The Home Secretary’s decision to revoke Valentina Gomez’s visa and bar her from entering the United Kingdom is correct. She is a foul racist and her presence in the UK is plainly not conducive to the public good.
But the more important question is why it took so long and why she was allowed into the country only last month after she had apparently called for Keir Starmer to be killed.
Withdrew permission
Gomez was recently authorised to travel to the UK to speak at Tommy Robinson’s Unite the Kingdom rally, scheduled for 16 May in London, but the Home Secretary withdrew that permission yesterday.
Nothing, however, that emerged in recent weeks is at all new.
Gomez spoke at the last Unite the Kingdom in September, telling the crowd that “rapist Muslims” were “taking over” the UK and urging police officers to stop following orders.
She called on English people to “fight or die” against “Muslim rapists and terrorists,” and branded Prime Minister Keir Starmer “the biggest paedophile protector in history.”
Should have known
These were not private remarks. They were delivered from a stage to tens of thousands of people, amplified online, and widely reported. The Home Office knew, or should have known, exactly who it was admitting when it initially issued her latest visa.
That the government initially waved her through is troubling in itself. It required sustained pressure from Muslim MPs and anti-racism campaigners to force a reversal that should have been the instinctive response in the first place.
Damning timeline
Perhaps most damning is the timeline. On 1 March, Elon Musk posted “Another one bites the dust”, referring to the killing of Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei by Israel.
Tommy Robinson, touring the US, reposted it, beneath which Gomez added the comment “@KeirStarmer is next.”
This could only be read as a call for Keir Starmer to be killed. Yet Gomez was permitted to visit the United Kingdom later that same month when she appeared in an interview with the far-right podcaster James English.
In a post published in March 2026, she also directed a torrent of abuse at Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood, describing her as a “dirty” Muslim and stating: “No nation has ever benefitted from bringing in dirty Muslims like you (Shabana). You came to a Christian country and took an oath on the Quran.”
The suggestion that the UK government lacked sufficient grounds to act before April is simply not credible.
The grounds existed since September 2025.
They were compounded in March 2026.
The government chose, for whatever reason, not to act on them.
Allowing a figure who had already threatened the Prime Minister, abused the Home Secretary in grossly sectarian terms, and attempted to incite a mass rally against British Muslims to enter the country a second time would not have been a demonstration of liberal tolerance.
It would have been an abject failure of government.
