The above clip was taken from the latest episode of The Weekly Wrap, which you can watch on YouTube or on
.In the Gulag Archipelago, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn described how the Soviet dictatorship disposed of political dissidents: disappearing them into a vast architecture of prison camps where they were worked, starved, beaten, and shot to death. Their guards were made merciless by the unforgiving Siberian weather, but also by learning to strip the inmates of their humanity through the lens of ideology.
This ideology also led Lenin, Stalin, and their successors to appoint the most sadistic criminals imprisoned under the prior Tsarist monarchy as the administrators of their political prison complex.
In Old Russia there existed (just as there still exists in the West) an incorrect view of thieves as incorrigible, permanent criminals (a “nucleus of criminality”). Because of this the politicals were segregated from them on prisoner transports and in prisons. In Old Russia there was just one single formula to be applied to the criminal recidivists: “Make them bow their heads beneath the iron yoke of the law!” And so it was that up to 1914 the thieves did not play the boss either in Russia as a whole or in Russian prisons.
But the shackles fell and freedom dawned. In the desertion of millions in 1917, and then in the Civil War, all human passions were largely unleashed, and those of the thieves most of all, and they no longer wished to bow their heads beneath the yoke; moreover, they were informed that they didn’t have to. It was found both useful and amusing that they were enemies of private property and therefore a revolutionary force which had to be guided into the mainstream of the proletariat, yes, and this would constitute no special difficulty. Reasoning on a social basis: wasn’t the environment to blame for everything? So let us re-educate these healthy lumpenproletarians and introduce them into the system of conscious life! […]
The thieves flourished because they were encouraged. Through its laws the Stalinist power said to the thieves clearly: Do not steal from me! Steal from private persons! You see, private property is a belch from the past. […]
And there is always that sanctifying lofty theory for everything. […] And here is how it was worked out. Professional criminals can in no sense be equated with capitalist elements (i.e., engineers, students, agronomists, and “nuns”), for the latter are steadfastly hostile to the dictatorship of the proletariat, while the former are only (!) politically unstable! (A professional murderer is only politically unstable!) The lumpenproletarian is not a property owner, and therefore cannot ally himself with the hostile-class elements, but will much more willingly ally himself with the proletariat (you just wait!). That is why in the official terminology of Gulag they are called socially friendly elements. […]
But when this elegant theory came down to earth in camps, here is what emerged from it: The most inveterate and hardened thieves were given unbridled power on the islands of the Archipelago, in camp districts, and in camps—power over the population of their own country, over the peasants, the petty bourgeoisie, and the intelligentsia, power they had never before had in history, never in any state in all the world, power which they couldn’t even dream of out in freedom. And now they were given all other people as slaves. What bandit would ever decline such power? The central thieves, the top-level thieves, totally controlled the camp districts.
Britain’s prisons are now much the same.
Shadow Justice Secretary, Robert Jenrick, posted a thread to X on the 4th of April, detailing how
Britain’s prisons are being overrun by Islamist gangs.
Self-styled ‘Muslim Brotherhood’ leaders control wings in many high-security prisons.
And instead of isolating them, the system is protecting them - not officers or the public. […]
Islamist gangs run shadow sharia courts. Dictate diets. Enforce their rules with threats and flogging.
Officers fear being labelled racist if they step in.
This is appeasement, not punishment.
In April 2024, The Mail reported on how Muslim prison gangs subject other inmates to Sharia law, forced Quran readings, and conversions under duress — else they have hot cooking oil poured over them. Jonathan Hall KC, the government’s independent reviewer of terror legislation, wrote a report in 2022 which found that convicted terrorists were holding Sharia courts behind bars. Usman Khan — who stabbed two students to death at a rehabilitative justice event in London Bridge in 2019 — and Sudesh Amman — shot dead by police during an attempted terror attack in Streatham high-street in 2020 — threatened other inmates with violence unless they converted to Islam.
And yet, a Ministry of Justice spokesman told the Telegraph:
“Attributing these figures to the influence of Muslim gangs would be misleading and based on wholly anecdotal evidence. Forced religious conversions are not tolerated in prisons.”
Since 2019, a group (unimaginatively) calling themselves the Muslim Brotherhood have become the largest faction in British prisons. One former prison officer said this is an open secret, but that “people don’t want to talk about” it.
A former inmate in HMP Belmarsh, himself a Muslim, told the Evening Standard in 2016 that the maximum security wing operates “like a jihadi training camp”, and that “governors, prison officers and imams all know about this”. The paper’s correspondent, David Cohen, described a visit to the prison, in 2016:
Soon after I arrived in Belmarsh in 2014, news came through that Mosul in Iraq had fallen to Islamic State and the prison erupted. There were chants of “Allahu Akbar”, wild banging on the doors and joyous shouting of “we are going to take over” throughout the wing. It was like a big party that went on unchecked for several hours.
HMP Belmarsh is notorious for housing Islamic terrorists, including hook-handed Finsbury Park Mosque cleric Abu Hamza, ISIL supporter Anjem Choudary, and Lee Rigby’s murderers, Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale. Terrorists meet in its maximum-security wing, and plot terror attacks to commit together upon release. Twice-failed Jihadist Mohiussunnath Chowdhury, jailed for a minimum term of 25 years in 2020, said he met with “likeminded brothers” while inside, including Parsons Green bomber Ahmed Hassan and a friend of “Jihadi John”. In 2017, a Muslim terror cell calling themselves the “Three Musketeers” were jailed, after meeting in HMP Belmarsh and plotting to murder MPs.
When statistics were last published in December 2019, a quarter of inmates were Muslim. However, thanks to data compiled from Freedom of Information requests by @juice882 on X, we now see that the Muslim population of Belmarsh has grown to 31.9 percent in just five years.
This is despite Muslims officially making up only 6.5 percent of the general population, but 18 percent of the prison population. This population has increased 323% since 1997. It is an almost three-fold overrepresentation.
Why is this? Well, Ministry of Justice data found a fifth (3,096, 19.9 percent) were white converts — a three-times overrepresentation of white Muslims in the general population (7.8 percent). Ian Acheson, who conducted a review of Islamism in prisons for the Ministry of Justice, told the Telegraph that “There’s strong evidence that people convert as a pragmatic response to who controls power and space in our prisons.”
“This seems to be the case in high security prisons, in particular, where safety is at a premium and there are also large numbers of violent young men entering custody searching for meaning and belonging. So Islam in this case has gang characteristics”.
So, some inmates are converting for protection while in Britain’s maximum security facilities.
The population has also grown since Britain became first in Western Europe, and second on the continent as a whole, for crimes committed by foreign actors in 2023. By 2024, there were 10,423 foreign nationals in prison — 12 percent of the total prison population. Albanian, Pakistani, and Somali nationals had some of the highest rates of offending; with more data due to be published by the government in a “league table” of foreign offenders soon. However, data procured by the Telegraph and
provides us with a rudimentary picture already of which nationalities commit a disproportionate amount of crime. For example, 1 in 50 Albanians in the UK is in prison:
We also already know that foreign nationals are 2.5 times more likely per capita to commit sex offences than British nationals, and are three times more likely than British nationals to be arrested for sexual offences. Proportionate to their share of the population per 10,000, Afghans and Eritreans were more than 20 times more likely to account for sex offence convictions than British nationals.
With the exception of Congo, which is constantly embroiled in a state of war, the nations that top the tables are majority Muslim.
19,000 foreign offenders eligible for deportation were still in Britain at the end of 2024. It appears to be British government policy to battery-farm foreign criminals at taxpayers’ expense.
But this still doesn’t answer the questions as to why a minority of Jihadists have been given rule of the roost in Britain’s prisons? Robert Jenrick suggests that “Officers fear being labelled racist if they step in” — the same reason cited by police officers and social workers as to why they took no action on the ongoing Pakistani rape gangs scandal.
It was also the reason given by Kyle Lawler, a security guard at the Manchester Arena, for why he did not approach and question suicide bomber Salman Abedi on that fateful night of the 22nd of May, 2017.
"I felt unsure about what to do.
"It's very difficult to define a terrorist. For all I knew he might well be an innocent Asian male.
"I did not want people to think I am stereotyping him because of his race.
"I was scared of being wrong and being branded a racist if I got it wrong and would have got into trouble. It made me hesitant.
"I wanted to get it right and not mess it up by over-reacting or judging someone by their race."
Had our culture not demanded that Lawler ignore his instincts, lest he break the liberal commandment of antiracism, then perhaps Abedi’s attack might have been thwarted, and twenty-two innocent people would still be alive today.
Or, perhaps, if Abedi’s family had not been given asylum in Britain in the first place, they would not have raised two sons to be murderous Jihadists.
Salman Abedi was born in Manchester, on New Year’s Eve in 1994. Ramadan Abedi and his wife, Samia Tabbal Abedi, received asylum from Libya in 1993. Ramadan was not a reformist peacenik, but rather a member of a jihadist faction who fell out with Colonel Gaddafi.
In September 2011, a month before rebel fighters killed Colonel Gaddafi, the Abedi family moved back to Libya. Police evidence suggests Salman (then 16) and his brother Hashem (then 14) fought as part of the civil war, before returning to Britain. In 2010, before his 16th birthday, Salman was known to MI5 as a terror suspect. By September 2012, the eldest three boys returned from Libya without their parents. Salman enrolled at Manchester College, and within a month assaulted a female pupil. When ISIS declared a caliphate in Libya on 29th June 2014, Salman and Hashem returned to fight in the reignited civil war. A month before their son committed the Manchester Arena attack, both Ramandan and Samia moved back to Libya, and refused to comply with the Manchester Arena Inquiry into the attack. Their oldest son Ismail fled the UK on the 29th of August 2021, evading a scheduled appearance at the Inquiry which he had been ordered to attend by chairman, Sir John Saunders, because he was denied immunity from prosecution.
Nonetheless, the Home Office under the Major government the family to live indefinitely in Britain, and receive thousands in taxpayer-funded benefits every month. Indeed, these benefits continued to be paid even after Samia returned to Libya with her three youngest children in October 2016. The family received monthly payments of £692.32 in housing benefits from Manchester City Council, and weekly payments of £302.76 in working and child tax credit and £61.80 in child benefits. Their monthly tax-free income was £2,147. The payments continued until the 26th of May 2017 — four days after he son committed the suicide bombing.
It will sicken but not surprise you to learn that these taxpayer benefits were spent on materials for her son’s nail-bomb. Before the attack, £300.00 was spent on a 200-amp battery from Shield Batteries in Salford and to B&Q for tools to build the bomb, in a transaction taken straight from Samia’s account. Salman Abedi also appears to have spent his taxpayer-subsidised student loan on the bomb making equipment too. So the British taxpayer paid for the bomb which killed twenty-two innocent people at Manchseter Arena — and then paid for the Home Office to run an elaborate propaganda scheme to convince them to “Don’t Look Back in Anger” to diffuse public opposition to Islam.
All of this, then, will lead you to question why Hashem Abedi, arrested in Libya on the 23rd of May 2017, convicted of 22 counts of murder, attempted murder and conspiracy to cause an explosion likely to endanger life on the 17th of April 2020, and sentenced for his role in plotting the attack to at least 55 years in prison on the 20th of August 2020, was given kitchen privileges in HMP Frankland.
Abedi used his access to cooking implements to commit another terror attack against three guards on the 12th of April 2025: hospitalising three by dousing them in hot oil, and stabbing them with a knife made from a cooking tray. This was after Abedi joined fellow Muslim inmates Ahmed Hassan and Muhammed Saeed in attacking prison officers while in Belmarsh prison in 2020, for which he was relocated to Frankland. Inexplicably, while in Frankland, he was given utensils which could have easily been sharpened into weapons. Abedi has now been moved back to Belmarsh after the Frankland attack, in a bizarre game of Jihadist pass-the-parcel.
I will take this opportunity to remind you that 55 percent of the British public support the death penalty (More in Common, January). This rises to 70 percent for serial murderers and terrorists. We could simply spare ourselves the burden of Hashem Abedi’s upkeep and hang him. One can either have a high-trust civilisation or indulge in the dangerous fantasy that Jihadists can ever be rehabilitated. You cannot have both.
The most disturbing part of this story, though, is that the British government and judicial system have known for years now that many prisons are defacto madrassas, run by Muslim gangs.
It doesn’t take a conspiracy theorist to think that they are outsourcing extrajudicial punishment of political prisoners and “Far Right” protestors, jailed for participating in demonstrations after the Southport murders last summer, to Islamist vigilantes.
During my recent debate at the Frontline Club in London, I mentioned the death of 61-year-old grandfather Peter Lynch after he was imprisoned for two years and eight months for nonviolent protest in August, 2024. He was found hanged in his cell on the 19th of October in HMP Moorland.
I Tried To Tell Liberal Journalists Why Generation Z Don't Like Democracy, and It Didn't Go Well.
In multiple polls, Generation Z reports being disillusioned with democracy, frustrated by the pace of political change, and unwilling to enlist in the military to defend their country.
While former BBC journalist John Sweeney shouted that this was not murder, and therefore incomparable to the atrocities committed by Vladimir Putin’s government in Russia, I beg to differ.
I think the British state knows exactly what they are doing. I think that Keir Starmer and the magistrates who worked around the clock to convict those who participated in civil unrest after the Southport murders know the danger they are putting those they label as “Far Right” and “racist” in when incarcerating them in prisons overrun by Muslim gangs.
And if you think I am conjuring that theory from thin air:
Sky News crime correspondent Martin Brunt said during coverage of the civil unrest after Southport that, “Somebody who told me — somebody who knows about these things — said any rightwing, ‘Far Right’ protestors landing up in jail can expect a very ‘cold’ reception in jail from what he says are Asian gangs inside prison who are looking out for them.”
There seems to be a tacit acknowledgement that the British state is outsourcing extrajudicial violence against those it labels “Far Right” and “racist” to Islamist gangs inside prison.
Just like in the Soviet Gulags, the government has allowed some inmates to become a client group, and lets them be at liberty to intimidate and attack those they consider to be political opponents.
Peter Lynch’s death can be considered a form of state-sanctioned antiracist vigilante justice; hence why Keir Starmer and his front bench have been silent about it. When George Floyd died in the US, Starmer and his deputy, Angela Rayner took a knee on camera, and insisted the British justice system be reorganised around the principle of antiracism.
"As socialists and anti-racists we stand in complete solidarity with those standing up against police brutality towards Black people"
No such concern is expressed for the death of Peter Lynch, and the duress under which his fellow “Far Right rioters” are still incarcerated.
These include Lucy Connolly, who, as Allison Pearson has written about for the Telegraph, had her statements misrepresented by the police and Crown Prosecution Service after her conviction:
There was worse to come. The police and Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) released a statement saying that Lucy “told officers she did not like immigrants and claimed that children were not safe from them”.
But Lucy hadn’t said that. What she said in her long interview with the police was, “I’m well aware that we need immigrants… I’m well aware that if I go to the hospital there are immigrants working there and the hospital wouldn’t function without them. I’m [also] well aware of the difference between legal immigrants and illegal immigrants and they are not checked and [nor is] what they might have done (any crimes) in their country of origin – it’s a national security issue and they’re a danger to children”. Sentiments which are shared by millions of British people.
Lucy broke down and cried when she heard how her words had been misrepresented. Whatever else she was, she was not a bigot. Lucy and her two sisters had been raised by an old-fashioned socialist mother to abhor racism. The Connollys asked for a transcript of the police interview which was grudgingly handed over after a long delay. Lucy’s mother complained to the CPS and they corrected the statement on their website to match what Lucy had actually said. Too late.
Police also accused Lucy of previous racist posts. Turns out she had called a friend “Pikey” after he had called her “Brummie c--t”. Even banter could be passed off as evidence of malignant character.
So, the state is not beneath lying about you publicly to brand you as a racist, and justify your imprisonment for nonviolent offences inside prisons dominated by Jihadist gangs.
To put into perspective just how weighted Britain’s justice system is toward punishing political enemies over foreign offenders: the number of people imprisoned for being party to the riot at an asylum hotel in Rotherham last summer now exceeds the number of men convicted for participating in the Pakistani rape gangs in the town.
South Yorkshire Police have made over 100 arrests for the summer disorder, resulting in 93 convictions; 88 of which have been sentenced, and 77 jailed or detained in a Young Offenders’ Institute. Meanwhile there have been only 68 convictions for group-based child sexual abuse and exploitation in Rotherham. This is despite the number of victims estimated to exceed 250,000 girls across fifty towns and cities in Britain — bringing the total number of rapes to over a million.
33 people a day — 12,000 a year — are arrested for offensive speech in Britain under under section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 and section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988. If Keir Starmer and the broader culture continue to brand these critics of Islam, immigration, and the government as irredeemable “Far Right racists”, then they are knowingly putting a target on their backs, and throwing them to the Islamist wolves who have turned Britain’s prison system into their personal caliphate.
Share this post