Riots and the far right: The global network behind the violence

Published

10 months ago

October 15, 2024

admin

The narrow medieval streets and canals of Strasbourg in France, on the border with Germany, have little in common with Southport in the UK. Yet the stabbing of three little girls there resonated for one man here. And his subsequent posts on social media resonated around the world – and back to the UK

In a business park on the edge of town, Silvano Trotta runs a successful telecoms business. But from his large private office, filled with miniature cars and pictures of his family, he spends much of his time posting online.

He came to prominence during COVID, publishing anti-vax posts, and getting banned from YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter, before subsequently being reinstated on Elon Musk’s rebranded X, where he posts mainly about immigration.

Trotta is bespectacled, genial, and unafraid of controversial views.

When the Southport stabbings happened on 29 July, he posted false information to the messaging app Telegram that they were carried out by an immigrant who had arrived on a small boat and gave the false name Ali Al Shakati. Our investigation shows that his post was one of the most influential of any of those making similar misleading claims on Telegram.

Trotta shrugs it off when I point out that this was entirely false.

“Who doesn’t make mistakes? But whatever happened, he is still a migrant, even if he was born in Wales.”

I’ve come to Strasbourg because what happened here is crucial to understanding what happened in the UK riots.

We’ve worked with Prose, an open-source intelligence start-up, to understand the online conversation around Southport on Telegram, the app where the stabbings were discussed, the narrative was developed, and the riots were organised.

Previous reporting has highlighted specific pieces of misinformation that fuelled the riots: the fake name from news publisher Channel 3 Now, which they subsequently retracted and apologised for, and the individual bad actors in Telegram groups abroad.

But now Sky News can reveal the full story.

Prose monitors more than 10,000 extremist and conspiracist groups on Telegram, every day collecting and archiving everything they post. Together, we looked at how active those groups were around Southport, starting on the day of the stabbings and for two weeks afterwards, looking at 11,051 total messages from 1,496 different chats and channels.

And what we found belies the idea that this was just a British reaction to a British issue. Out of the top 20 most influential accounts, in terms of reach, views and interaction, only six were from the UK. The rest were based abroad.

“While all the action is happening on the ground and people in Britain are dealing with the consequences of this misinformation,” says Al Baker, managing director of Prose, “the people stoking the violence, the people flooding Telegram and other platforms of misinformation are largely based outside the UK.”

What it shows is the nature of the new far-right – not a tightly organised hierarchy based in a specific location, but an international network of influencers and followers, working together almost like a swarm to stir up trouble.

And it is extremely worrying for the security services. The head of MI5 Ken McCallum last week told Sky News that, compared to traditional radicalisation, the extreme right instead relies on a “pick and mix ideology” where people pull on hatred and misinformation from mostly online sources.

Rather than specific organisations, it is, he said, a “crowd-sourced model”.

Bristol, Saturday, 3 August and the streets were seething. A confrontation between protesters and counter-protestors turned into a running battle, first at Castle Park, and then down to the bridge below. Police horses repeatedly charged the rioters. They threw bottles back: I got one in the head while I was reporting.

The skirmishes continued outside the centre, up towards a hill and a hotel which houses asylum seekers. Eventually, it died away.

Those who took part though were left with the consequences: several were sentenced to years in prison. But they were not far-right extremists, as is traditionally understood.

“The unrest has been fuelled by disinformation that has been circulating, particularly on social media,” the judge said in his remarks.

One of those convicted for violent disorder was Dominic Capaldi, 34. He handed himself into the police.

Capaldi’s neighbour David Lomax told us that he “is just a caring bloke and a very quiet chap”.

“He got dragged into it somehow, and he didn’t realise what he was getting dragged into.

“And a lot of these people that do all these things, they don’t come from Bristol.”

Inciting those on the ground was a specific goal of the online far-right, according to Mr Baker, at Prose.

“These are communities which are expressly specifically and in a very dedicated and organised fashion devoted to exploiting racial divisions internationally,” Baker says.

“Any incident which could plausibly involve an immigrant, a Muslim, someone who isn’t white, regardless of whether in fact they did it or not, these communities are going to kick into action and try and stoke up division and racial hatred.”

This network map shows how those groups interact.

The points in the red cluster are UK-based, English-speaking accounts on Telegram, during the two weeks after the Southport murders. And they’re dwarfed by other groups. The purple is non-UK-based English-speaking accounts. Orange shows German, for example. Dark blue is pro-Russian accounts. Below them, in yellow, are Russian-speaking accounts.

And although the online far-right may be more shapeless, less structured, than the traditional version, it still contains the hardcore element.

“There are very extreme groups who routinely funnel information into these broader networks who were clearly, specifically, indirectly trying to incite a race war on the back of the Southport murders,” Mr Baker from Prose says.

“The core of these communities are very serious people, including members of proscribed terrorist organisations, extreme neo-Nazi groups. The word ‘Nazis’ and the word ‘fascist’ is overused.

“But when I describe the groups that were influencing the tactics and the targets of the rioters, these are fully paid-up neo-Nazis who want to see the extermination of non-white people.”

Along with Telegram, X was also used to fuel the riots.

Here, research shared exclusively with Sky News by Ned Mendez, director of consultancy Clash Digital, found a similar emphasis on non-UK accounts. The most widely shared and retweeted content on Twitter/X during the initial three days of the unrest was primarily authored by non-domestic accounts from the USA and Europe, which repurposed local incidents to push inflammatory and divisive content into the UK discourse.

Jacqui McDonald knows exactly how that works. She’s a freelance journalist who was covering a vigil in Southport the day after the attack and posted a video of the crowd that gathered to mourn together.

Amy Mek, an online influencer based in the US and known for promoting anti-immigration views, ripped Ms McDonald’s video and reposted it with her own comments, in which she said the Islamic community usually “swarm the streets” and “seize control of public spaces”.

This was the single most widely shared piece of content on X during the unrest. The original video earned 11,000 views; the repurposed content got 5.5million views in a few days.

I meet Jacqui in the square where she filmed the vigil. Tributes to the girls still stand – dolls tied to lampposts, handwritten cards in the flowerbeds. I show her Amy Mek’s post on X.

“It wasn’t true at all to what was happening in her language, the inflammatory use of what she was saying and the way she framed that video wasn’t what we were seeing in front of us,” she says.

“We were seeing a respectful, peaceful, quiet vigil for those children who had died that day.”

That is one of the tragedies of the riots, that they eclipsed the grief the town felt – and still feels.

Read more from Sky’s Data and Forensics team
How the far right hijacked Southport protests
Far-right outnumbers anti-racist movement on engagement

We asked several accounts for comment, including Amy Mek. She told us she rejected the labels far-right, hard-right and conspiracist, saying these were based on “biased generalisations” and added: “I unequivocally reject any form of violence that took place during the riots.”

She said Jacqui McDonald’s video had been sent to her as a tip and had assumed that the person who sent it had taken the footage. She said she was upset to hear it had originated from a freelance journalist and would ensure they received proper credit, along with a public statement.

“Just as I had no control over how the tipster’s video came to me without proper attribution, I also had no control over how others used or interpreted my content,” Mek said.

We also approached X but received no reply, while Telegram spokesperson Remi Vaughan told us: “Telegram is not a place to spread violent content. Moderators removed UK groups and channels calling for violence when they were discovered in August…

“To dissuade criminal misuse of Telegram, IP Addresses and phone numbers of criminals who violate our rules can be disclosed to the authorities in response to valid legal requests. We are ready to cooperate with the UK government through the appropriate channels.”

The concern is that it may all happen again, that the online far-right remains active – as the head of MI5 warned – and that this wasn’t a one-off but a playbook, one that will be more effective next time.

“Large swathes of the online far-right see Southport as a missed opportunity,” Mr Baker says. “There is a huge amount of recrimination, people blaming one another for how quickly the riots fizzled out.”

“And I think we should be very concerned that they’re not going to make the same mistake twice.”

Southport is a memorial – and it is a warning.

The Data and Forensics team is a multi-skilled unit dedicated to providing transparent journalism from Sky News. We gather, analyse and visualise data to tell data-driven stories. We combine traditional reporting skills with advanced analysis of satellite images, social media and other open source information. Through multimedia storytelling we aim to better explain the world while also showing how our journalism is done.

World

Trump’s pride vs Putin’s legacy: What to expect from pivotal Ukraine summit

Published

19 hours ago

August 14, 2025

admin

Trump's pride vs Putin's legacy: What to expect from pivotal Ukraine summit

Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin will meet for the first time in six years on Friday, with a possible deal to end the Ukraine war on the agenda.

Mr Trump has threatened “very severe consequences” if his Russian counterpart doesn’t agree to a ceasefire at the summit, being hosted at a remote US army base in snowy Anchorage, Alaska.

Follow latest updates from Ukraine war

But there are fears they will discuss a deal robbing Ukraine of the land currently occupied by Russia – something Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said he won’t accept.

Here’s what three of our correspondents think ahead of the much-anticipated face-to-face.

Putin’s legacy is at stake – he’ll want territory and more
By Ivor Bennett, Moscow correspondent

Putin doesn’t just want victory. He needs it.

Three and a half years after he ordered the invasion of Ukraine, this war has to end in a visible win for the Russian president. It can’t have been for nothing. His legacy is at stake.

So the only deal I think he’ll be willing to accept at Friday’s summit is one that secures Moscow’s goals.

These include territory (full control of the four Ukrainian regions which Russia has already claimed), permanent neutrality for Kyiv and limits on its armed forces.

I expect he’ll be trying to convince Trump that such a deal is the quickest path to peace. The only alternative, in Russia’s eyes, is an outright triumph on the battlefield.

I think Putin‘s hope is that the American president agrees with this view and then gives Ukraine a choice: accept our terms or go it alone without US support.

A deal like that might not be possible this week, but it may be in the future if Putin can give Trump something in return.

That’s why there’s been lots of talk from Moscow this week about all the lucrative business deals that can come from better US-Russia relations.

The Kremlin will want to use this opportunity to remind the White House of what else it can offer, apart from an end to the fighting.

Ukraine would rather this summit not be happening
By Dominic Waghorn, international affairs editor

Ukraine would far rather this meeting wasn’t happening.

Trump seemed to have lost patience with Putin and was about to hit Russia with more severe sanctions until he was distracted by the Russian leader’s suggestion that they meet.

Ukrainians say the Alaska summit rewards Putin by putting him back on the world stage.

But the meeting is happening, and they have to be realistic.

Most of all, they want a ceasefire before any negotiations can happen. Then they want the promise of security guarantees.

That is because they know that Putin may well come back for more even if peace does break out. They need to be able to defend themselves should that happen.

And they want the promise of reparations to rebuild their country, devastated by Putin’s wanton, unprovoked act of aggression.

There are billions of Russian roubles and assets frozen across the West. They want them released and sent their way.

What they fear is Trump being hoodwinked by Putin with the lure of profit from US-Russian relations being restored, regardless of Ukraine’s fate.

That would allow Russia to regain its strength, rearm and prepare for another round of fighting in a few years’ time.

Trump and his golf buddy-turned-negotiator Steve Witkoff appear to believe Putin might be satisfied with keeping some of the land he has taken by force.

Putin says he wants much more than that. He wants Ukraine to cease to exist as a country separate from Russia.

Any agreement short of that is only likely to be temporary.

Trump’s pride on the line – he has a reputation to restore
By Martha Kelner, US correspondent

As with anything Donald Trump does, he already has a picture in his mind.

The image of Trump shaking hands with the ultimate strongman leader, Vladimir Putin, on US soil calls to his vanity and love of an attention-grabbing moment.

There is also pride at stake.

Trump campaigned saying he would end the Russia-Ukraine war on his first day in office, so there is an element of him wanting to follow through on that promise to voters, even though it’s taken him 200-plus days in office and all he’s got so far is this meeting, without apparently any concessions on Putin’s end.

In Trump’s mind – and in the minds of many of his supporters – he is the master negotiator, the chief dealmaker, and he wants to bolster that reputation.

He is keen to further the notion that he negotiates in a different, more straightforward way than his predecessors and that it is paying dividends.

So far, despite sanctions on Russia, despite warnings and deadlines, the situation in Ukraine is only getting worse.

He’s hoping that this meeting, simply the act of sitting down with Putin, can change the tide.

The Russian president may have different ideas.

World

Trump’s targets for Putin summit appear fluid – can he even get a ceasefire?

Published

19 hours ago

August 14, 2025

admin

Trump's targets for Putin summit appear fluid - can he even get a ceasefire?

The “if” was doing some heavy lifting.

Mr Trump floated the idea of a second meeting, this one between Putin, Zelenskyy and possibly himself, “if” the Alaska summit goes well.

Speaking to European leaders earlier, in a virtual call he rated at “10” and “very friendly”, he’d shared his intention to try to broker a ceasefire on Friday.

So, the strategy is crystallising – he will press for a trilateral meeting to discuss territory “if” he manages to secure a truce during the bilateral meeting.

But that begs the obvious question: what if he can’t?

The US president is keeping his options open – rating the chance of a second meeting as “very good” but preparing the ground for failure too.

“There may be no second meeting because if I feel that it is not appropriate to have it because I didn’t get the answers that we have to have, then we’re not going to have a second meeting,” he said.

Unusually, given how often he talks about his abilities, he conceded that he may not persuade Vladimir Putin to stop targeting civilians.

But without elaborating on what any sanctions might be, he warned that Russia would face “very severe consequences” if it doesn’t end the war.

Even if he achieves the seemingly impossible – a halt to the fighting – there seems little chance of agreement on any swapping of territory.

Mr Zelenskyy has told Mr Trump that Putin “is bluffing” and wants to “push forward along the whole front” not return land.

In the space of a week, Donald Trump has gone from talking about a land-swapping deal, to a “listening exercise”, to the potential for a ceasefire.

His expectations appear changeable, an indication of how fluid back-room negotiations are in the run-up to his first face-to-face with Vladimir Putin in six years.

He described Friday’s summit as “setting the table for a second meeting”, but that’s presumptuous when the meal – or deal – isn’t cooked yet.

World

Over 100 people killed in Gaza in 24 hours, officials say, marking deadliest day in a week

Published

1 day ago

August 13, 2025

admin

Over 100 people killed in Gaza in 24 hours, officials say, marking deadliest day in a week

More than 100 people have been killed in Gaza within 24 hours, officials there have said – the deadliest day recorded in a week.

The Gaza health ministry said 123 people were killed, adding to the tens of thousands of fatalities during the near two-year war raging in the Strip.

It comes as officials said Israel’s planned re-seizure of Gaza City, which it took in the early days of the war before withdrawing, is likely weeks away.

Follow the latest: Netanyahu accused of having ‘lost the plot’

Eastern areas of Gaza City were bombed heavily by Israeli planes and tanks, according to residents, who said that many homes were destroyed in the Zeitoun and Shejaia neighbourhoods overnight.

Al-Ahli hospital said 12 people were killed in an airstrike on a house in Zeitoun.

Israeli tanks also destroyed several homes in the southern Gaza city of Khan Younis, Palestinian medics said.

They added that in central Gaza, Israeli gunfire killed nine people seeking aid in two separate incidents. The Israel Defence Forces (IDF) did not comment on this.

The number of Palestinians who died of starvation and malnutrition in Gaza has risen to 235, including 106 children, since the war began, following the death of eight more people, including three children, in the past 24 hours, the Gaza health ministry said.

The malnutrition and hunger death figures have been reported by the Hamas-run ministry and have been disputed by Israel.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday: “If we had a starvation policy, no one in Gaza would have survived after two years of war.”

He also repeated the allegation that Hamas has been looting aid trucks and claimed uncollected food has been “rotting” at the border, blaming the UN for not distributing it.

The latest death figures come as Hamas held further talks with Egyptian mediators in Cairo with a focus on stopping the war, delivering aid and “enduring the suffering of our people in Gaza”, an official for the group said in a statement.

Egyptian security sources said the possibility of a comprehensive ceasefire would also be discussed.

This would see Hamas relinquish governance in Gaza and concede its weapons, with a Hamas official saying the group was open to all ideas as long as Israel would end the war and pull out of Gaza.

But the official added that “laying down arms before the occupation is dismissed as impossible”.

👉 Listen to Sky News Daily on your podcast app 👈

Meanwhile, Mr Netanyahu reiterated that Palestinians should simply leave Gaza, an idea which has also been enthusiastically floated by US President Donald Trump.

“They’re not being pushed out, they’ll be allowed to exit,” Mr Netanyahu told Israeli television channel i24NEWS. “All those who are concerned for the Palestinians and say they want to help the Palestinians should open their gates and stop lecturing us.”

World leaders have rejected the idea of displacing the Gaza population, and Mr Netanyahu’s plan to expand military control over Gaza, which Israeli sources said could be launched in October, has increased global outcry over the widespread devastation, displacement and hunger in the enclave.

The humanitarian crisis in Gaza is at “unimaginable levels”, Britain and 26 partners said in a statement on Tuesday, warning: “Famine is unfolding before our eyes.”

The statement added: “Urgent action is needed now to halt and reverse starvation. Humanitarian space must be protected, and aid should never be politicised.”

It was signed by the foreign ministers of Australia, Belgium, Canada, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Japan, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the UK.

The war in Gaza began on 7 October 2023 when Hamas killed about 1,200 people – mostly civilians – and abducted 251 others in its attack.

Most of the hostages have been released in ceasefires or other deals. It is believed Hamas is still holding 50 captives, with 20 believed to be alive.

Israel’s retaliatory offensive has killed more than 61,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza’s Hamas-run health ministry, which does not differentiate between militants and civilians in its count.