> The perpetrator was a second-generation African migrant

He isn't a migrant. He was born in Wales. He's British. 100%. This is exactly the kind of language that starts the wheel of hatred rolling.

Nobody knew anything about him when the riots were fomented by the white supremacist lunatics. They just made it up because it fit their narrative and allowed them to go after brown people. They invented a muslim sounding name and claimed he was an asylum seeker. None of which was true.

> The UK government initially refused to release information about the perpetrator

They didn't "refuse". It's normal practice for the police to not release the details of an alleged perpetrator.

> which caused speculation and confusion about the attack.

Speculation is not a good enough reason to try burning down a hotel with refugees in in. I'm sorry, but there is no defence for the violence and hatred that was stirred and fomented by the white supremacist lunatics (and by Musk et al).

What happened with those children is tragic. Truly. But that doesn't give a free hand to white supremacist lynch mobs.

> It's a bit odd to focus on the anti-government protests and call them terrorists, when they were out protesting because the government failed to adequately protect them from an actual terrorist.

That's a fucked up sentence. He committed a crime, not an act of terrorism. A horrific crime, yes, but what came after was not an "anti-government protest". It was a riot where people were actually trying to murder immigrants based on no information other than what they had made up themselves. I mean, a mosque was attacked the following day and the perpetrator is a Christian (or at least his family is). That's not a protest, that's pure extremist hatred.

As one of these "brown people" reading through your arguments, I'd like to politely ask; could you not?

You're not helping.