"Mr Musk, it seems to me, should stick to batteries, cars, and rockets because he's very good at it and leave to the UK authorities the job of dealing with the protection of the safety and security of our communities," Sir Thomas said.
The utter self-aggrandising smugness and superiority being displayed here by the former chief inspector of constabulary regarding Musk's analysis of what he saw and heard with his eyes and his ears demonstrates how much they want full control of the narrative, whether people self-censor or the state intervenes.
As I posted earlier, those in charge legitimately believe that two-tier policing is a far right conspiracy theory and dog whistle.
That'll be the secret court proceedings. The media can still report on it because they tow the approved line. It's self-generated content on social media and independent media they have an issue with but haven't got a strategy for yet other than chest-beating and a few charges for "hatred".
I do wonder if the Lotuseaters time is nearly up though, particularly after platforming Liz Truss?
There is a danger if the UK does request Elon Musk to be extradited (it won't work in my opinion but it won't stop them). Russia will follow suit by demanding the UK extradite critics of Putin to stand trial and the UK won't have a leg to stand on because they set the precedent.
If a YouGov survey is representative, they actually believe Elon Musk is more responsible than virtually everything else. I suspect if people had their way, user generated content online would be abolished, playing right into the Government and legacy media's hands who were never happy about the public having a voice without their gatekeeping and would prefer things to go back to one way communication and a heavily regulated national network.
Another thing to note, three quarters of those polled want indefinite lockdown as a response.
And what is bizarre, while only 19% wanted the Police to use live ammo, the majority of those polled want the Army to do exactly that.
The Uniparty has always detested Musk for not towing the line. Any threats of extradition to him, censoring of X or massive fines are at the moment just chest-beating in the hope of intimidating and silencing Musk. It won't work. But they will want to do anything to punish Musk for daring to speak back to the Government and not bend the knee to them.
At this point, your vocal cords, your tongue and your fingers are offensive weapons. As they produce the consequence of the broadcasting of ideas that can not be extinguished and uncomfortable truths that can not be easily dismissed as disinformation or speculation.
I don't think any attempt to extradite him will succeed, not because of his wealth per se, but because of the complexities and potential fallout involved. This is probably chest-beating by the UK Government in order to intimidate and silence Musk. Robinson however will more than likely go ahead as they see him as the "Bin Laden" of the "far right".
If you're referring to the BBC, this is why I archived it because they like to edit things after being called out on it.
The Elon Musk stuff happened as I made this original post but it's all tied in to the same thing, they detest user generated social media and want to put an end to it. They also seem to be using the same tactics as activists do to get something shut down, useful for a Government that does not want to get it's hands dirty or be seen as the first to block X in it's jurisdiction.
ETA - Do remember as well that Elon allowed Tommy back on the platform (why do I remember things after I post something?) and as Tommy is Government enemy number one, that makes Elon culpable for everything that happens from then on.
When they say "far right" they mean "working class". And it's not just protesting. It also applies not just to the police but also to the Uniparty and the judiciary. And not just if you are white. It also applies to men and boys, Christians and Atheists, republicans (as in critical of monarchy), dissenters and critics of the Uniparty, Brexit supporters and oddly enough in the times of promoting Net-Zero, environmentalists.
We've reached the point now where the local police have denied any assaults taking place and that the footage circulating on social media is all "speculation" and "disinformation" (it's those words again) and that no-one was carrying weapons either.
That being the case, where did all the footage come from? You'd think it would be easy to disprove all of this with evidence. But we're expected to just listen and believe.
I saw a video of a police liaison officer telling those with weapons to drop them off at the mosque without punishment or arrest.
You can bet that tomorrow, the likes of Yvette Cooper, Keir Starmer, Rishi Sunak, James Cleverly, the Stoke-on-Trent MPs et al will be offering zero condemnation of the violence today against those they dub the "far-right". Which will be rather telling.
This, a victim of Edwards giving his testimony to a national newspaper that makes Edwards look worse than he already does and now the BBC has had to remove a video of the Southport suspect who appeared in their Children in Need campaign video.
Not a good week for the BBC.
The media and politicians are going all in on the "speculation incites riots". This has been going on for a while and I warned repeatedly about it. Sadly it appears I've done an Alex Jones and that prophecy is coming true.
The people who condemn the "far-right" (and that will include Reform UK and the Conservatives now, mark my words) for using the tragedy of Southport for a political agenda are now doing that very thing to shut down free speech, bring in new draconian illiberal powers and proscribe their political opposition.
They look at Iran, Ethiopia, Sudan, Venezuela and other countries that shut down the Internet to quell dissent and unrest with furious envy. They would like to do it but their pesky western liberal values go at odds with that tactic.
Anyone else spot the irony of calling for the shut down of X on X?