Anti-Immigrant Fever Among British Patriots Gains Momentum: ‘Send Them Back’
When “Muhammed” becomes the most popular name for newborns in England and Wales, you know you have a problem.
Thousands of British patriots waving English and Union Jack flags took to the streets over the weekend to fight back against the country’s growing immigration crisis.
Sky News Australia reported the protests, organized by the activist group Britain First, were held outside hotels that are currently being used to house immigrants. Shouts of “send them home” can be heard in the video below.
The Daily Mail reported that a group of British mothers gathered for a peaceful protest outside the Britannia Hotel in Canary Wharf, London, on Sunday. They were dressed in pink clothing to “raise awareness of how women and young people are being ‘let down’ by the migrant crisis.”
One of the women told the Mail, “I live in this area, I have kids and grandkids and it needs to be safe for them to live. We don’t know them [asylum seekers], we don’t know what they’ve done. My son can’t get a house; he has been on the council list since he was 17.”
The demonstration was interrupted when a group of “up to 30 … masked thugs hijacked” the event. They set off smoke bombs and chanted “Keir Starmer is a w*****.” The thugs tried to breach the fence surrounding the hotel. Unsuccessful, they tried to run away, but were intercepted by the police, the report said.
As per the Mail, the protest was held at the Britannia because:
On Saturday, people believed to be asylum seekers appeared to move into the four-star hotel in London under the cover of darkness.
A coach full of suspected migrants was seen arriving at the Britannia International Hotel at around 1:40 am on Saturday morning.
Tower Hamlets Council confirmed the Government intends to use the hotel – which has around 500 rooms – for asylum seekers in a move that has angered anti-migrant protesters and guests whose bookings have been cancelled.
Footage of the passengers getting off the coach showed they were all men with the vast majority dressed in matching grey tracksuit tops and bottoms.
They were helped by masked security guards, some of whom appeared to be wearing body cameras.
Last week, workers were seen hauling beds and mattresses into the hotel in preparation for the arrival of ‘hundreds’ of asylum seekers.
A barricade of metal fencing was placed around the hotel by the Metropolitan Police after anti-migrant demonstrators protested the plan for immigrants to be housed there.
Following the chaos, police banned people from protesting outside the Britannia for 28 days. One British man explained in the social media post below why the government is putting the “feelings of foreigners” ahead of the “rights of citizens.” He wrote, “The government is afraid. Only a scared government turns to totalitarianism.”
The government is afraid. Only a scared government turns to totalitarianism and removes the rights of citizens over the feelings of foreigners. Trouble is coming for us because we rejected our responsibility to the country. https://t.co/1lGRxEUVeY
— Nick Buckley MBE (@NickBuckleyMBE) August 3, 2025
Over the past several years, the UK government has repeatedly overstepped its bounds — whether through expanding state surveillance, tightening speech regulations, or incrementally eroding civil liberties. Through it all, much of the British public remained quiet, hesitant to push back. Even as traditional British culture began to be diluted by unchecked immigration, the silence persisted.
But symbolic shifts speak volumes: When “Muhammed” becomes the most popular name for newborns in England and Wales, you know you have a problem. It’s a clear sign of dramatic demographic change, one that many feel has happened without consent or open debate.
Most recently, changes to the 2023 Online Safety Act intended to shield children from harmful online content, such as pornography, came into effect. On its face, the motive appears noble: protecting young people in the digital age.
However, the new rules actually go much further: They impose broad restrictions on access to information and introduce new powers that allow the government to actively monitor and police online speech about immigration.
Now, as citizens begin to grasp the full impact of these policies — that their free speech is being curtailed and their homeland fundamentally transformed — many are finally beginning to stir from their political apathy.
Countries that ban protests against government policies.
▪️North Korea.
▪️Iran.
▪️Belarus.
▪️Afghanistan.
▪️Britain.Not a great list to be on.
— PeterSweden (@PeterSweden7) August 3, 2025
In the X posts below, users are saying that Britain is finally awakening from its “long, long slumber.”
As heartening as it is to see Britons finally standing up to the creeping tyranny of their globalist government, I can’t help but wonder: are these protests too little, too late?
Anti immigration protests in Britain threaten the state because they are an explicit rejection of the universalist ideology of the elite. Once we recognise an Eritrean cannot be an Englishman (nor a man a woman) the creed of the regime collapses. It will be like glasnost and… https://t.co/HbjP9XxjgG
— Douglas Carswell🇬🇧🇺🇸 (@DouglasCarswell) August 2, 2025
BRITAIN HAS AWAKENED: Manchester MASSIVE Anti-Immigration Protest Shows Citizen Pushback Against Starmer’s Suicidal Policies Has Gained Unstoppable Momentum pic.twitter.com/nK7QimwPAw
— Kenny G (@Texas4Trump_24) August 4, 2025
Thousands of patriots line the street in Manchester City centre today demanding remigration! The country is finally starting to wake from it's long long slumber 🏴 pic.twitter.com/VZqZ3hBsMc
— That Anglo-Saxon Bloke™ 🏴 (@NelsonsLeftEye) August 2, 2025
Elizabeth writes commentary for Legal Insurrection and The Washington Examiner. She is an academy fellow at The Heritage Foundation. Please follow Elizabeth on X or LinkedIn.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
“One British man explained in the social media post below why the government is putting the “feelings of foreigners” ahead of the “rights of citizens.”
Because you aren’t citizens. You are subjects.
En route to formally becoming serfs to the government and to the invaders.
Subotai Bahadur
Point taken. I wonder what percentage of those in the UK know that. Their government has been taken effectively over by criminals. Not the Muzzie kind though there oodles and oodles of Muslim criminals. The Muslim role is to be agents of the real criminals. The real criminals will all have connections with Chatham House more formally called The Royal Institute of International Affairs.
It’s in the same league as the Council on Foreign Relations based in NYC.
All of this is intentional. To remove the growing tyranny will take revolution. Armed revolution. Chatham House tried to block that method by imposing gun control decades ago.
The people will find a way. It won’t be easy as the Muzzie troops are inherently violent and will be used by Chatham House.
Yes, they are citizens.
“Yes, they are citizens.”
But only by grace of government.
I don’t think this group of protests will succeed, but ultimately I think the situation will result in (an attempt to create) a new Magna Carta.
However it may be too late…
Yeah, just like the people whose countries have adopted the UN Declaration of Human Rights have rights… until their government exercises the escape clause that removes them, for the convenience of the government.
The escape is called the by-law trick,
When doing statutory construction one rule stands out. Read the whole statute.
The UDHR lists all kinds of rights. E.g., Art. 18, freedom of thought, conscience and religion; Art. 19, freedom of opinion and expression.
Now no one in their right mind believes that anyone in the UN believes any of that. The UDHR operates from a faulty premise to begin with. Namely, that rights come from government, not from the Creator. As such, what government “grants,” it can as easily take away.
This premise is entirely at odds with the thesis of our Founders. We recognize and state that rights, inalienable, come from the Creator and that the sole purpose of government is to protect those rights. The purpose of our Constitution is to limit the government, not the people.
Contained within the UDHR is itself the trapdoor that effectively flushes all of the vaunted UDHR “rights” away.
Article 29 reads,
(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
Do you see the “by law” trick? Rights are first granted, but then they’re made subject to limitations as set forth “by law.” In other words, it’s all a charade. In a UN world, which bears great similarity to an Islamic world, government comes first and foremost, with the people “allowed” to exist but only to serve the state.
The UDHR used as its model not the US Constitution (1787), but the Soviet Constitution which uses that same “by law” limitation trick.
Check out this excellent timely column from Mark Steyn, dark days indeed in the UK.
https://jewishworldreview.com/0825/steyn080425.php
“Britain is the land where everything is policed except crime”.
Mark Steyn has been trying to warn the British for literally decades. Not his fault nobody apparently cared. Now, well Pat Benatar had a song about this.
The Beginnings
It was not part of their blood,
It came to them very late
With long arrears to make good,
When the English began to hate.
They were not easily moved,
They were icy-willing to wait
Till every count should be proved,
Ere the English began to hate.
Their voices were even and low,
Their eyes were level and straight.
There was neither sign nor show,
When the English began to hate.
It was not preached to the crowd,
It was not taught by the State.
No man spoke it aloud,
When the English began to hate.
It was not suddenly bred,
It will not swiftly abate,
Through the chill years ahead,
When Time shall count from the date
That the English began to hate.
Very old joke:
Do you enjoy Kipling?
I don’t know. I’ve never Kippled.
I wonder if that postcard is still offered at tourist shops?
Violent rebellion is the only answer.
There are few political problems that cannot be solved by a suitable application of high explosive.
Remember this at the voting booths. Stop voting for anyone who supports mass immigration. Make them pay on election night.
The current government only exists because over four million Tory voters decided to vote Reform instead. Had I been a UK voter I would have been among them, and I still think it was the right thing to do, but the fact is that that is why Labour won.
Had all Reform voters voted Tory instead, the Tories would have come in first, with 38% of the vote and would probably have won; and would probably have continued doing exactly what they had been doing, which is why so many of their voters turned against them.
This is not correct.
We have a Labour Government as the people decided to punish the Tories for failing to be a conservative Government when they had an absolute majority in parliament and squandered that opportunity.
People understood that it wasn’t them that left the Tory party but the Tories that left the people.
The Tories have made themselves politically irrelevant.
It is correct. Four million Tory voters decided to punish the Tories by voting Reform. I think they did the right thing, but you cannot deny the fact that that is why Labour has a overwhelming majority and has five years of absolute control.
Labour’s own support barely increased since the disaster it endured in the previous election. Its percentage went up by a mere 1.6%, and it actually lost half a million votes. So how did almost the same number of votes turn from a thrashing to a landslide? It was entirely because the Tories lost so many voters.
If I were a UK voter I would have done the same thing; I would have voted Reform. But I would have done it knowing that this was likely to produce five years of Labour. I would have done it reckoning that it was worth enduring that in the hope of delivering a sharp message to the Tories, and over the next five years they would either reform themselves and welcome the Reform voters back, or else collapse and let Reform take over as the major conservative party. I still hope one of those things happens.
Stick to your own lane. You have absolutely no understanding of British politics and what lead to the last election disaster for the Tories.
They were thoroughly and deservedly punished by people who had had enough of the Tory party being anything but conservative.
The Tory party, by failing to be conservative in any way shape or form made themselves politically irrelevant.
There was no way in hell that anyone who voted Reform was EVER going to vote Tory after being screwed over by the uniparty conservatives who failed to deliver true brexit (ie. doing what they had promised to do in finalising legally our exit out of the EU and failing to deal with illigal immigration).
You have absolutely no idea what’s been going on over here and just throwing more pointless words at the intraweb isn’t going to get you any closer to what’s been going on here simply because you’ve got no f88king idea sweetie 😂
So stick to your lane and just be wrong about US politics instead of being wrong about US and British politics 😂
Mailman, you’re behaving like an idiot. Four million people voted Reform. Where did they come from? Were any of them Labour voters?! Of course not. Almost all of them came from the Tories.
Yes, they voted Reform to punish the Tories. That’s exactly what I wrote. Twice. You are violently agreeing with me, while fat-headedly insisting that you are not. They voted Reform to punish the Tories, as I would have done; and that is what caused Labour to win. That is what turned fewer than 10 million Labour votes — half a million fewer than they got last time — from the complete thrashing it was last time to the landslide it was this time. How can you deny this?
The Reform voters put Labour in power. Knowingly and deliberately. Yes, it was worth it. But don’t you dare deny that that is what they did.
Milhouse, shut up and listen up.
Mailman is trying to explain the nuances of British politics to an outsider from the viewpoint of a Brit. Control the arrogance and pay attention. Unless you are a product of the culture or you have been embedded in it for a long time, you are *unable* to understand fully. It’s like me, as a son of the Old South, trying to explain the nuances of Southern culture to a New Yorker. It won’t work in that case. Neither will it work in this one.
.
Oh look, not he’s trying to demoralize the Brits by telling them how their own politics work
You’re not a UK voter. You’re not a lawyer. You can barely lie quick enough to stay ahead of your own lies.
Like this one–
If I were a UK voter I would have done the same thing; I would have voted Reform
Nah. You would’ve voted Labour. And lied about voting Reform.
I still maintain you’re both saying exactly the same thing.
mailman, if you don’t agree, pick out one statement you think was wrong, then explain how what you wrote corrects it.
“ But don’t you dare deny that that is what they did.”
What the intellectual midget is really saying is “how very dare you tell me what’s happening on the ground in your own back yard” 😂😂
Howard, we aren’t saying the same thing. justice Millhouse doesn’t understand what happened here in the Uk and why people punished the Tories by making them politically irrelevant.
As a political party they are done and any changes happening now are just the deck chairs being re-arranged on the Titanic.
I liken Labour to a less intelligent version of of Democrats and generally what the Democrats get up to in America eventually filters through to Labour here in the Uk a few years later.
The latest thing being swamping the country with illigal aliens as soon these people will be able to vote and, like Democrats in California, will never vote to deport themselves.
This is funny. You write “this is not correct” and then go on to say pretty much exactly the same thing Milhouse said.
The Tories were voted out because they were acting like globalists and socialists, and Labour was the only other choice at the polls.
Labour is acting like globalists and socialists because that’s what Labour does… but that’s not why the people voted for them. It was because the Tories needed to be punished and there was no other alternative left.
It’s the same sort of mechanism that occurs when MAGAs urge you to vote against RINO candidates who won primaries. You’re going to get a Democrat, and you know what that means. You just have to hope the GOP gets the message and puts up a MAGA next time around if they want to win.
Look at you arguing for the sake of arguing 😂😂
I’m merely pointing out that the Tories were punished for not being Tories and unlike America over here a political party actually got its arse handed to it because it’s usual voters got pissed off with it and actually kicked them out of office by voting third party, who incidentally are on track to be the next party.
Please feel free to be the intellectual mid wits pet for all we care 😂😂
Be honest with yourself, you and justice Millhouse would never have voted third party 😂
Ha ha! You’re talking to a guy who voted consistently for Ron Paul, even a couple of times when he wasn’t even on the ballot.
Despite requests, you’ve consistently avoided choosing even ONE claim Milhouse made, and showing how it differs substantially from your version. Until you do, I have to conclude you’re either arguing in bad faith or failing to understand what you read. All the ad hominem in the world doesn’t compensate for that.
Alternatively the remaining loyal Tory voters who refused to throw their electoral weight to Reform sabotaged Reform from taking power.
Or, those who continued to vote Tory effectively put Labour in power 🤔
Is it to0 late? It will require war to fix it.
It does not help matters that their inbred imbecilic king is an islamophile.
Inbred is one thing he’s not. Imbecilic is a stronger term than I would use, but it’s not wrong; and he has in the past said nicer things about Islam than I felt comfortable with. But past suspicions that he might be a secret Moslem are extremely unlikely to be true.
Not my down tick. I said he was an iskamophile. I don’t think he’s a muslim either. Just likes them a lot at the expense of his own people.
30 years too late you labor voting twats. Enjoy being serfs again.
Are these “anti-immigrant” protests, or “anti-illegal alien, force your way into the country, demand handouts paid for by the taxpayers, rape our women, groom our children, and demand we make our culture more like the culture you just abandoned” protests? The distinction is important.
Brits had better make a stand here or Blighty is done for. Overthrow the labor party and government. Find all the police officials that went along with surveilance of British citizens. Increase your numbers exponentially because your enemies are varied and many.
Also start smashing surveillance cameras. A variation of burning tires, sorry, tyres, on GATSO cams.
The U.K., France, the Netherlands, Canada and Australia are Exhibits A through E demonstrating the predictably totalitarian consequences that ensue when cancerous leftism is melded with/allied with goose-stepping, rabid Islamofascism/Muslim supremacism.
So the protest was only “mostly peaceful”, like the ones we like to mock when they’re described that way here.
The British have a history of subservience to authoritarian misrule, until they don’t. Brexit is one example, but there are many other such sudden shifts, often (but not always) triggered by a collective disgust with exceptionally incompetent leadership, propped up by arrogantly clueless elites.
The Brits have a choice to make and no one outside Britain can fix it for them except at the margins where their insane policies impact US Citizens and Companies. Hopefully the Trump WH will not hesitate to ratchet up the consequences for Britain for seeking to impose their Orwellian ‘Online Safety’ law on US Companies. Start low and small but escalate if necessary to end the ‘special relationship’ by revoking visas of all kinds and ending access to US capital markets and consumer markets. The British Gov’t doesn’t seem overly worried about offending the USA so why should the USA worry about ending the ‘special relationship’ more than Britain which is the beneficiary of the unequal relationship?
sir muhammad churchill
It’s gonna take a lot more than waving flags around or voting to fix this.
Pity the British have given up their right to self defense.
They used to know what to do to invading Muslim hordes.
Free men are armed.
Britons are neither.