'The Southport Cover-up'
What is the Establishment keeping back about the Axel Rudakubana case?
Within days of the Southport Stabbing, on the 29th of July 2024, it was apparent to great swathes of the British public that something was off about events and the manner in which details about the major incident were being presented to the public by the Press, the Police, and the British Government.
Initial rumours about the identity of the perpetrator suggested he had been an immigrant — an illegal from Somalia named Ali Al-Shakati. These rumours were quashed by the official announcement that the attacker arrested at the scene was a ‘Cardiff-born teenager’. This gave the public the impression that a native British white boy had been responsible for the knife rampage against the group of primary-school-age girls.
This struck people as odd. Whilst it is all too common for young men — particularly and disproportionately among black youths in cities — to stab each other in Britain, these attacks and homicides most often occur in instances of gang warfare between adolescents, or one-on-one assaults. It is not a mass attack against a group of girls, especially not girls of primary school age, defenceless, and enjoying a Taylor Swift-themed dance class.
Attacks against this demographic — young girls and women in Western nations — are committed by young-to-middle-aged men with an immigrant status, originating from Arab countries, often motivated by Islam. This statement should be uncontroversial.
The Pakistani-Muslim Rape Gangs in the UK, the Manchester Area Bombing (2017), the Primary School Stabbing in Ireland (2023), and the thwarted attack on a Taylor Swift Concert in Vienna (2024) all spring to mind with a sting when the words, ‘Attack on young girls’ is heard. This is to neglect to mention the innumerable assaults and stabbings committed against women and girls by immigrant men that appear in regional newspapers on an almost daily basis.
For the sake of stating the obvious for those who believe it necessary, this is not to say that all such attacks are committed by immigrants or Muslims, or that all attacks perpetrated by immigrants and Muslims follow this pattern. The Reading Park Attack (2020) was committed by a Jihadist but committed against three gay men and the Stabbing of Emily Jones was exacted by a migrant woman. Instead, it is to state that a pattern exists and that patterns are not arbitrary.
The prospect, then, that the suspected perpetrator behind the Southport Stabbing was a white, Welsh, ‘Christian’ boy was both shocking and unlikely. Young men from white, devout Christian backgrounds do perpetrate heinous attacks against large groups of young children — namely in school shootings as seen in the United States of America — but such attacks are unheard of in the United Kingdom, and, if true, the attack in Southport presented a terrifying new style of violence rupturing onto Britain’s streets.
It was, then, with some public anger, that the ‘Cardiff-born karate-loving teen’ — the “quiet choir boy” Axel Muganwa Rudakubana — was:
revealed to be a second-generation immigrant — the son of two Rwandan immigrants
charged with producing the biological toxin, ricin
charged under the Terrorism Act 2000 for being in possession of “a pdf file entitled ‘Military Studies in the Jihad Against the Tyrants: The Al-Qaeda Training Manual’ of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism.”
This is all after great swathes of the British public were condemned by Prime Minister Keir Starmer as wrongheaded and “far right” for suspecting the perpetrator of the Southport attack would be an immigrant, or of immigrant descent, and potentially inspired by radical Islam.
Yet, the attack itself has not been declared a terror incident. There may be good reasons for this. This does not, though, negate the peculiarity of other details about the handling of the case, such as the absence of a police mugshot or an otherwise up-to-date picture of Axel Rudakubana.
It is customary to withhold the official mugshot of a suspect until after a trial has concluded and the accused has been found guilty. This does not explain why no picture of Axel Rudakubana as an adult has been circulated for press use — only images of the accused as an eleven or twelve-year-old schoolboy.
Some believe in covering his face Rudakubana is masking a beard. I am inclined to believe he is masking a smile. Those close to the case believe an up-to-date photo or drawing has not been circulated because the image of Rudakubana might prompt memories in the wider Southport community…
Whatever the reason, the Establishment — whether the orders are issued from the Government, the Police, the Courts, or the legacy media — seems to think it is acceptable to continue to depict Rudakubana as a young child. His school-boy image often features beside pictures of the three primary school girls who were killed — Elsie Dot Stancombe, Alice da Silva Aguiar, and Bebe King — as if Rudakubaba himself were among the victims.
The Chief Constable of Merseyside Police — Serena Kennedy — stated on 30 October 2024 that:
“You may have seen speculation online that the police are deciding to keep things from the public. This is certainly not the case.
“We have been given extensive guidance by the CPS in relation to what we can say publicly to ensure the integrity of the court proceedings are protected, and therefore we are restricted in what we can share with you now, whilst the proceedings are live.”
Some people might interpret each of these two statements as being somewhat contradictory to the other. I am one of those people. Several of my colleagues have received similar information suggesting that the public is ‘managed’ in these affairs and that — as Nigel Farage MP asserts on The Winston Marshall Podcast — “we are witnessing one of the biggest cover-ups we’ve ever seen in our lives.”
I am of the sincere belief that this case, whilst being handled in a manner which serves the best interests of the accused — and, perhaps, others in positions of authority around him — is failing to be handled in a matter which serves the best interests of the public and the victims.
Over the last four weeks, I have taken it upon myself to conduct an old-fashioned, boots-on-the-ground, journalistic investigation into the management — or mismanagement — of this high-profile case.
I have collated a dossier addressing each of the major allegations and concerns the public has about the attack, Axel Rudakubana and his family’s history, the nature of the cover-up, the extent to which the Establishment — the Government, Police Forces, local authorities, and media — are either complicit or have played an active role in the cover-up, and (most importantly) why they have decided to orchestrate a cover-up.
I have used an eclectic set of private and public sources, including ancestry sites, British national archives, the Electoral Register, legal deposits, documentation from Rwanda genocide trials, birth and death records from both Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo, and asylum case rulings. Wherever possible I have spoken directly to witnesses, and where impossible have used second and third-hand reports which I have been able to verify.
I presented the finished exposé to several individuals with different expertise who have given me advice on the best method of publishing my research. I have resolved to commission an essay series. Each essay will take a dominant allegation or rumour that concerns the general public, first exploring the evidence for and against the claim, then expounding upon the nature of these revelations and what they indicate about the Southport attack and the ambitions of the British establishment in covering up such information.
For ease of access for my readers, I have created a “Southport” category on the homepage of my Substack. All new articles penned by myself on the Southport Cover-up will be posted there. You can also subscribe to have any updates emailed to your inbox. All articles will be free and in the public domain.
I present these essays to the public because I fear that which is not stated, explicitly, as being of great public interest before the trial of Axel Rudakubana will fail to be revealed after the trial.
I do not present the information contained within this dossier as the irrefutable truth and I welcome correction in either direction. I have gone to great lengths to verify each of the sources: I present nothing here that I know to be false and have stipulated where fact remains uncertain and where the strength of intelligence I have received leaves something to be desired.
I have exercised all caution within my means to not reveal information which could be considered contempt of court. To this end, I have been somewhat overly cautious, lacking as I do the protection of a publisher, and withheld some information of which I am in possession.
If this information is not revealed through the trial or after the trial, and I have good reason to believe that information remains true, I will make that information public.
May God preserve my body and soul, those who work in good faith to expose all that which is being withheld about the Southport attack, and preserve the memory of those innocent girls, their families, and that fateful summer’s day…
