Wow, UK has lost freedom of speech

[Nessie]

Yorkshire police arrest UK man for 'F*** Hamas' X post | The Jerusalem Post

Pete North, 47, was arrested over the meme on suspicion of committing a public order offence.

www.jpost.com

How is this possible?

In the UK if you post "◊◊◊◊ Hamas" or "◊◊◊◊ Palestine" on Facebook or Twitter, you go to jail???

When did this insanity start?

What has happened is that many people have now weaponised hate speech laws, by making spurious complaints to the police about what others they disagree with have posted online. The police investigate the complaints and some reports, which are evidenced to be hate speech breaking UK laws, that go to the UK prosecution services, make it to trial and those people are convicted.

Those convictions are then often misreported, without proper context, by other bad actors, to get to make a living as so-called journalists and social media commentators. They have found that misreporting and making people angry, gets more attention, and so they make more money, than responsible, evidenced, explanatory reporting.

Those groups of people, who are acting very irresponsibly, have created a chaos of misinformation.

 

[Nessie]

Criminalizing non-violent, non-threatening speech that harms NOBODY, is the path to Nazism or Stalinism.

Its not a strawman.

Please example someone who has used non-violent, non-threatening speech, who has been convicted of a criminal offence in the UK. Remember to accurately describe the full circumstances of what was said, the context in which it was said, exactly what crime they were convicted of and the sentencing remarks made by the judge.

 

[smartcooky]

Sounds like the justice system worked then.

Only if you don't understand that the process is the punishment. Putting people through the ringer for posting a hurty tweet will dissuade them, and others from exercising their rights to free speech. Its analogous to Goebbels' repeating the big lie until it becomes the truth... in this case, the repeated action of putting innocent people through the process of being handcuffed, taken to jail and held for several hours will have the effect of changing behaviour. I won't speculate as to whether this is an intentional plan, but it is certainly the effect.

All of the links I posted earlier are things that actually did happen to real, named people - they are not made up. Police have acknowledged all of them - there are police records of these incidents, and police statements about them on public record.... and in some cases, court records that are also public. The head of the Metropolitan Police has even publicly acknowlegded that his officers are placed in a difficult position because of lack of clairy and transparency in the law.

The progressives in this thread know this - and that makes them unconfortable - its why they limit their comments to mockery and dismissal - its all they've got!

 

[smartcooky]

Please example someone who has used non-violent, non-threatening speech, who has been convicted of a criminal offence in the UK. Remember to accurately describe the full circumstances of what was said, the context in which it was said, exactly what crime they were convicted of and the sentencing remarks made by the judge.

You're falling into the trap of failing to understand the intimidatory effect of THE PROCESS. These so-called hate speech posts need to be investgated WITHOUT making any contact with the person who made the alleged "offending" post. They should look at the post, and make the decision as to whether or not it is hate speech. If they decide its not... no further action is taken, and the person concerned is never contacted. If they decide that it IS hate speech, ONLY THEN should they contact the person who made the post to arrest them.

The UK police need to stop using the process as a cudgel!

 

[Nessie]

Only if you don't understand that the process is the punishment. Putting people through the ringer for posting a hurty tweet will dissuade them, and others from exercising their rights to free speech. Its analogous to Goebbels' repeating the big lie until it becomes the truth... in this case, the repeated action of putting innocent people through the process of being handcuffed, taken to jail and held for several hours will have the effect of changing behaviour. I won't speculate as to whether this is an intentional plan, but it is certainly the effect.

All of the links I posted earlier are things that actually did happen to real, named people - they are not made up. Police have acknowledged all of them - there are police records of these incidents, and police statements about them on public record.... and in some cases, court records that are also public. The head of the Metropolitan Police has even publicly acknowlegded that his officers are placed in a difficult position because of lack of clairy and transparency in the law.

The progressives in this thread know this - and that makes them unconfortable - its why they limit their comments to mockery and dismissal - its all they've got!

Agreed. What Parliament needs to do, is make the laws on speech clearer, with examples of what is and is not acceptable. The present system leaves a gap, between the law being introduced and the courts deciding what is in breach of the law and what is not. That gap causes all sorts of problems for the police.

There also needs to be consequences for the bad actors, who make spurious complaints that they have experienced distress about someone else has posted online, to get that person arrested, or at least the subject of a police complaint.

 

[Carrot Flower King]

The supposed shouting "We love bacon" was discussed in another thread, but we got sent to the Naughty Step, as it was off topic.

Long story short: there was no actual evidence available to support the story; it was in the context of long-running protests outside the building site of a mosque in Dalton in Furness (not Dalton, east London as many claimed), which had big presences of outside agitators and a lot of arrest for public order offences of folk on both sides of the argument. I did a lot of rummaging in various corners of the net on that one.

This is what happens repeatedly with a bunch of these supposed suppressions of free speech: over-claiming by certain parties; mis-reporting; removal of pertinent facts and so on.

 

[Nessie]

You're falling into the trap of failing to understand the intimidatory effect of THE PROCESS. These so-called hate speech posts need to be investgated WITHOUT making any contact with the person who made the alleged "offending" post. They should look at the post, and make the decision as to whether or not it is hate speech. ONLY THEN should they contact the person who made the post to arrest them.

The UK police need to stop using the process as a cudgel!

Agreed, but the problem is the gap between the introduction of a law and the courts making decisions as to what counts and the lack of guidance from the start. With multiple police forces making multiple decisions as to what breaks the law, without any clear guidance from the start, of course there will be many consistencies and odd decisions. Stop faulting only the police, for a problem that has been caused by Parliament and the courts.

 

[Carrot Flower King]

The behavior of the other guy is irrelevant.

If one of us loses freedom of speech, you and I are next. Neimoller taught us that.

There is a difference between free speech and deliberate provocation: Nazis insisting on marching through a Jewish area is the latter, not the former.

 

[smartcooky]

Agreed, but the problem is the gap between the introduction of a law and the courts making decisions as to what counts and the lack of guidance from the start. With multiple police forces making multiple decisions as to what breaks the law, without any clear guidance from the start, of course there will be many consistencies and odd decisions. Stop faulting only the police, for a problem that has been caused by Parliament and the courts.

I'd love to not fault the Police, and actually, I dolt fault the the regular cops who end up contacting these people. They don't make that decision themselves, its their superiors. Someone up the chain of command is making these decisions. It needs to stop.

No other offenses are investigated the way that hurty social media posts are. The alleged perpetrator is the last person the police visits. The FIRST person they need to visit is the complainant. In many cases, the complaint is anonymous, and they are not even contacted at all.

 

[Nessie]

IF, this article is accurate and this IS correct;

Yorkshire police arrest UK man for 'F*** Hamas' X post | The Jerusalem Post

Pete North, 47, was arrested over the meme on suspicion of committing a public order offence.

www.jpost.com

"North explained that the police who interviewed him in Harrogate were ignorant on the conflict and on Hamas, a proscribed terrorist organization in the United Kingdom.
He recounted how “The officer in the interview said, ‘Well, firstly, let’s start with the meme. You posted a meme that said, f*** Hamas’.
“I said, ‘yeah, I did post a meme that said, f***Hamas, because Hamas is a proscribed terrorist organisation internationally, including in Britain. Just so we’re on the same page, you do know who Hamas are?’ And he just looked gormlessly and shook his head."
“‘And so you don’t know anything about Oct 7?’ And I briefly explained to him what happened at the Nova music festival. He was totally oblivious."

Then a large part of the problem is that not very bright officers are bad at enforcing vaguely worded laws that may have not yet had any court decisions as to what actually counts as a criminal act. Parliament, the police and the courts are not very good at getting their act together and acting in a sensible, consistent way, from the start.

 

[smartcooky]

There is a difference between free speech and deliberate provocation: Nazis insisting on marching through a Jewish area is the latter, not the former.

Nazis marching through a Jewish area is not what is happening here. What IS happening is that people are being Policed for expressing on social media, their genuinely held opinions.

 

[smartcooky]

IF, this article is accurate and this IS correct;

Yorkshire police arrest UK man for 'F*** Hamas' X post | The Jerusalem Post

Pete North, 47, was arrested over the meme on suspicion of committing a public order offence.

www.jpost.com

"North explained that the police who interviewed him in Harrogate were ignorant on the conflict and on Hamas, a proscribed terrorist organization in the United Kingdom.
He recounted how “The officer in the interview said, ‘Well, firstly, let’s start with the meme. You posted a meme that said, f*** Hamas’.
“I said, ‘yeah, I did post a meme that said, f***Hamas, because Hamas is a proscribed terrorist organisation internationally, including in Britain. Just so we’re on the same page, you do know who Hamas are?’ And he just looked gormlessly and shook his head."
“‘And so you don’t know anything about Oct 7?’ And I briefly explained to him what happened at the Nova music festival. He was totally oblivious."

Then a large part of the problem is that not very bright, poorly educated officers are bad at enforcing vaguely worded laws that may have not yet had any court decisions as to what actually counts as a criminal act. Parliament, the police and the courts are not very good at getting their act together and acting in a sensible, consistent way, from the start.

Respectful FTFY

If anyone in this day and age does not know who and what Hamas are, and has never heard about the October 7 attack, then they don't deserve to even be in the police force.

 

[Nessie]

I'd love to not fault the Police, and actually, I dolt fault the the regular cops who end up contacting these people. They don't make that decision themselves, its their superiors. Someone up the chain of command is making these decisions. It needs to stop.

No other offenses are investigated the way that hurty social media posts are. The alleged perpetrator is the last person the police visits. The FIRST person they need to visit is the complainant. In many cases, the complaint is anonymous, and they are not even contacted at all.

I agree that fault primarily lies with more senior officers. There will be some who see it as a contest to get the first case to trial, or to report the most offences, to evidence what a brilliant police officer they are, ready for their next promotion. I saw that happen in Police Scotland, with the over enforcement of laws regarding domestic violence and abuse. Lots of innocent people were arrested, kept in custody and sent to court, as senior police sought to fulfil targets set by the Chief Constables. But, amongst many of them, was the genuine belief that they were doing good and driving down domestic crimes. The police go on crusades, driven by a belief they are doing good. Another example was the enforcement of badly worded laws during the pandemic, driving the police to arrest people who were doing things that had no danger of causing transmission of Covid.

They are doing the same thing again with hate speech laws.

 

[Carrot Flower King]

Nazis marching through a Jewish area is not what is happening here. What IS happening is that people are being Policed for expressing on social media, their genuinely held opinions.

I was replying to Hercules, who brought up the example of the ACLU defending the right of Nazis to march through a Jewish area, so my response is completely pertinent to that: just check back in the thread.

 

[Pixel42]

I agree that what does and does not qualify as hate speech needs to be clarified, and the process around investigating complaints of it can certainly be improved. But human error, over zealousness, biases and malicious accusations are facts of life that all areas of the justice system has to deal with. Sadly people are wrongly arrested, prosecuted and sent for trial only to be found innocent for every type of crime. Sometimes they're even wrongly found guilty. This is not something that's unique to the crime of hate speech, and it doesn't mean that the UK has lost freedom of speech. That would only be the case if people were being routinely prosecuted, found guilty and punished for saying things which are clearly not hate speech.

I suspect the motivations of those who are shouting loudly, and often inaccurately, about a few specific examples of a general and long standing issue.

 

[smartcooky]

I was replying to Hercules, who brought up the example of the ACLU defending the right of Nazis to march through a Jewish area, so my response is completely pertinent to that: just check back in the thread.

Fair enough. I just thought it needed saying.

The ACLU has, IMO, the correct position on this issue. They are in effect, saying what I believe, which is...

"I might hate everything you believe in, and despise the horrible things you say, but I WILL defend your right to believe in, and say those things"

 

[Hercules56]

Oh wait. I mean, that meme was pretty strong (though I don't believe it should ever come close to rising to the level of a legal office. Religions themselves are fair game in my book (otherwise criticizing the Catholic Church for their lack of activity and accountability in dealing with paedofile priests would be a criminal offense).

But if you think this is something new, the I have news for you

Teenager arrested for saying that a police officer looked like her lesbian Nana:

Police face complaint over arrest of autistic Leeds teenager

The girl was detained in Leeds for a "homophobic public order offence", officers say.

www.bbc.com

Man arrested for misgendering a transgender identified male:

Leeds preacher's sentence for trans woman's harassment quashed

Christian preacher David McConnell's conviction is overturned at Leeds Magistrates' Court.

www.bbc.com

Man arrested for saying "We love bacon" near a mosque:

The bacon hate crime

A man has been arrested for singing ‘we love bacon’. Free speech is cooked.

www.andrewdoyle.org

Former policeman arrested for misgendering his stalker:

Free-speech champion harassed by trans police officer is accused of h…

archived 14 Sep 2025 07:38:50 UTC

archive.is

Man arrested, charged, convicted and jailed for teaching a dog to do Nazi salutes (I kid you not)

Man guilty of hate crime for filming pug's 'Nazi salutes'

Mark Meechan recorded the dog reacting to statements such as "Sieg Heil" by raising its paw.

www.bbc.com

76 year old woman arrested for allegedly calling a neighbor a hurty name:

Scots OAP 'carted off in cop van' after being wrongly accused of hate crime

A PENSIONER has told how she was carted off by cops after being wrongly accused of a hate crime. Mild mannered Morag McDougall Brown, 74, says she has endured two years of abuse from a nightmare ne…

www.thesun.co.uk

Person visited by Police for criticising a Labour consellor on Facebook

The petty authoritarianism of Britain’s thoughtpolice

Candice Holdsworth, Tom Slater and Fraser Myers discuss the pensioner visited by police for criticising a Labour councillor. This is a clip from the latest episode of the spiked podcast. Watch the full thing here.

www.spiked-online.com

Father & mother arrested in front of their daughter for complaing too much in a post, about their other disabled daughter's primary school
https://www.spiked-online.com/video/the-petty-authoritarianism-of-britains-thoughtpolice/

Arrested for... well, I can't even work out why:

‘Brexity things’? This is a new low for the thoughtpolice

How a tweet about anti-Semitism and some anti-woke books landed a pensioner in a police cell.

www.spiked-online.com

It started a long time ago...

The above is just the ones we know about... a small percentage of the 30 people a day who get visits from Police in the UK, simply for saying hurty things on Social Media

All of these arrests appear on their face to be insane and ridiculous, unless you believe free speech has no value.

When did Britain lose their way?

Or, have they always been this way?

 

[Hercules56]

You're falling into the trap of failing to understand the intimidatory effect of THE PROCESS. These so-called hate speech posts need to be investgated WITHOUT making any contact with the person who made the alleged "offending" post. They should look at the post, and make the decision as to whether or not it is hate speech. If they decide its not... no further action is taken, and the person concerned is never contacted. If they decide that it IS hate speech, ONLY THEN should they contact the person who made the post to arrest them.

The UK police need to stop using the process as a cudgel!

Wait, so folks to accept that mere hateful speech should be a crime? Yikes.

 

[Hercules56]

There is a difference between free speech and deliberate provocation: Nazis insisting on marching through a Jewish area is the latter, not the former.

Mearly marching, without making threats of violence, is not a provocation.

If the mere presense of a swastika flag equals violent threat, what else qualifies?

Palestinian flag? Flag of the Soviet Union?

Where does it end?

 

[Andy_Ross]

Hurrah for the Blackshirts!