‘This is the UK in 2025!’ — Police face backlash after failing to arrest asylum seeker who entered elderly woman’s home

From the comment thread on X:

A society that once built an empire now trembles before a trespasser it dare not prosecute. The law is no longer about protecting the old woman in her home, but about sparing the intruder from consequences. Protesters rage outside the hotel, but their fury is a faint echo of a deeper truth: when a culture loses the will to defend itself, it hands the keys of its civilization to those who never asked permission to enter. The “compassion” on display is not virtue but decadence, the morality of a society that prefers humiliation to strength.

‘This is the UK in 2025!’ — Police face backlash after failing to arrest asylum seeker who entered elderly woman’s home

A statement from the Metropolitan Police regarding the incident has sparked a wave of criticism at the state of policing in the UK

ByRemix News Staff
4 Min Read

London’s Metropolitan Police has been accused of failing to protect the public after an asylum seeker housed at the Britannia Hotel in Canary Wharf entered an elderly woman’s home without permission — and was returned to the hotel without arrest.

The incident took place on Aug. 13, when police were called to Marsh Wall at 6:07 p.m. Officers claimed in a statement posted on social media that the man entered the property through an open door while “being followed by a group of men” in the street.

Police claim no intent could be proven, and the man was not arrested.

However, the response was markedly different toward protesters angry about the housing of asylum seekers in the area. Three demonstrators outside the migrant hotel, questioning why the man was not arrested, were themselves detained — including a 22-year-old woman facing multiple charges such as common assault on a security guard, possession of an offensive weapon, and affray. A Section 35 dispersal order was issued in the area, leading to the arrest of a 28-year-old man and a 57-year-old woman for breaching it.

The police statement has triggered a wave of condemnation from commentators and public figures. Firas Modad, a presenter at Lotus Eaters, posted on X: “Wait. An illegal migrant enters a home. Three people get arrested. But not the trespasser?! And the person who objected to his presence gets the book thrown at her?” He called out Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, asking her if she would be demanding any resignations from the police force over the matter.

British barrister and political commentator Steven Barrett said, “Thanks, Evil Bot 3000, for trying. But do you mind telling your masters at the Metropolitan Police that this is both gibberish as law — and really, deeply, disturbing. Be normal people again.”

Rory Geoghegan, the founder of the Public Safety Foundation and a former police officer, wrote: “A world-class police service would recognize that it needs to do more than pump out statements like this. Why are senior officers and comms teams in the UK so afraid of holding proper briefings for the media and public?

People are openly talking about the prospect of civil war and that the country has ‘had enough’ — but those in HQ think the answer is a few lines of text?”

Conservative political commentator Sophie Corcoran said, “So you’re telling me this demonic-looking man, whom we know nothing about, can walk into a woman’s flat and not get arrested. Women are doomed.”

“Met Police confirm that this thing entering your home is NOT a crime. But being angry about it is. This is the UK 2025,” added nationalist activist Tommy Robinson.

The Met Police say they are reviewing body-worn video footage and other evidence, describing the incident as “a complex set of events.”

6 replies
  1. Tim
    Tim says:

    The multi-ethnic hybrid, egocentric weirdo, and manic loner Rebrandy Muttbeaner is desperately seeking “sponsors” for his irrelevant and ultimately meaningless “street interviews,” which merely regurgitate well-known facts that everyone already knows, without offering any solutions or even political activism. But no one considers him worthy of support. He complains that he doesn’t even have an assistant to hold the cam for him.

    https://rumble.com/v6xhvlq-martinez-politix-aug.-11-2025-tide-is-turning.html

    A year ago, he secretly created a Judentube account under the fake name “Guiri Basado,” apparently in an attempt to “shake off his (now embarrassing) past”. But his mentality is and remains typically Mediterranean, not to say Levantine. It’s a big mystery anyway who finances his permanent vacation, which consists only of fiesta making and consuming cocaine (pale, sweaty skin, regularly repeated eye rubbing and nose sniffing).

    However, it seems likely that, as back in Ceuta, he continues his double “schizo” game, giving English lessons in the evenings to the same migrants he denounces as despicable during the day. 6,000 clicks on his chat-up video could be the start of a new future.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG_gwB-tMl4

    But that should not remain his only source of income; he wants to follow in the footsteps of his role model “TIKhistory” by spreading his nonsense that Hitler was a “crypto-communist” and exercised virtually total control over the “state controlled economy” (even though Hitler himself renownedly had no idea about and no interest in economics).

    Brandy wants to scare all spoiled and pampered consumerists by suggesting that the Third Reich was a “planned economy just like the Soviet Union,” which is of course incomprehensible nonsense, but there are always a few unsuspecting and uninformed teenies who fall for his cheap sophistry and take the bait.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oj1nhMLEjvI

    Now, for reasons that are known, I am not a Hitler supporter, but certainly not because Hitler was a “communist” [sic], or even a socialist (in the traditional sense of the term as it is understood today). What repels me about Hitler is his downright maniacal militarism, which caused nothing but terror, misfortune, bloodletting and suffering.

    • Tim
      Tim says:

      The Third Reich, which existed for only twelve years, can basically be divided into two halves of six years each: a better first half (peace) and a very bad second half (war). What was built up with one hand in the first half was torn down with the other hand in the second half. In the first half, Germany fared better overall under the dictatorship than it did under the “republican democracy” of the Weimar period.

      It all began with the deception of condemning the Germans as solely responsible for World War I, thereby humiliating a great cultural nation beyond words. The inevitable consequences of this—cultural decline and degeneration (Weimar period), the Great Depression triggered in America, hyperinflation—created not only resignation but also resentment. All of this served as fuel for the rise of National Socialism.

      Ultimately, World War II was an attempt to continue World War I (this time successfully); it was revanchism. In the second half of its existence, Germany was practically under martial law, and in the end even under “total” war mobilization. The fact that price controls, rationing, five-year plans, etc. had to be implemented due to limited imports of resources had less to do with “communism” than with an economy under wartime conditions.

      The radical removal of Jews from politics, economic life, the legal system, universities, cultural life, etc. was, in principle, a correct and salutary measure. Even the so-called Nuremberg Race Laws are to be welcomed from a nationalist point of view. But the entire manner in which they were handled, the radicalism and brutality, the zeal and fanaticism, devalued and destroyed this noble cause.

      Completely different measures should have been taken and alternatives considered. Perhaps the Madagascar or Uganda solution. Or even China, India, or Canada as destinations. Of course, that would have taken several years longer, but the Nazis wanted everything right away, like stubborn children. Negotiations should also have been held with Great Britain, France, and America to send the Jews to their supposedly “holy” land.

      Negotiations should have been held with vast Russia, where Jews held leading positions just as they did in America, to take in the Jews in fair exchange for generous economic and financial aid. The wealthier Jews were certainly not very interested in being deported to the communist Soviet empire, so they would have had to go to their fellow tribesmen in America, which millions of them did anyway. America’s current destructive Zionist problem is primarily attributable to this.

      I dispute that the National Socialists considered “exterminating all Jews” from the outset. As we are told, this only happened in the final years of the war, often justified by the bombing of German cities, a semi-secret measure of Himmler’s pseudo-elitist SS order and not “public opinion,” even if Germany as a whole was not well disposed toward Jews.

      The overthrow and abolition of the Kaiser’s monarchy in 1918 was, as in other states at the same time (Trotsky & Co in Russia, Béla Kun & Co in Hungary), primarily the work of (in this case Bolshevik) Jews, who even proclaimed a short-lived “Bavarian Soviet Republic” through their leader Kurt Eisner. The “stab-in-the-back myth,” as it is called today, was not just a “myth based on anti-Semitic prejudices.”

      • Tim
        Tim says:

        We are familiar with the lectures and film presentations by astrophysicists who make the size and distances between celestial bodies in the vastness of space vividly and tangibly comprehensible to us, because numbers are abstract and therefore do not stimulate the imagination.

        Take Treblinka, one of alleged “killing centers,” as large as a few soccer fields. Have you ever seen a city street filled with thousands of people, say ten thousand, for example during a demonstration? Have you ever seen a stadium filled with people at an international sporting event, say a hundred thousand?

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sporting_venues_with_a_highest_attendance_of_100,000_or_more

        The film “Two Thirds of the Holocaust” was therefore literally “eye-opening.” Imagine the mini-camp, located on a hill, surrounded by coniferous forest and plaguing insects, with a narrow-gauge railway connection, which at best corresponded to a tram or coal wagon of that time:

        https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=96088&sid=4ed6f6728fa5564bb73d0d82d636eaa3

        There, in nine months, ten times as many people are said to have been “processed” in a few primitive “gas chambers” with wooden garage doors, amounting to a million. A million is ten times a hundred thousand, or a thousand times a thousand! On some days, this is said to have resulted in 10,000 to 20,000 [sic] human victims.

        And all this with just a handful of people and within a few months on swampy ground that was frozen during the winter months. And where you couldn’t sleep for a minute without constant surveillance of the entire territory (against the outside, i.e., the curious Polish environment, and against the inside, e.g., the conspiracy of death row inmates or Ukrainian helpers). The physical effort required for this alone is absolutely ridiculous.

        They claim, in a highly unconvincing manner, that Jews (who were later gassed each time to eliminate witnesses) were “constantly retrained.” Who seriously believes that? Every employer can tell you how immense the effort and patience required to relearn a work process is.

        They even claim there was a “zoo”, which was operated alongside the impossible task. Finally, all the decomposing piles of corpses that had not yet been found were to be dug up and burned by hand on railroad tracks, regardless of the weather, and the hundreds of thousands of tons of bones were to be crushed into ashes and sifted.

        But can you imagine that the Jews made sure that anyone who raised such deeply logical doubts would be imprisoned beyond Europe and have no chance of mounting a fact-based defense, even through a lawyer, since this too would be “denial” and therefore a “criminal offense”?

        https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ca/Holocaust_Denial_Laws.svg

    • Tim
      Tim says:

      It is astonishing anyway that Germany’s economy boomed so massively after 1933, and did so under its own steam. Where did it get its physical energy from, when everyone was exhausting themselves all day long alone in pointless uniformed marches?

      Which served as motivation, built up, and invigorated. Has anyone ever wondered whether thousands of people had to shit their pants at these mass events at the Nuremberg Reich Party Rally Grounds or on the Bückeberg, unless they were wearing diapers?

      We could easily avoid the mistake the Nazis made of running a gigantic bureaucratic apparatus to get rid of the “Jews and other internationalist elememts” by simply stopping all payment incentives to alien invaders and replacing them with penalties.

      Of course, this process must be controlled, we use IT for this purpose. Our armed forces (and volunteers, of whom there will be no shortage) will be deployed as the executive branch of remigration, which actually exists for our welfare and protection.

  2. Roberto Gini
    Roberto Gini says:

    @ Tim
    Not sure what connection all these posts have to do with the Canary Wharf story from the UK.
    Two points: (1) Brandon Martinez wrote and published one of the best arguments that 9/11 was a Zionist conspiracy.
    (2) The “Holocaust” narratives are neither all fact nor all fiction, but a mixture of both, the main problem being the way they are used to prevent criticism of Jewish and anti-White activities.

Comments are closed.