When hundreds of thousands of Britons joined the recent Unite the Kingdom rally, the government of Keir Starmer wanted them to know that they were being watched for possible arrest. By deploying facial recognition systems and invoking the United Kingdom’s anti-free speech laws, Starmer’s government made it clear that it would not tolerate anything it considered hateful or xenophobic, on the heels of its losses to Reform UK in council elections.
Under its Online Safety Act, the government removed posts from social media platforms such as TikTok, including statements about Reform UK’s immigration policies.
Among those impacted was Reform UK’s shadow home secretary Zia Yusuf who reportedly had “two videos removed from TikTok—one for a user report under the UK’s Online Safety Act and another for hate speech.” They were later restored.
Starmer’s government also reportedly prevented speakers from the rally from entering the county, citing concerns they might “incite” the crowd.
The Times reported last year that the government was arresting 30 people a day for speech crimes.
In the last two decades, free speech protections in the U.K. have been eviscerated. The criminalization of speech has expanded exponentially as individuals and groups call the police to silence those who criticize them or advocate opposing views.
Even silent prayer or “toxic ideologies” can lead to arrest. Expressing concerns over Western cultural values is now treated as an admission of “right-wing ideology,” warranting investigation. A few years ago, a neo-Nazi living with his mother was found to have a room filled with hateful symbols and material.
Judge Peter Lodder dismissed free speech concerns over the defendant’s possessions with a truly Orwellian flourish: “I do not sentence you for your political views, but the extremity of those views informs the assessment of dangerousness.” Calling the defendant “a right-wing extremist,” Mr. Lodder said the contents of his room were evidence of “enthusiasm for this repulsive and toxic ideology.”
One of the most notorious cases has been dropped with a belated apology. Last year, I wrote about how Graham Linehan became the latest comedian to be arrested as part of the global crackdown on free speech.
The co-creator of the U.K. sitcom “Father Ted” was arrested at London Heathrow Airport, allegedly over several social media posts criticizing transgender activists. The posts were not jokes, but political commentary.
Now, the Metropolitan Police has issued an apology that he should not have been detained by five armed officers at Heathrow Airport in September 2025. It took five months, but the Met Police apologized for how his case was handled and vowed to learn from the experience.
Met Police Inspector Matt Hume declared, “I apologize to Mr. Linehan for the shortcomings in this investigation. The Met Police remains committed to lawful, proportionate policing and to learning from failings when they arise. I accept that the service provided was not acceptable and recognize the distress and impact this matter has caused Mr. Linehan.”
The problem is that it is not clear why they concluded that they made a mistake but the laws are so sweeping in their language that the police can act in the most arbitrary and ideological fashion.
There will be no discipline of those who ordered the arrest, or apparently, further explanation of why this case, as opposed to hundreds of others, was viewed as improper.
The most that Hume would offer is that, while insisting that the arrest was entirely lawful, it was “flawed” because officers focused on the transgender criticism “rather than the alleged incitement to violence,” according to The Telegraph.
Linehan correctly noted in a post to X that “This, from the ‘apology’ I received from the police, doesn’t sound like an apology.” That is because it is not a real apology. It is an effort to spin and discard a high-profile controversy while reaffirming the very policies and laws that allow for such abuses to occur in the United Kingdom.
There’s no more evading the fact that Britain has become an anti-liberty police state. They are not an ally of the United States. At the very least, the President, State Dept, should issue a travel warning to Americans to avoid travel/tourism there. There aren’t even free elections there any longer. NATO? Obsolete.
OT
SAVAGE BLAME GAME?
“…because you don’t want real history taught in our schools because you’re afraid that it’s going to hurt people’s feelings to know that their ancestors were so savage that they would enslave Black folk…”
– Jasmine Crockett
______________________
Jasmine Crockett fails to mention the basis for slavery in the British colonies, which was the monumental effort of her ancestral African tribal chiefs who abducted and sold the ancestors of Crockett et al. to Arab slave traders who sold them to British shippers who delivered them to British planters in the British colonies.
All that history ever needed to do to preclude slavery was stop the African tribal chiefs from capturing and selling Africans.
The U.S. State Department should issue a travel warning for Britain, stating that American Citizens could face what would be considered in the U.S. to be arbitrary arrest and detention simply for exercising freedom of speech and religion. And, that their online social media posting made while there could subject them to arrest based on content that is otherwise constitutionally protected in the United States.
Not a bad idea. Americans traveling there need to know about its criminalization of speech the government disagrees with (not dissimilar to North Korea).
“posting made while there” [to their friends back home]? What makes you think the UK’s jurisdiction is so limited? Someone might be arrested at the airport for what they posted years before.
Here is an excellent article from BBC discussing UK’s approach to “free speech” vis-a-vis the U.S. Take the time to read it, then review again what the good Professor Turley discusses.
A few excerpts:
“The US business magazine Forbes carried an editorial this month that took this argument further still. In it, editor-in-chief Steve Forbes condemned the UK’s ‘plunge into the kind of speech censorship usually associated with tin pot Third World dictatorships.’ He argues that, in stark contrast to the United States – where free speech is protected by the first amendment to the constitution, ‘the UK has, with increasing vigour, been curbing what one is allowed to say, all in the name of fighting racism, sexism, Islamophobia, transgenderism, climate-change denial and whatever else the woke extremists conjure up.'”
“What these cases both illustrate is the lack of consensus about what can and should be policed online in the UK, and by who.
And a lack of consensus too about how we can set apart the unpleasant, offensive, ugly and hateful things said online from those that are genuinely threatening or dangerous.”
“In the UK, the Human Rights Act does give protection to free speech but as a ‘qualified right.’ This means that ‘governments can restrict that right… provided that the response ‘s proportionate – [or] ‘necessary in a democratic society’ is what people tend to say,’ according to Lorna Woods, professor of internet law at the University of Essex.”
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62ln7mzd5ro
Re: Here’s an excellent article…” Distilled down to the essence, the government will decide what is “right speech”. How ‘Orwellian’ of them. Lonesome George is rolling in his grave, laughing hysterically.
It’s been 250 years since England lost its very valuable American colonies over the issue of free speech (among others) and it appears the British government has learned nothing in the interval.
Yeah Baby!! Starmer knows if a native citizen questions the rapidly declining standard of living and the commensurate erosion of your children’s future opportunities YOU MUST BE A RACIST, COLONIALIST, SUPREMACIST HATE MONGER that needs re-education in the style of NOKO with a Star Chamber legal system that can ensure dissent and questioning of leadership competency (oops I mean HATE SPEECH) is crushed out (oops I mean dealt with appropriately). Yeah Baby – watch the last light of hope for your culture be snuffed out by your own WOKIE!!!!
“. . . officers focused on the transgender criticism ‘rather than the alleged incitement to violence’ . . .”
Let me get this straight. If I publicly criticize LGBTQ . . ., that expression is perfectly legal. However, if someone merely alleges that my opinion might incite violence, then that very same expression is a “crime.”
That is *not* the law protecting the individual from a mob. That is the law delivering an individual to a mob.
Sam: I agree. Take a look at the article I just posted, supra, that tends to flesh out the two sides. Definitely food for thought.
I saw that. Thanks for posting it.
And here is the horror element: “. . . what people tend to say.”
The right to free speech is most critical to protect those who say what people tend *not* to say — i.e., to protect *dissenters*.
Another good point, thanks.
Yesterday I read with great interest here on Res Ipsa some very good thinkers looking to get crosshairs on the idea of natural rights. Today we see the U.K. government back on the keyboard with its fat thumb on control/alt/delete. The Old World is awash with curtailment of speech. Old World in the sense of UK and Europe. It is also awash with mass migration. We are going the other way. Then l remembered an idea Johnathon has spoken many times. The impuse for each of us to think as we will, speak as we will, write as we will and publish as we will is in our DNA. The Enlightenment thinkers to the Framers didn’t have the benefit of Francis Crick and his team, DNA, and the double helix. Our hardwired brains produce both the speech impulse and the perception of something not perfectly understood greater than ourselves that runs to both faith and natural rights. That makes the Indispensable Right not only a human right, but ineluctably human.
You do know existentialism hasn’t natural rights, right? It runs on instinct.
UK Police Log One-Year-Old Baby As Crime Suspect; Hundreds Of Kids Flagged For Offences
https://modernity.news/2026/05/19/uk-police-log-one-year-old-baby-as-crime-suspect-hundreds-of-kids-flagged-for-offences/
No, it is not the Bee.
I saw some pictures of the Unite the Kingdom rally. It was good to see so many people, so many Union Jack flags and tee-shirts. Good for them!
I love how I can count on Turley to pivot to a European article whenever Trump has a fresh scandal.
How is the slush fund not the focus of at least one article? Rampant corruption.
Let’s pay J6 rioters instead of funding ebola prevention in Africa.
Still pushing that lie?
Apparently you know what he’s referring to and you deflect with a distortion – not that you knew what you were writing. If anyone is pushing a lie, its you. As usual.
The annony posted about it multiple times in another PT column the other day. John Say dismantled the lie in epic fashion.
“With a total annual budget of around US$8 BILLION [emphasis added] of aid per year for the African continent, 70% of this, or around US$5.6 billion, is dedicated to health sector programs.”
https://www.developmentaid.org/news-stream/post/183303/overview-of-u-s-health-assistance-for-africa
https://www.wired.com/story/how-trumps-aid-cuts-are-fueling-the-ebola-outbreak/
I don’t think so. The stellar environs of Congo just burned down a medical center.
There’s no prevention. It’s burn the village before it spreads.
Well Parliament is the ultimate arbiter of all law in the UK. They have no Constitution such as we and I believe that is why, when we revolted, that a written constitution was felt to be necessary, among many other reasons. The totality of the laws passed in the Uk is considered their “constitution” but ultimately Parliament can change anything. That is why Brexit, passed by a vote of all the people, was not considered valid until Parliament passed a law enacting Brexit. So, in effect, Parliament can end these impingements on speech by ending them in passed laws. In the House of Commons. House of Lords no longer can block legislation. So it starts and ends with Parliament and the Commons. Both the Tories and Labor have passed these laws so maybe it is time for Reform UK to be elected and act.
And before Idiot Anonymous can start his inane questioning and whining, my family has a long relationship with a family in Wales that started 1942-1944 and continued up until approx 2010. My siblings and I started visiting the UK and Ireland in 1955 while living in Germany and have visited multiple times over the years with the last visit in 2015. Have only missed Northern Ireland. My older sister even visited Parliament with a Welch MOP and sat in on a session of Parliament. So I think we have some good insight on some of the UK problems. I’m sure that there are other readers here who have lived in the UK in the past and now. Culturally their entertainers and ours cross the pond to each other’s countries all the time as well as both countries being heavily involved in each other’s economy.
We can comment on their freedoms of speech because it is certainly a hot topic right now in the UK.
“They have no Constitution such as we and I believe that is why,…” That has to be the stupidest comment I’ve ever read here.
You’re an expert on English law because of a family relationship with some people in Wales?
Your sister visited Parliament and that makes you an expert on English common law?
GEB, seriously, are you lame in the head or what?
GEB is clearly more informed of UK government than you.
How would you know? You’re a fool.
I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
Ah yes, the typical, obnoxious, and aggressive commenter, who believes he’s so much more educated, and enlightened, than all of the rest. Everyone else’s opinions are mocked, and only theirs are true and correct, and worthy of being expressed.
GEB, you must be quite up.in years? I am always truly amazed by people who’ve lived such full lives.
The U.K. keeps reminding us Americans of why what we did 250 years ago was so very necessary.
Allah forbid the’Nasties’ say anything offensive about the Islamist occupation of His Majesty‘s Christian nation. Thomas Sowell got it right when he observed “Europe is belatedly discovering how unbelievably stupid it was to import millions of people from cultures that despise Western values and which often promote hatred toward the people who have let them in.“ “ Those who cannot remember the past or condemned to repeat it. “…… George Santayana.
“It can’t happen here
It can’t happen here
I’m telling you, my dear
That it can’t happen here” (Frank Zappa)
Starmer Government Doubles Down on Anti-Free Speech Policies …. so what.
We’re becoming increasingly isolated because our one-time allies are abandoning the individual rights that resulted from the Enlightenment of Western Civilization. True, we’ve had some degree of government control over the mainstream media for at least 50 years but, the Biden regime introduced politically motivated censorship and were rejected at the next election. Unfortunately, the left’s calls for a disinformation commission continue to grow. Without free and open debate, elections become exercises in futility. The Brits are the canaries in the mine standing as a warning for us. They’ve already lost their country. We shouldn’t let that happen here.
Fait accompli.
Actually the UK has cut all ties with the US but not as it appears.
The UK has suffered through more than a few incompetent and even ridiculous Prime Ministers. Starmer is not just the next in line. Bad judgement, bad strategies, and disrespect for his own people are just some of his faults. Let me add that many former ( and poor) Kings of England understood the importance to allow people to vent their issues. Starmer does not.
How can you possibly judge UK PM’s policies and actions when you have no or partial info (us media, of all sources LOL) not part of the UK political world or even a voter? You live in the US, not GB. You have no idea what transpires daily in that world. As for those kings you write, you can’t even name them. How appropriate.
Focus on the reality! There is a malignancy spreading throughout the Western World that is destroying us. Its virulence is extremely dangerous. Its simultaneous appearance across international boundaries is frightening. We see the damage this cancer does, yet we take no steps to prevent it, deal with it or even quarantine it. We seem to accept it. We complain about it. We argue about who is at fault. When we don’t do is what we should do. Excise it like a surgeon would a tumor. Cut it out of the body politic and destroy all vestiges of it before it poisons everything and everyone.
A malignancy? But you don’t know what it is? Seems to be in your mind.
It’s a celebration of the second rate in the world! Get with the party! It’s fun to be a criminal! Yay!
But it’s OK if the Arabs protest all day long. And take over the streets.
England has seen better days.
So the first of many racists rearing their ugly heads is dustoff. As usual
Yes it is okay for citizens of Arab decent with and without citizenship to protest (no, they don’t protest all day long) and take over streets, because they have permits. Its perfectly OK if whites take over the streets and protest all day long. Right eh? You f-ing racist.
So what were a bunch of freeloading muslims protesting? Bacon in schools and local delis? Pet dogs? Lack of full sharia in the town? Women showing their ankles? The British flags?
Incompatible with Western society.
F them. Deport them all. Serve bangers and mashed on the plane.
Got to love reading such comments here, a blog about free speech, and not a person here argues that even foreign born Britains can legally protest there.
It’s always the virtue signaling lot such as yourself who were seen kicking and screaming as they were thrown into the freight cars of the trains heading for Auschwitz. Much like the useless fool holding up the sign that reads “Queers for Palestine.“ This is not the migration of the 19th and 20th centuries, fool. This time, if you bring them here from there, they will bring there here for the purpose of making here there.
Is it constitutional for noncitizens to vote in local and State elections, anon? Asking for a friend…
Dustoff, seriously shut-up.
You consistently come here to stir the pot. Your posts aggravate me but I would never attempt to silence you. You, however, sound like you would censor dissenting opinions.
You immediately played the racist card. Fine. I’ll play the Trump card: we must fight against civilizational erasure. Especially because Western Civilization has done light years more than any other to advance the lives of the masses by every measure.
More, dustoff.
Hey Dustoff, foreigners and green card holder can demonstrate and protest in the USA. The US Constitution protects them too. So why not Britain?
Did this insanity spread from the US to the EU, or from the EU to the US? I’m guessing it came from the EU, since history shows that’s where the World Wars started.
Its source? Who cares. And you gonna tie in world wars as an eventuality of anti-free speech policies. You are an idiot.
Someone needs their thorazine shot this morning.
Please, your medical issue have no place here.
How about that ebola outbreak in Congo? Probably backlash from eating all those pygmies fleeing the Rawandan massacre.
It just ain’t gunna be ok…