The British Summer of Discontent - The growing civil unrest of the native British population, sparked by the murder of 3 young girls in Southport

I've achieved some phenomenal compression with AV1, fwiw.
Better than H264 and HEVC?
That's weird I usually think "why post about wanting to murder government officials anywhere at all".
Shitposting is an age old internet tradition.
5.56 bullet on an AR15
Should be talking about the AR-18 (the civilian AR-180 model as well), that's what the Provos mainly got I think before the M82s. Difference include a different gas system (Short stroke gas piston vs Direct impingement), recessed charging handle, stamped metal receiver.
I wonder if the unicorn Semi auto Howas for contract ended up in NI...
アタレ

Also, have a guy dual wielding M82s for shits and giggles.
 
the United States has explicitly outlawed extradition of American citizens to the UK for any kind of speech-related "crime" alleged by the UK and also explicitly indemnified American citizens from any and all enforcement actions stemming from any speech-related litigation in the UK.
I would be greatly appreciative if you can point me to the source of that, please?
 
It was mentioned that these protests are an op since brits don't want to send weapons to middle east.
Overall: It amazes me, how fast guberment is moving now and jailing everyone it can, when it can't even keep crime off streets every day or... as it seems, doesn't want to.
 
Average working class white British person does not go around trying lynch and burn down random old ladies middle upper class homes.
Average working class white British people once tried to lynch and burn down a paediatric clinic because they thought 'paediatric' meant you fuck kids. Average working class white British people are literally fucking retarded.
 
Average working class white British people once tried to lynch and burn down a paediatric clinic because they thought 'paediatric' meant you fuck kids. Average working class white British people are literally fucking retarded.
So are the Afghani and Pakistani goatfuckers, that's why Labour thought they were interchangeable.
 
I would be greatly appreciative if you can point me to the source of that, please?
SPEECH (Securing the Protection of our Enduring and Established Constitutional Heritage Act) act (2010), 28 U.S.C. §§ 4101–4105.
Got passed because some American got sued by a arab in the UK. Oh and her surname is (Ehrenfeld) supposedly used by Jews a lot?

(a) In General.--Part VI of title 28, United States Code, is amended
by adding at the end the following:

``CHAPTER 181--FOREIGN JUDGMENTS

``Sec.
``4101. Definitions.
``4102. Recognition of foreign defamation judgments.
``4103. Removal.
``4104. Declaratory judgments.
``4105. Attorney's fees.

``Sec. 4101. Definitions

``In this chapter:
``(1) Defamation.--The term `defamation' means any action or
other proceeding for defamation, libel, slander, or similar
claim alleging that forms of speech are false, have caused
damage to reputation or emotional distress, have presented any
person in a false light, or have resulted in criticism,
dishonor, or condemnation of any person.
``(2) Domestic court.--The term `domestic court' means a
Federal court or a court of any State.
``(3) Foreign court.--The term `foreign court' means a
court, administrative body, or other tribunal of a foreign
country.
``(4) Foreign judgment.--The term `foreign judgment' means a
final judgment rendered by a foreign court.
``(5) State.--The term `State' means each of the several
States, the District of Columbia, and any commonwealth,
territory, or possession of the United States.
``(6) United states person.--The term `United States person'
means--
``(A) a United States citizen;
``(B) an alien lawfully admitted for permanent
residence to the United States;
``(C) an alien lawfully residing in the United
States at the time that the speech that is the subject
of the foreign defamation action was researched,
prepared, or disseminated; or
``(D) a business entity incorporated in, or with its
primary location or place of operation in, the United
States.
``Sec. 4102. Recognition of foreign defamation judgments

``(a) First Amendment Considerations.--
``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
Federal or State law, a domestic court shall not recognize or
enforce a foreign judgment for defamation unless the domestic
court determines that--
``(A) the defamation law applied in the foreign
court's adjudication provided at least as much
protection for freedom of speech and press in that case
as would be provided by the first amendment to the
Constitution of the United States and by the
constitution and law of the State in which the domestic
court is located; or

[[Page 124 STAT. 2482]]

``(B) even if the defamation law applied in the
foreign court's adjudication did not provide as much
protection for freedom of speech and press as the first
amendment to the Constitution of the United States and
the constitution and law of the State, the party
opposing recognition or enforcement of that foreign
judgment would have been found liable for defamation by
a domestic court applying the first amendment to the
Constitution of the United States and the constitution
and law of the State in which the domestic court is
located.
``(2) Burden of establishing application of defamation
laws.--The party seeking recognition or enforcement of the
foreign judgment shall bear the burden of making the showings
required under subparagraph (A) or (B).

``(b) Jurisdictional Considerations.--
``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
Federal or State law, a domestic court shall not recognize or
enforce a foreign judgment for defamation unless the domestic
court determines that the exercise of personal jurisdiction by
the foreign court comported with the due process requirements
that are imposed on domestic courts by the Constitution of the
United States.
``(2) Burden of establishing exercise of jurisdiction.--The
party seeking recognition or enforcement of the foreign judgment
shall bear the burden of making the showing that the foreign
court's exercise of personal jurisdiction comported with the due
process requirements that are imposed on domestic courts by the
Constitution of the United States.

``(c) Judgment Against Provider of Interactive Computer Service.--
``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
Federal or State law, a domestic court shall not recognize or
enforce a foreign judgment for defamation against the provider
of an interactive computer service, as defined in section 230 of
the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230) unless the
domestic court determines that the judgment would be consistent
with section 230 if the information that is the subject of such
judgment had been provided in the United States.
``(2) Burden of establishing consistency of judgment.--The
party seeking recognition or enforcement of the foreign judgment
shall bear the burden of establishing that the judgment is
consistent with section 230.

``(d) Appearances Not a Bar.--An appearance by a party in a foreign
court rendering a foreign judgment to which this section applies shall
not deprive such party of the right to oppose the recognition or
enforcement of the judgment under this section, or represent a waiver of
any jurisdictional claims.
``(e) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to--
``(1) affect the enforceability of any foreign judgment
other than a foreign judgment for defamation; or
``(2) limit the applicability of section 230 of the
Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230) to causes of action
for defamation.

[[Page 124 STAT. 2483]]

``Sec. 4103. Removal

``In addition to removal allowed under section 1441, any action
brought in a State domestic court to enforce a foreign judgment for
defamation in which--
``(1) any plaintiff is a citizen of a State different from
any defendant;
``(2) any plaintiff is a foreign state or a citizen or
subject of a foreign state and any defendant is a citizen of a
State; or
``(3) any plaintiff is a citizen of a State and any
defendant is a foreign state or citizen or subject of a foreign
state,

may be removed by any defendant to the district court of the United
States for the district and division embracing the place where such
action is pending without regard to the amount in controversy between
the parties.
``Sec. 4104. Declaratory judgments

``(a) Cause of Action.--
``(1) In general.--Any United States person against whom a
foreign judgment is entered on the basis of the content of any
writing, utterance, or other speech by that person that has been
published, may bring an action in district court, under section
2201(a), for a declaration that the foreign judgment is
repugnant to the Constitution or laws of the United States. For
the purposes of this paragraph, a judgment is repugnant to the
Constitution or laws of the United States if it would not be
enforceable under section 4102 (a), (b), or (c).
``(2) Burden of establishing unenforceability of judgment.--
The party bringing an action under paragraph (1) shall bear the
burden of establishing that the foreign judgment would not be
enforceable under section 4102 (a), (b), or (c).

``(b) Nationwide Service of Process.--Where an action under this
section is brought in a district court of the United States, process may
be served in the judicial district where the case is brought or any
other judicial district of the United States where the defendant may be
found, resides, has an agent, or transacts business.
``Sec. 4105. Attorneys' fees

``In any action brought in a domestic court to enforce a foreign
judgment for defamation, including any such action removed from State
court to Federal court, the domestic court shall, absent exceptional
circumstances, allow the party opposing recognition or enforcement of
the judgment a reasonable attorney's fee if such party prevails in the
action on a ground specified in section 4102 (a), (b), or (c).''.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the Sense of the Congress that for the
purpose of pleading a cause of action for a declaratory judgment, a
foreign judgment for defamation or any similar offense as described
under chapter 181 of title 28, United States Code, (as added by this
Act) shall constitute a case of actual controversy under section 2201(a)
of title 28, United States Code.

[[Page 124 STAT. 2484]]

(c) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of chapters for
part VI of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end
the following:
 
Average working class white British people once tried to lynch and burn down a paediatric clinic because they thought 'paediatric' meant you fuck kids. Average working class white British people are literally fucking retarded.
Ok, that’s funny.
But the video is actually good. It was a very obvious set up. This one lady (who the fk knows) actually spent 10 minutes trying to get cops to arrest people, because one was carrying the British flag. Her reasoning was that, to show up to a racist event with a British flag meant you had criminal intentions and were a Nazi. All their faces are caught. For PR, they are now trying to appear less menacing and many have uncovered faces. The cops clap with them at the end of their chants. And one lady cop tells them “you did it! You had more people than them. You all were awesome”

I think the “Nazis” were some looky Lou neighbors who came out to see why these creatures that failed at evolution were reeee-ing

One guy does say that they can take the faces of the people there, obviously find find them, and see if they’ve ever made any racist posts. THEN they can tie them to all this stuff and have them arrested.
 
Last edited:
At this point converting to Islam is a pro-gamer move. It's better than going away for a while for wrongthink.
That's what Russian PoW's during the Chechen Wars thought before shouting takbir, growing wahhabi beards, killing their former brothers-in-arms and finally renouncing their mothers on camera in the name of their newfound genocidal deity.

All of them were agitated in this exact way. By the way, in a camp where father Sergiy was kept, two [prisoners] gave in - Klochkov and Limonov. They switched sides. They thought they would simply change their faith there, and once they were back home... No. There is no going back. It's the first step. The second step was making [them] gun down [other] captives. That's what they did in that camp, there are many witnesses to this. See? And then Kostya Limonov renounced, in front of a TV camera, from his own mother. He said, "I don't have a mother. I have Allah".

Do NOT fall for this. Islam is a war cult, and you aren't in any way immune to its indoctrination.
 
New Zealand is, internationally, a non entity. It produces little of note, it commands few resources and it can do relatively little to compel others to do what it wants.

The United Kingdom on the other hand, whatever else it may be, has far more reach and resources to make someone's life very difficult. Not to mention that unlike the Kiwis the UK Government this week has been very open about intending to impose their laws on citizens of other nations outside of their borders, rather than only concerning themselves with internal dissent.
Now that the UK isn't even in the EU it is just as much as a non-entity as NZ. And if your shit posting from the USA there are laws on the American books specifically protecting Americans against UK style speech prosecution.

If your in the UK then just use TOR for kiwifarming. This site is one of the best working sites on TOR. For me its seems about 90% as fast as it does over clearnet. Even using TOR to access the kiwifarms.st domain is fast on TOR.
 
Last edited:
The best way to say no to somebody trying to ineffectually threaten you is "Nah I'm good but thanks anyway."
no thanks pal.jpg
It looks like more PSY ops to me. Average working class white British person does not go around trying lynch and burn down random old ladies middle upper class homes. Again, like the 100 protests, it was a hoax.
This has likely already been posted, but "controlled spontaneity" and "mind control" have been top-of-mind for a while now.
 
That's weird I usually think "why post about wanting to murder government officials anywhere at all".
Yup... posting plans about wanting to commit violence against someone they dislike actually harms chances of success.

Imagine if Mr. Tarrant or Mr. Breivik posted their plans days before their attacks. We might have more Sand Niggers and Commies in this world.
 
There is a bit of a difference here though.

New Zealand is, internationally, a non entity. It produces little of note, it commands few resources and it can do relatively little to compel others to do what it wants.

The United Kingdom on the other hand, whatever else it may be, has far more reach and resources to make someone's life very difficult. Not to mention that unlike the Kiwis the UK Government this week has been very open about intending to impose their laws on citizens of other nations outside of their borders, rather than only concerning themselves with internal dissent.
Yes I have seen the Home Office threats.

They are still garbage. Particularly so in the United States, where there is no way for anyone to extradite out a USA citizen without due process (they do NOT want to do that and create a conservative media frenzy in the USA where the State Department will not have much of anything to support completing the extradition order when it's under review in Federal court). They certainly can doxx you and harass and turn in a 4chan.uk.gov themselves, but that's all they can do.

I love it that the little garbage weasels are going straight for Elon and are demanding his head. They will lose. The only way they can censor content on X is to ban themselves with a country IP block and follow Putin's lead and chase down VPN pops.


Also:
1723183809202.png

serbian detected
 
Last edited:
It is precisely because of this kind of bullshit by the UK government that the United States has explicitly outlawed extradition of American citizens to the UK for any kind of speech-related "crime" alleged by the UK and also explicitly indemnified American citizens from any and all enforcement actions stemming from any speech-related litigation in the UK.

Think about that. The UK is so retarded about its impotent flexing that the US of all places codified "lol fuck off" into law for its citizens to protect them from that horseshit.
Even before other wrongthink extradition attempts were tried by foreign governments to the US, they never worked because Fed judges are poised to throw them out and before they even see it, the State Department (the part of the USA that does foreign relations including taking in the formal requests to extradite), stands ready to block requests that will inflame Congress (who will haul the secretary in front of cameras).


What the UK would do is use terror charges instead, and they would claim your speech is evidence in that case. That's playing with fire, because if it doesn't fool the State Department then it turns into an immediate political crisis for the UK government. If it's rubber stamped, then you get the notification that an extradite is opened and then it's you and your lawyer that argue it's really a speech issue and the expedite must be quashed. When it's in the court system, it becomes a political issue for both governments but neither can act (other than withdraw) as they sit around waiting for the judge.
 
True or not, this response is the most effective. The police fear the criminals, not the other way around. The way to stop the government persecution is to make them fear you than the Muslims.

View attachment 6287587
The best part about that happening is that the policeguy wasn't even detaining a Nazi chud, he tackled a security guard of some event who had pinned down the Knife Enricher, and while his colleagues were too useless to back him, the Enricher got up and stabbed him instead. Everyone was really sad for the heroic policeguy for a week or so, but few mentioned how badly the police behaved in this situation. Going in without thought or backup, misreading the situation. Likely were instructed that the people at the event (which was a far right thing) were to be observed and hammered at the slightest provocation, and didn't think a peace knife could enrich the situation first.
 
Back