Max Thompson

Work in Westminster | Campaigns Officer @SpeechUnion | All views my own.

[Max Thompson @MaxHThompson]

Yesterday, the Government effectively reintroduced Britain’s blasphemy laws, 18 years after Parliament abolished them.

Today, they push ahead with the biggest assault on English liberty by restricting our right to jury trials.

The scary thing is: it’s only Tuesday.

[The Free Speech Union @SpeechUnion]

The Free Speech Union has long warned that the official definition of Islamophobia — now repackaged as “anti-Muslim hostility” — would be used to silence legitimate criticism of Islam.

Within weeks, Labour MPs had reported Shadow Justice Secretary Nick Timothy to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, branded him an “Islamophobe”, and called on the Prime Minister to remove him from his post.

Last week, 27 Labour MPs reported Reform UK to the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), accusing the party of Islamophobia and urging the Commission to investigate.

Led by Afzal Khan, a leading campaigner for an official Islamophobia definition, the MPs cited Nigel Farage’s criticism of the mass Muslim prayer event in Trafalgar Square, alongside comments made by Lee Anderson and Sarah Pochin.

This definition is already being weaponised to silence those who criticise Islam. It amounts to an Islamic blasphemy law by the back door.

Hear from FSU Campaigns Officer @MaxHThompson 👇

[The Free Speech Union @SpeechUnion]

South Wales Police is enforcing its own bespoke Islamic blasphemy law — and it won’t be the only force to do so.

When the FSU warned that the Government’s official definition would silence legitimate criticism of Islam, some accused us of being hysterical.

Our warning has been vindicated time and again.

South Wales Police is now effectively enforcing a blasphemy code, with officers instructed to record speech that goes beyond what they regard as “legitimate discussion” of Islam.

But what constitutes “legitimate discussion” of Islam in a country that abolished blasphemy laws in 2008? And why should officers at South Wales Police have the power to decide what may and may not be said about Islam and Muslims?

The Government’s official definition of Islamophobia — now repackaged as “anti-Muslim hatred/hostility” — was a gilded invitation for public bodies to go even further with their own definitions and guidance.

The result is legal uncertainty. Individuals cannot know whether their lawful speech or beliefs will be recorded by the police, nor how any resulting record may be retained, used or disclosed.

If an officer decides that someone has crossed the line of what they consider “legitimate” debate about Islam and Muslims, the police will, in all likelihood, record it as an anti-social behaviour incident.

That record could then appear on an enhanced DBS check and cost someone a job.

We will inevitably see women who describe the burka as a tool of oppression logged alongside those who criticise halal food or public prayer events.

Most concerning of all, the policy will deter people from speaking out on sensitive issues — from the grooming gangs scandal to Islamist extremism — including public officials and journalists, for fear of acquiring a black mark against their name.

The Free Speech Union has written to South Wales Police demanding that it withdraw this guidance. If it refuses, it has been warned that judicial review proceedings will follow.

Read FSU Campaigns Officer @MaxHThompson’s opinion piece for @GBNEWS 👇

[GB News @GBNEWS]

'What we are demanding is equality before the law.'

Reform UK MP Robert Jenrick rebukes claims that Nigel Farage is 'whipping up hatred' with his response to the Henry Nowak bodycam footage.

[BBC Newsnight @BBCNewsnight]

"I would like to see a Stephen Lawrence style inquiry."

The Telegraph's Poppy Coburn says there are serious unanswered questions surrounding the murder of Henry Nowak by Vickrum Digwa.

#Newsnight

[The Free Speech Union @SpeechUnion]

What happened to Henry Nowak is the most tragic example of what happens when the police get their priorities wrong.

The 18-year-old student was stabbed with a 21cm ceremonial knife.

As he lay bleeding to death on a gravel driveway, police officers arrived and handcuffed him.

They chose to focus on an allegation that Henry had used a racial slur rather than the fact that he had been stabbed.

When Henry told officers he could not breathe and that he had been stabbed, one replied: “I don’t think you have, mate.”

Instead of trying to save his life, they arrested him.

The Free Speech Union has warned for years that the police need to get their priorities straight.

There are serious questions that must be answered by Hampshire Police.

Watch FSU External Affairs Officer @_ConnieShaw below 👇

[The Free Speech Union @SpeechUnion]

Henry Nowak was an 18 year-old student on a night out in Southampton.

He was brutally stabbed with a 21cm ceremonial knife carried by a Sikh man.

The footage released last night is deeply distressing and has shocked us all.

As Henry lay bleeding out on the ground, the police arrested him on an accusation of a racial slur.

When he told officers that he could not breathe and that he had been stabbed, an officer can be heard saying “I don’t think you have, mate”.

Rather than attempt to save this young man’s life, the police were more interested in an accusation of racism.

The last thing Henry heard was being read his rights as he was arrested.

When the police are more concerned with an allegation about words potentially said than the fact that a young man has suffered a fatal knife wound, the extent of the mess our police are in is laid bare.

Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary have some serious questions to answer.

[Nigel Farage MP @Nigel_Farage]

The fear of being called racist was greater than dealing with Henry Nowak’s murder.

We should respond to this with pure cold rage.

Britain’s historic way of life is being thrown away.

[The Free Speech Union @SpeechUnion]

“While a Christian preacher who compares Christianity with Islam on a Bristol street is arrested, the Mayor of London happily sponsors an event that sees thousands of Muslims gather to pray in Trafalgar Square — one of Britain’s most prominent civic spaces. One expression of public faith earns handcuffs; the other earns a platform. Both are lawful. Only one is treated as a problem,” writes FSU Campaign Officer @MaxHThompson.

The Public Order Act has been weaponised by activists to target peaceful preachers. Up and down the country, police forces are capitulating to campaigners who want to silence anyone who fails to share their beliefs.

Two weeks ago, Avon and Somerset Police confirmed that they had dropped their investigation into Dia Moodley, who was arrested in Bristol city centre for criticising trans ideology and comparing Christianity with Islam.

But his case is far from isolated. The plight of Christian street preachers is a growing scandal.

This will only get worse as the Government’s official definition of Islamophobia — now repackaged as “anti-Muslim hostility” — becomes embedded in British policing.

In each case, the law eventually sided with the preacher, but the arrests exposed the increasingly sinister manipulation of the law.

Read more from Max Thompson in @Telegraph 👇

[The Free Speech Union @SpeechUnion]

🚨 South Wales Police are zealously enforcing their own definition of Islamophobia in a way that threatens free speech.

The force has instructed staff to log anything that goes beyond what it considers a “legitimate” discussion of Islam.

This subjective definition gives officers the power to decide what constitutes acceptable speech and risks having a chilling effect on free expression.

The Free Speech Union has written to South Wales Police calling on them to withdraw the guidance. If they fail to do so, we have threatened legal action by way of judicial review.

FSU General Secretary Lord Young said South Wales Police risked “penalising people for expressing misgivings about Islam”, contrary to free speech protections enshrined in law. Britain’s blasphemy laws were abolished by Parliament in 2008.

Lord Young added: “The Government was careful to include free speech safeguards in its official definition of anti-Muslim hostility, making clear that it was not intended to inhibit criticism of Islam or Islamic religious practices, such as ritual public prayer.

“Our concern is that police forces and other public bodies adopting the definition will gold-plate it, ignoring those safeguards and penalising people for expressing misgivings about Islam, even when those views are rooted in evidence rather than prejudice.

“In particular, we are concerned that the default police response to reports of anti-Muslim hostility — even where they clearly fall outside the definition — will be to record them as ‘anti-social behaviour incidents’, the new name for ‘non-crime hate incidents’. Those records may then be disclosed in enhanced DBS checks.”

The Government announced its official definition of “anti-Muslim hostility” in March, alongside plans to appoint an Islamophobia tsar.

South Wales Police’s interpretation adds an extra phrase to the Government’s definition that could have a chilling effect on free speech and potentially affect people’s employment prospects.

As a result of this policy, individuals may be unable to predict whether their lawful speech or beliefs will be recorded by the police, or how any resulting record may be used, retained or relied upon.

We understand that several other police forces have adopted their own definitions of Islamophobia.

Read more below 👇

[Max Thompson @MaxHThompson]

Plight of Christian street preachers is another sign of our cultural decline https://t.co/DytvBsVQ48

[Max Thompson @MaxHThompson]

The treatment of Christian street preachers speaks volumes about two-tier policing in Starmer’s Britain.

The Public Order Act has been weaponised by activists. One expression of public faith earns handcuffs; the other earns a platform.

Read my piece in @Telegraph 👇

[The Free Speech Union @SpeechUnion]

Watch our director Lord Young on Free Speech Nation talk about the removal of the chair of the Bradford hate crime panel at the behest of Muslim activists for her supposed 'Islamophobia'.

[Kate Hoey @CatharineHoey]

A Reform UK spokesman said: “Carol Vorderman is a left-wing bad faith actor. If she spent half as much energy attacking Labour for letting men into women’s spaces and blocking a grooming gang inquiry - which present real dangers to women and girls - as she does clutching her pearls over mild tweets, her words might actually carry weight with women in Makerfield.“Rob isn’t a polished, professional politician and doesn’t speak like one. That’s precisely why he’ll be a straight-talking, effective voice for normal working people in Makerfield.”

[PoliticsHome @politicshome]

MPs must not use the Private Members’ Bill process to force through the same assisted dying legislation – it failed for good reasons
✍️@JohnCooperDG

https://t.co/b7M5cmHFj1

[The Free Speech Union @SpeechUnion]

Police sacked hate crime adviser who warned the force favoured Muslims over Jews.

After complaining that officers had been ignoring the “elephant in the room” of Islamist extremism during a meeting about an anti-Semitic terrorist attack, the chairman of the policing scrutiny panel was sacked.

She was informed that she would be removed as chairman of the Bradford Hate Crime Scrutiny Panel because of her “divisive and inflammatory” comments.

She has accused West Yorkshire Police of appearing to prioritise Muslims rather than focusing on the Jewish community following last October’s attack on a synagogue in Manchester.

This follows another incident in which she was accused of “hate speech” by police officers after defending the right to criticise the Prophet Mohammed.

The former panel chairman, a retired academic in her 60s, is now seeking a formal apology from West Yorkshire Police Chief Constable Sir John Robins.

The Free Speech Union is proud to be supporting her. FSU General Secretary Lord Young said the force has shown that it is “more concerned with protecting the feelings of Muslim community leaders than protecting Jews from terrorist attacks”.

The academic was approached in 2022 to volunteer on the scrutiny panel tasked with monitoring how police respond to hate crime reports. Soon after she was elected chairman, Muslim police officers began calling for her removal.

She has suggested that the letter notifying her of her removal was “for the Muslim men who complained to him to get him to shut me up - and he did as they asked”. She also said it “sounded like a threat”, as the complainants had been demanding her personal details and asking whether she had herself committed a hate crime.

Blasphemy laws were abolished in 2008. A free society must allow criticism, challenge and debate of any religion.

The police must not kowtow to those who wish to enforce an Islamic blasphemy law that prevents others from doing their job.

Read more below 👇

[Robert Jenrick @RobertJenrick]

I went on @LBC this morning to discuss Henry Nowak’s case.

His appalling death should be a turning point for DEI and so called ‘anti-racism’ training.

[The Free Speech Union @SpeechUnion]

Whilst Henry Nowak’s murderer has been found guilty, the treatment Henry was subjected to by the police remains a scandal.

Henry was brutally stabbed on the streets of Southampton by a man carrying a 21cm ceremonial knife.

Rather than attempting to save the life of a young man bleeding to death, police chose to arrest him following an accusation that he had made a racist comment.

The police appeared more interested in an allegation of racism than in saving the life of a young man drowning in his own blood.

There are serious questions that must be answered.

Read @RobertJenrick’s letter to the Home Secretary 👇

[Robert Jenrick @RobertJenrick]

Since the murder of Henry Nowak there has been stony silence from the Government.

Not a peep from the Home Secretary.

Not a word from the Prime Minister who is normally quick to respond to deaths involving the police, both in the UK and abroad.

Remember the spectacle of him ‘taking the knee’ over George Floyd’s death? He won’t even say Henry Nowak’s name.

Henry’s death constituted a national scandal. An 18 year old, robbed of his future on a night out in Southampton after being brutally stabbed 6 times with a 21cm long ceremonial sword. Instead of helping him, the police initially arrested him as he bled to death after he was accused by his attacker of racial harassment. Henry was treated not as the victim, but as the criminal.

His murder could not have been more monstrous; the police response more shameful. 

So why has this appalling injustice been met with a collective shrug by politicians in Westminster? With the exception of a couple of us including Henry’s local MP, Jen Craft, it has not been raised in the House of Commons.

I asked the Home Secretary to launch an investigation into the police’s conduct and a debate on two-tier policing - needless to say I was rebuffed. 

The silence can be explained by the fact that most politicians are more interested in showing their supposed virtue by favouring minority communities at the expense of the majority. So they look away at injustices perpetrated by minorities, lest it colour the multicultural illusion they have that the country is a harmonious melting pot. And they ignore prejudiced laws and the conventions of so-called ‘anti-racism’ which lead to discrimination against the majority. 

The trial of Henry’s killer, Vickrum Digwa, may be over, but the questions are only just beginning.

Why did the police arrest Henry based on one allegation he had made a racial slur - something the prosecution described as a “wicked lie”?

Why was Henry’s handcuffing and arrest considered a priority for the police when he was in a critical condition?

Why do perceived racial sensitivities consistently appear to shape how the police enforce the law these days? 

The police have now apologised. But ‘sorry’ doesn’t cut it. Not remotely. Heads must roll for such a catastrophic failure. The bodycam footage must be released. And the police’s “anti-racist” training programmes need overhaul.

We can’t go back in time and undo what has been done. Henry’s family and friends will live with this forever.

But his tragic death should be a turning point. A clarion call for the authorities to act in a colour-blind way - treating people under the principle of equality before the law.

[Max Thompson @MaxHThompson]

Britain and its people are considerably worse off since you became PM.

[Keir Starmer @Keir_Starmer]

Tony Blair might not like my plan, but he's wrong: it's changing Britain for the better.

https://t.co/jbDwObZZFr

[Robert Jenrick @RobertJenrick]

Henry Nowak’s murderer has been found guilty.

Good. But Henry’s treatment remains an appalling scandal.

My letter to the Home Secretary demanding answers👇