A 19-year-old from Derbyshire, England, Daniel Harris, will be extradited to the United States after being found guilty of encouraging terrorism (contrary to Section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2006) relating to his creation and uploading of material to the internet between February 2021 and March 2022.
“A British teenager has been sentenced over far-right videos that might have helped inspire two U.S. mass shooters.
Daniel Harris, 19, has been sentenced to 11 and a half years in a young offender institution after he published a ‘stream of rightwing terrorist bile’ from a bedroom at his grandfather's house in Derbyshire, the judge said during his sentencing.
These videos glorified various far-right killers, including Anders Breivik. Some of the videos also provided instructions on how to commit similar atrocities.
The court previously heard that his videos had been viewed by two men who went on to commit mass murders in the U.S. last year.
Payton Gendron, the then-18-year-old mass shooter who killed 10 black people in Buffalo, New York, last May, was known to have watched Harris' videos.
The Buffalo shooter commented on a video made by Harris about the perpetrator behind the 2019 mass shooting in Christchurch, New Zealand.
An unknown user commented: ‘This video has moved me. I was on the fence, now I am committed to my race’.
The Buffalo shooter responded: ‘You are not alone my friend’.
During Harris' trial, his videos were also linked to Anderson Led Aldrich, 22, accused of killing five people at a mass shooting in an LGBTQ nightclub in Colorado last November.
The judge referenced the Buffalo shooter, commenting that there was ‘evidence that others have acted on or been assisted by your encouragement to carry out racist attacks. I have in mind the encouragement related to Payton Gendron before he carried out his shooting in Buffalo state, New York’.
‘This indicates that the videos you produced had had some influence on a young man, who I note was a similar age to you, who went out and shot ten people dead in Buffalo’.
Harris was found guilty of five counts of encouraging terrorism.
Detective Inspector Chris Brett from Counter-Terrorism Policing in the East Midlands said Harris was behind ‘a concerted effort to generate a following and influence people’, the BBC reported.
‘Harris was ultimately deemed not to have been groomed, rather, his provocative words and inflammatory films were potentially radicalizing others’”. -MSN
It’s interesting how no one is willing to accuse the Azov battalion, a Ukrainian army proxy that the U.S. government has funneled billions of dollars worth of weapons, of influencing a young man who, at the very least, admired the battalion’s look considering the Ukrainian military garb he was sporting at the time of his arrest.
At least in America, you don't have to fear getting prosecuted over a patsy intentionally crediting your verboten ideas as their motivation for committing a false flag shooting.
In the United Kingdom, on the other hand, they never let a mass shooting go to waste, even if it occurred on another continent. After all, what better way to discredit someone’s message than to have it praised by a murderer?
The Anders Breivik 2011 shooting that Harris allegedly cited, however, was an organic attack evident by the fact that it resulted in the death of dozens of quisling members of the Norwegian Labour Party’s youth wing as opposed to innocent citizens.
Given how Clausewitz defined war as a continuation of politics by other means, putting the moral rightness of Breivik’s act aside, given who the targets were, it was more an act of war than the acts of terror directed toward plebeians.
While slaying a bunch of commoners serves no political purpose and gives off negative publicity, Norway's Labour Party has yet to recover from nearly half of their next-generation leadership being wiped out by a single attack.
This is something Breivik directly addressed in his manifesto when he wrote about how it is not the wild animals who are to blame for entering the zoo, but rather the zookeepers who hold the gates open and permit them to enter.
If one is to condemn this sort of belligerent act, it would be inconsistent to not also denounce every other celebrated historical figure who has committed arguably less justifiable killings than Breivik.
It’s ironic how, in the United States, when the name John Brown gets discussed, it’s usually in the context of being the inspirational hero of the Civil War.
On May 24, 1956, Brown, five of his sons, and three other associates murdered five men in three different cabins along the banks of Pottawatomie Creek, near present-day Lane, Kansas. After Brown was captured and hanged, he became a Union hero.
It’s hard to believe that someone who acted in defense of his own nation against a foreign invasion and a treasonous government is more inherently terroristic than someone who dragged people out of their homes and hacked them up because he opposed their political ideology.
In conclusion, what we’re seeing here is the draconian imposition of thoughtcrime and excessive repression on behalf of the illiberal democracies of the West to instill fear in anyone who agrees with the crimethink of supposed political agitators.
Despite all the rhetorical appeals toward freedom of speech and freedom of expression, the law that gets enforced today is essentially a dynamically defined and redefined social construct that gets used to railroad and silence anyone who dares violate the government-sanctioned official narrative that gets imposed on the public, at first by way of deception, then when that fails, outright suppression.