Post

@PsychRabble

More from @SpeechUnion

The Free Speech Union

@SpeechUnion

Feb 4

At a recent PMQs, @KemiBadenoch told MPs that Labour’s adoption of the APPG on British Muslims’ definition of ‘Islamophobia’ has inhibited public discussion of rape gangs.

She pointed out that under this definition, anyone highlighting the over-representation of Muslim men in grooming gangs risks being branded an Islamophobe. Some Labour MPs, she said, have been "scared to tell the truth”.

She’s right — but here’s a thread on why the problem runs even deeper. 🧵👇

The APPG definition was drawn up in 2018 under Wes Streeting and Anna Soubry. It defines Islamophobia as: “A type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness.” Labour formally adopted it in 2019, and its chilling effect on free speech has only grown since.

At the time, critics warned the definition was dangerously broad. It states, for example, that “claims of Muslims spreading Islam by the sword” are Islamophobic. By that logic, Tom Holland’s In the Shadow of the Sword — a history book on Islam’s early expansion — would be classed as Islamophobic.

Read 13 tweets

The Free Speech Union

@SpeechUnion

Feb 4

🧵1/4 Free speech under threat!

Labour has officially adopted the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on British Muslims’ dangerously broad and subjective definition of ‘Islamophobia’ — as have dozens of Labour-run councils, including in areas where grooming gangs have operated. Under this definition, even stating that some of these gangs are of Pakistani heritage could be deemed ‘Islamophobic’.

Now, with Labour in government and Angela Rayner proposing an ‘Islamophobia council’, the risk is real. Once adopted as official guidance for public bodies, individuals could face accusations of Islamophobia simply for criticising aspects of Islam, or Islamic practices.

In the worst-case, such remarks could be treated as stirring up religious hatred — an offence under Part 3A of the Public Order Act 1986 — leading to criminal charges and even jail time. This is a dangerous path, one that threatens the principle of open discourse on which democracy depends. Read FSU staffer Freddie Attenborough’s piece in The Spectator on why it matters.

spectator.co.uk/article/islamo…

2/4 And what about ex-Muslims who have left Islam and want to explain why?

As FSU Director of Case Management Dr @BenBarryJones recently pointed out, the right not to believe is a cornerstone of liberal democracy. Yet apostates from Islam living in the UK already face ostracism, threats, and even violence.

For those who already bear the greatest personal cost for speaking out, a non-statutory definition of ‘Islamophobia’ — apparently favoured by Angela Rayner and her Labour colleagues — would make an already dangerous climate even worse.

Watch Ben's interview with NTD's @LeeAlanHall here.

youtube.com/watch?v=1OtCM7…

You can also read the shocking findings of Ben's doctoral research into the experiences of Muslim apostates in the UK here.

freespeechunion.org/shocking-findi…

Ben found numerous people wanting to leave Islam who have been forced to live ‘double lives,’ had their finances seized by relatives, or even faced physical assault.

In one case, a police officer told a 19-year-old lesbian under threat from her parents that she should avoid speaking openly about leaving the faith.

How much worse would it get for others like her if the APPG definition were formally adopted as government guidance?

3/4 But the problem isn’t just the APPG’s definition of ‘Islamophobia’.

As @CConcern’s Head of Public Policy, @TDieppe, highlights in a recent research briefing for the FSU, ANY attempt to formalise a definition — whether through a non-statutory framework or future legal changes — would have a chilling effect on public debate.

Historians, critics of Islamism, and those engaging in legitimate debate about Islam, integration, and multiculturalism could find themselves accused of ‘Islamophobia’, with severe professional and legal consequences. The last vestiges of open discussion on these crucial issues would disappear.

Read Tim’s full briefing here.

freespeechunion.org/banning-islamo…

Read 4 tweets

The Free Speech Union

@SpeechUnion

Jan 9

The Labour Party's adoption of a controversial definition of Islamophobia makes it difficult for Keir Starmer to discuss rape gangs, @KemiBadenoch told MPs during PMQs. She's right, as we flagged up in a 2024 briefing paper. Here's a 🧵on why the problem goes deeper than that...

The definition Mrs Badenoch referred to was drafted by the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on British Muslims in 2018. It was drawn up when Wes Streeting – now the Health Secretary – was its chairman and describes Islamophobia as "a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness".

In a recent FSU briefing, Christian Concern's @TDieppe warned that defining Islamophobia this way would inevitably curtail free speech. By relying on perception, he argued, the APPG definition invites subjective interpretations that deter legitimate criticism of religious beliefs or practices.

freespeechunion.org/banning-islamo…

Read 9 tweets

The Free Speech Union

@SpeechUnion

Nov 16, 2024

In response to freedom of information requests, police forces across Britain have revealed that 'non-crime hate incidents' (NCHIs) are being logged against people in authority doing their jobs. Examples include:

❌ An NCHI recorded against a doctor in West Yorkshire after a patient alleged they were misdiagnosed "because they were bisexual".

❌ A journalist's article about his interview with a "deaf and dumb" scooterist being reported to the police as a hate incident.

❌ A social worker was also reported to the police in Lancashire over claims she had abused her position and racially discriminated against the victim by preventing her from seeing her children.

freespeechunion.org/doctors-and-vi…

In 2014, the College of Policing — a taxpayer-funded quango — came up with the concept of the NCHI in its 'Hate Crime Operational Guidance'. As defined in this document, an NCHI is any incident perceived by the victim or any bystanders to be motivated by hostility or prejudice to the victim based on a 'protected' characteristic (race or perceived race, religion or perceived religion, and so on).

For the avoidance of doubt, non-crime hate incidents really are as Orwellian as they sound. They aren't anonymised, and sit forever against the names of the alleged perpetrators without any real investigation or right of appeal. In addition, if one is recorded against your name it can show up on an enhanced criminal records check and prevent you from getting a job.

That's right, you might not get a job because someone 'perceives' you've committed a 'non-crime'.

Here's a short 🧵detailing some of the most egregious of the 250,000+ NCHIs we estimate the police in England and Wales have logged since 2014...

In June 2022, Wiltshire Police opened a non-crime hate incident file when an 11-year-old boy was called "shorty" and "leprechaun" in the street by another boy.

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1…

Hampshire Police dispatched five officers to arrest army veteran Darren Brady following a complaint that he'd reposted a meme created by Laurence Fox depicting the Pride flag as a swastika.
dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1…

Read 17 tweets

The Free Speech Union

@SpeechUnion

Nov 13, 2024

FSU member and Telegraph journalist @AllisonPearson is facing a police investigation over an X post from last year — a member of the public complained, and officers initially logged it as an Orwellian 'non-crime hate incident' (NCHI). Needless to say, we're providing our member with support.

telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/11/1…

For the avoidance of doubt, NCHIs really are as Orwellian as they sound — if one is recorded against your name it can show up on an enhanced criminal records check and prevent you from getting a job.

That's right, you might not get a job because you've committed a 'non-crime'.

Since 2014, a quarter of a million NCHIs have been recorded in England and Wales alone — an average of more than 65 a day.

Because of their obvious chilling effect on free speech, in 2023 the then home secretary @SuellaBraverman raised the threshold for police recording of NCHIs. Under this guidance, officers are now only supposed to record a NCHI if the incident is "clearly motivated by intentional hostility".

thecritic.co.uk/the-return-of-…

Would it surprise you to learn that the new Code of Practice, which was intended to reduce the rate of NCHI recording and put it on a lawful footing, appears not to have been shared with officers on the ground?

The FSU recently submitted FOI requests to all 43 police forces in England and Wales to find out if the number of NCHIs they were recording had gone down since the new Code of Practice was introduced in June 2023.

According to our analysis of the data we got back, the number being recorded has actually INCREASED.

Overall, the increase was 1.6%, but in certain regions it increased by much more. Across the 16 regions which saw an increase (out of 29 we analysed, covering 73% of the population of England and Wales), the number recorded has gone up by 28.2% since parliament legislated to bring the number down.

Full briefing below.

freespeechunion.org/police-still-w…

Read 4 tweets

The Free Speech Union

@SpeechUnion

Nov 11, 2024

Attempts are underway across Europe to police what football fans — and players — say about matters of ongoing public debate, and curtail their #freedomofexpression.

Suddenly, 'the beautiful game' has become the battleground in the latest fight to defend #freespeech.

Here's a 🧵 detailing some of the highest-profile cases the FSU has come across over the past 12 month.

In France, Monaco FC midfielder Mohamed Camara was suspended for four games after covering up an LGBT badge on his shirt during a match.

Following Camara's refusal to comply, French Sports Minister Amelie Oudea-Castera said the player should be subject to "the strongest sanctions".

thecritic.co.uk/the-football-w…

This isn't a one-off aberration — in fact, the French League's move to sanction Camera is just the latest troubling sign that football authorities across Europe are seeking to impose a radically 'progressive' equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) agenda that, in its headlong rush to protect the rights of certain pre-identified 'vulnerable' and 'marginalised' groups, infringes the rights of others to freedom of expression as established by both Strasbourg jurisprudence and national case law.

Last year, for instance, Nantes striker Mostafa Mohamed refused to wear a rainbow flag-themed shirt during a game against Toulouse — having sat out the match, he was fined by his club, which then pointedly donated the money to a local LGBT charity.
apnews.com/article/nantes…

Read 7 tweets

Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

The Free Speech Union

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @SpeechUnion

The Free Speech Union

The Free Speech Union

The Free Speech Union

The Free Speech Union

The Free Speech Union

The Free Speech Union

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Send Email!