🚨NAMED AND SHAMED This is Judge Elizabeth Ruddick She just let an AFGHAN migrant who ATTACKED a Mother and a 14 year old girl with a WINE BOTTLE in the street REMAIN in the UK She claimed he was receiving medical treatment on the NHS and is no longer a threat to our society INSANE Judges like this should lose their license to practice APPALLING DECISION

📣🚨The Free Speech Union is mounting a legal challenge against the Government over its official definition of Islamophobia — now repackaged as 'anti-Muslim hatred' — and its appointment of a new 'tsar' to punish people who fall foul of it. This amounts to a Muslim blasphemy law via the back door. The definition is vague and subjective, and will be weaponised to silence legitimate criticism and debate about Islam, Muslims, and Islamic practices and history. The FSU’s General Secretary, Lord Young of Acton, said: “This is the most serious threat to free speech the Government has come up with so far — the only area in which it’s achieving any success. “If we don’t win this fight, tens of thousands of people a year could lose their jobs at the say-so of a Labour-appointed ‘tsar’. It’s dystopian.” Public bodies will adopt this definition — despite it being non-statutory — with the same zeal the police have shown in investigating and recording non-crime hate incidents (NCHIs). It is predicted by one of the drafters of the definition that it could lead to around 20,000 reports of 'anti-Muslim hostility' a year. At present, the number of recorded anti-Muslim hate crimes is around 4,000. In a free society, no religion should be shielded from legitimate criticism. This proposal places one faith above the rest. The Free Speech Union is bringing a legal challenge on two grounds. First, the definition relies on nebulous, legally undefined terms such as “negative and prejudicial stereotyping of Muslims”, making it incoherent and irrational — and ripe for weaponisation. Second, adopting such a definition cuts across legislation already enacted by Parliament and therefore breaches the public law principle known as “occupying the field”. Under this established public law doctrine, new regulations, put in place by ministers, must not replace existing legislation. It is constitutionally unlawful. In this case, the body responsible for protecting Muslims from discrimination is the Equality and Human Rights Commission, not an anti-Muslim hostility 'tsar'. Parliament voted to abolish blasphemy laws 18 years ago. We can't let this Government resurrect them via the back door. This is one of the biggest battles the Free Speech Union has ever taken on in its six years — and we need your help. Judicial reviews are expensive, but this is a fight we felt we had to take on. Donate to our crowdfunder below👇

Started a few hours ago ( I believe) SIGN & SHARE? Petition: Dissolve Parliament and call a General Election now! petition.parliament.uk/petit…

Let's all trigger far left metropolitan elitist snob @EmilyThornberry by retweeting this. Happy St George's Day!

🚨 BREAKING NEWS UK 🚨 🔴 BRITISH CITIZENS ARE SET TO GO ON STRIKE!!! 🔴 24/05/2025 🔴 Every City centre at the same time (12PM) 🔴 Check out our account for confirmed meeting point. 🔴 More to follow

Newcastle diving is hilarious

Paul Williams wears a beret while sticking baguettes up his bum.

Forward pass France tmo let's it go.

When the "Refugees Welcome" lot get offered to host a "Refugee", all of a sudden they're have a bunch of excuses...

So glad the Nazis are out of office