territory the xenophobic and ultra-conservative vision of the MAGA networks."
Hayer suggested further that the National Security Strategy served as confirmation that the "Trump administration is an enemy of Europe" and that "we must stop behaving as a friend toward it."
Shashank Joshi, an editor at the Economist, echoed Hayer, saying it was "a radical, dangerous document" and suggesting the strategy was to "Make Europe White Again."
Brett Bruen, a former diplomat who served as director of global engagement at the Obama White House, told the Independent that the plan was a "disastrously dumb, deeply damaging document for American diplomacy."
"It only further fuels distrust and puts more distance between Washington and the allies we most desperately need to ensure our own security and prosperity," added Bruen.
The German foreign minister, Johann Wadephul, was reportedly also prickled by the document, stating that "we see ourselves as being able to discuss and debate these matters entirely on our own in the future, and do not need outside advice."
In Wadephul's country, which had a birthrate of 1.35 children per woman last year, has in recent years, like other European nations, suffered an explosion in violent crime as a result of its admission of third-world migrants; has a capital city with apparent no-go zones where Jews and homosexuals cannot safely transit certain areas; and has sought to ban, vilify, disarm, debank, and criminalize the popular party that has attempted to turn things around.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
It’s Impossible To Keep Up With The Fall Of Britain
The United Kingdom is now in a rolling crisis that its leaders can neither manage nor control. We should pay attention.Tommy Robinson has the last laugh after politically motivated terrorism arrest: 'Free speech won!'
Tommy Robinson has long drawn the ire and attention of British establishmentarians by raising hell about the fallout of mass immigration, the failure of multiculturalism in England, the threats posed by radical Islam, and the cover-up of the Pakistani rape-gang scandal.
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, various other politicians, and even some woke clergymen have condemned him; multiple social media platforms have banned him; and he was even told to stay clear of an entire city.
'Thank you for raising the flag of England whilst so many cowards cowered.'
The desperation to shut Robinson up or, at the very least, make him go away manifested last year in the form of an unjustified police stop, which resulted in his indictment on a terrorism charge under the British equivalent of the Patriot Act.
To the likely chagrin of Robinson's detractors in parliament and to the delight of his supporters on the scene, Judge Sam Goozee of the Westminster Magistrates' Court cleared the 42-year-old activist on Tuesday, agreeing with the defense that the stop was unlawful and that police discriminated against Robinson because of what he stands for and his political beliefs.
"That judge's verdict is a slam down against the police," Robinson told reporters outside the courthouse. "Read what he says. Read about the evidence. It was corrupt. It was unlawful."
"I'm frustrated still. I should be happy. I'm not happy because I shouldn't be put through this time and time again," Robinson added.
RELATED: The UK wants to enforce its censorship laws in the US. The First Amendment begs to differ.
On July 28, 2024 — a day after organizing a political rally — Robinson was detained by Kent police under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act while attempting to travel to Spain, where he now lives. During his detention, Robinson was told to give police the PIN necessary to access his phone.
Robinson allegedly told police, "Not a chance, bruv. ... You look like a c**t, so you ain't having it," adding that his phone contained sensitive "journalist material" regarding "vulnerable girls."
Alisdair Williamson, Robinson's lawyer, emphasized during the trial that Robinson "was stopped unlawfully, detained unlawfully for 40 minutes, and asked questions that were something to do with his political beliefs."
Judge Goozee evidently agreed, finding on Tuesday that the stop did not appear motivated by any genuine suspicion of terrorism but rather by Robinson's beliefs, which altogether qualify under the law as a protected characteristic. The judge also took issue with the police officers' apparent selective amnesia regarding the incident and credibility.
Goozee said in his ruling, "I cannot put out of my mind that it was actually what you stood for and your beliefs that acted as the principle reason for the stop," the Guardian reported.
"I cannot convict you," the judge added.
In addition to questioning what happens now to the counterterrorism officers who unlawfully targeted him, Robinson thanked Elon Musk after the trial, stating, "I'm forever grateful. If you didn't step in to fund my legal fight for this, then I'd probably be in jail. So today, free speech won!"
Elon Musk responded, "Thank you for raising the flag of England whilst so many cowards cowered."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Today's top stories
thefederalist.com
freebeacon.com