Letter, opinion and questions by Mathew Carr

—Everyone seems to be not asking this obvious question in public.

It’s certainly possible they have …. and I didn’t notice.

Come on Sir Keir, give CarrZee the scoop. No or yes? The fires at your “former” house are super strange….right? (See below)

Are you gunna deploy more deep state fuckery on me for asking?

I’m really not being rude. People are asking privately and voters deserve to know.

Why else would you promise change and deliver for billionaires?

Still. Rupert Murdoch’s press is turning on you so you might well be toast, now.

Shows that cowering to billionaires does not pay off right?

Weak leaders are losers.

Billionaires are a disloyal bunch because they are mainly interested in money. Do you really expect your loyalty to billionaires to be rewarded?

Please comment.

Mathew Carr

Come on @Keir_Starmer ….give CarrZee the scoop.

Have you ever been #sex #blackmailed or did anyone ever try to do that to you?

Even “no” is a worthy story ….given you have failed to bring in the change you promised us all.

We can then rule it out as an explanation for your…

— Mathew Carr wants markets to save earth's charm (@carrzee) February 8, 2026

Labour waited for 14 years in the wilderness.
Then won a super majority with less than 18% of the vote.

They had no plan. No direction, no clue.

Then fucked it all up in 18 months.

You'd have to have a heart of stone not to laugh.

— Goosey (@Goosey30111568) February 7, 2026

Note

ChatGPT to be sure

Here’s a clear summary of what’s been reported about the fires linked to Sir Keir Starmer’s former home and other properties:

🔥 What happened

In May 2025, London police responded to a series of three separate fires in north London that were all linked to properties associated with Keir Starmer:

• A car fire on 8 May, involving a vehicle Starmer had previously owned.

• A blaze at the door of a property in Islington on 11 May linked to him.

• A fire at the entrance of the house in Kentish Town on 12 May — the house Starmer and his family lived in before he became prime minister and now rented out.

Nobody was injured in any of these incidents, though there was damage to the front of buildings and vehicles. 

👮‍♂️ Police action and investigation

Counter-terrorism detectives from the Metropolitan Police led the investigation because the fires involved properties connected to a sitting prime minister.  A 21-year-old man, Roman Lavrynovych, was arrested and later charged with three counts of arson with intent to endanger life. He appeared in court and denied the charges.  Additional arrests followed: a 26-year-old man was detained on suspicion of conspiracy to commit arson, and at least one further suspect, a 34-year-old man, was arrested in connection with the same series of fires. 

🧠 Motive and context

Authorities have not publicly confirmed a clear motive. Prosecutors noted that, at the time of charging, there was no official explanation for why the fires were started.  Some outside reports and commentary have suggested possible links to foreign intelligence recruitment via online channels, but these are unverified and not confirmed by police or prosecutors.  Media also reported that Russian officials denied any involvement after speculation appeared in some outlets, and no evidence of state involvement has been publicly confirmed. 

📍 Where things stand now

The individuals charged or arrested are due to face further legal proceedings in UK courts.  Investigations continue, and authorities have warned against prejudicial reporting while the case is active. 

——-

Why counter-terror police took the lead

In the UK, any attack on property linked to a sitting prime minister is automatically treated as a national security matter, regardless of scale. That doesn’t mean terrorism is assumed; it means the threshold for risk is higher. Counter-terror policing has better resources for motive-analysis, digital forensics, and links between incidents. So their involvement is procedural, not a signal of secret intelligence or state actors.

How common this sort of targeting is

Historically, properties linked to senior politicians are targeted more often than people realise — usually not to harm them physically, but to make a symbolic point. MPs’ offices, constituency homes, and former residences are softer targets than protected locations. Past cases involving Thatcher, Blair, and even backbench MPs show a familiar pattern: minor arson, vandalism, or threats carried out by individuals rather than organised groups.

What the charging tells us (and what it doesn’t)

Charging someone with arson with intent to endanger life sounds dramatic, but legally it reflects the risk created, not proof of an assassination attempt. Setting fire to a door or vehicle could endanger occupants or neighbours, so prosecutors use the higher charge. Importantly, police have not publicly alleged a political conspiracy or ideological network, which they would normally do early if evidence existed.

Why the lack of motive fuels unease

Humans hate motive-free acts. When authorities say “no motive established,” it creates a vacuum that gets filled with theories — especially when the target is powerful. In practice, many such cases turn out to involve grievance, instability, notoriety-seeking, or muddled personal politics rather than a coherent agenda.

Where things realistically go from here

Unless new evidence emerges, the case will likely narrow to:

individual culpability, whether incidents were coordinated or imitative, and sentencing risk rather than political meaning.

If there were credible evidence of foreign state involvement or organised extremism, we’d already be seeing carefully worded briefings to that effect.

So your instinct that it feels “off” is understandable — symbolism + silence does that — but based on what’s publicly known, this still fits the messy, unsatisfying pattern of lone-actor political vandalism, not something larger.

——-