Chan Abraham - Changing Britain For Good

𝑶𝒖𝒕𝒔𝒕𝒂𝒏𝒅𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒍𝒆𝒂𝒅𝒆𝒓𝒔𝒉𝒊𝒑 𝒔𝒉𝒐𝒘𝒏 𝒃𝒚 𝑷𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒊𝒅𝒆𝒏𝒕 𝑻𝒓𝒖𝒎𝒑 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒉𝒊𝒔 𝒕𝒆𝒂𝒎 𝒂𝒔 𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒚 𝒔𝒆𝒆𝒌 𝒂𝒈𝒂𝒊𝒏 𝒕𝒐 𝒔𝒂𝒗𝒆 𝑬𝒖𝒓𝒐𝒑𝒆𝒂𝒏 𝒏𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝑩𝒓𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒊𝒏 𝒇𝒓𝒐𝒎 𝒕𝒐𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒓𝒊𝒂𝒏 𝒅𝒆𝒔𝒑𝒐𝒕𝒔 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒂 𝒅𝒚𝒔𝒕𝒐𝒑𝒊𝒂𝒏 𝒇𝒖𝒕𝒖𝒓𝒆

The peoples of European nations and Britain are celebrating the extraordinary kindness of America, yet again, as President Trump and his team step forward to save us from totalitarian despots and a dystopian future.

Senior figures — including Vice President JD Vance and Under Secretary of State Sarah Rogers — have criticised the UK’s Online Safety Act and the EU’s Digital Services Act, arguing that they have stifled citizens’ free speech online.

The State Department has launched a new website, freedom.gov, which will allow UK and EU citizens to bypass censorious laws that block and restrict access to online content.

This is the latest — and arguably most damning — intervention by the US administration on the state of free speech in the UK. It comes in the same week the White House said it would consider offering Hamit Coskun political asylum should he lose his blasphemy case.

𝑹𝒆𝒔𝒕𝒐𝒓𝒆 𝑩𝒓𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒊𝒏 𝒂𝒏𝒏𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒄𝒆𝒔 𝒇𝒊𝒓𝒔𝒕 𝒑𝒖𝒃𝒍𝒊𝒄 𝒓𝒆𝒑𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒗𝒆 - 𝒘𝒐𝒎𝒆𝒏'𝒔 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒈𝒊𝒓𝒍𝒔' 𝒔𝒂𝒇𝒆𝒕𝒚
Well done Rupert Lowe and the Restore Britain team for appointing Orla Minihane to Restore Britain who will be Restore Britain's first official spokeswoman, on women and girl's safety.

Rupert says, "Orla founded the Pink Ladies, a national network dedicated to protecting women from migrant crime. Wonderful to have her on the team."

𝑼𝒑𝒅𝒂𝒕𝒆: 𝑪𝒐𝒎𝒑𝒍𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒕 & 𝑭𝑶𝑰𝑨 𝑫𝒆𝒍𝒂𝒚 – 𝑾𝒉𝒚 𝑰𝒔 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑴𝒆𝒕𝒓𝒐𝒑𝒐𝒍𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒏 𝑷𝒐𝒍𝒊𝒄𝒆 𝑺𝒉𝒊𝒆𝒍𝒅𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝑺𝒂𝒅𝒊𝒒 𝑲𝒉𝒂𝒏’𝒔 “𝑭𝒓𝒐𝒎 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑹𝒊𝒗𝒆𝒓 𝒕𝒐 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑺𝒆𝒂” 𝑺𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕?
I’ve just published a detailed update on my ongoing formal complaint against the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) regarding their handling of serious allegations against Sadiq Khan, who occupies the high profile role of Mayor of London, the UK’s historic capital city.

The core issue: In October 2025, during Mayor’s Question Time, Khan publicly stated that he does not consider the chant “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” to be antisemitic—a phrase widely recognised by history, Government ministers, the Home Secretary, and major Jewish organisations as inherently antisemitic and carrying genocidal intent.

I formally reported this to the MPS Commissioner on 13 October 2025 as potential incitement to racial hatred (s.19 Public Order Act 1986), supported by extensive evidence linking such rhetoric to rising antisemitic violence in London.

The MPS response so far is that they:

• Recorded the matter as a non-crime hate incident (ref 01/8225922/25), acknowledging the hate element

• Yet decided no criminal offence occurred on the balance of probabilities and declined to investigate further.

To understand the legal basis for this decision, I submitted a Freedom of Information Act request on 22 October 2025 (ref 01/FOI/25/049201/E). The statutory 20-working-day deadline expired in November 2025. As of February 2026, no substantive response, no extension notice, and no refusal has been issued — a clear breach of legal FOIA obligations.

On 4 February 2026 I:

• Escalated the FOIA delay into my existing conduct complaint (ref PC/13271/25)

• Sent a final 7-day demand to the MPS Data Rights Unit, with notice of escalation to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) if non-compliant.

This case raises serious questions about consistency in hate-crime handling, transparency, potential differential treatment, and impartiality — especially given Sadiq Khan’s statutory role as Police and Crime Commissioner overseeing the very force investigating him.

Full timeline, correspondence, and analysis now available in the article:

Read the update here:

https://www.chanabraham-changingbritainforgood.com/post/update-complaint-foia-delay-why-is-the-metropolitan-police-shielding-sadiq-khan-s-from-the-riv

Public trust in policing depends on equal application of the law and openness about decision-making. I will continue to pursue this through all lawful channels.

Comments and thoughts welcome.

𝑭𝒐𝒍𝒍𝒐𝒘-𝒖𝒑 𝒕𝒐 “𝑴𝒐𝒄𝒌𝒆𝒓𝒚 𝒐𝒇 𝑪𝒉𝒓𝒊𝒔𝒕𝒊𝒂𝒏𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝒊𝒏 𝑯𝒖𝒏𝒕𝒊𝒏𝒈𝒅𝒐𝒏”: 𝑺𝒕𝒊𝒍𝒍 𝑵𝒐 𝑬𝒏𝒈𝒂𝒈𝒆𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕 – 𝑱𝒖𝒔𝒕 𝑴𝒐𝒓𝒆 𝑫𝒆𝒇𝒍𝒆𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏

I acknowledge those who have commented (and the silent readers watching). I’ll keep this post brief as some clearly are struggling.

𝗔𝗱𝗺𝗶𝗻 𝗺𝗼𝗱𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 (𝗝𝗼 𝗛𝗮𝗿𝘃𝗲𝘆, 𝗗𝗮𝘃𝗶𝗱 𝗟𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗼𝗻-𝗖𝗼𝗹𝗲, 𝗗𝗮𝗿𝗿𝗲𝗻 𝗠𝗼𝘀𝗲𝗹𝗲𝘆):
Jo Harvey, thank you for your reply but as Admins, you have the ability – and responsibility – to proactively moderate obvious bullying, harassment and personal insults (e.g. “clown”, “snowflake”, “melt”, “grow up”, repeated name-calling). Group rules exist to protect civil discussion. But if you’re waiting only for individual reports when abuse is plain to see, this is not the standard most people expect from community moderators. Please can you confirm whether you consider these comments acceptable under “the rules”? The people of Huntingdon deserve clarity: are these comments breaking group rules – or do you consider them acceptable?

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝘁𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗱 “𝗔𝗜 𝘄𝗿𝗼𝘁𝗲 𝗶𝘁” 𝗮𝗰𝗰𝘂𝘀𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻:
The repeated claim that this is “ChatGPT” is simply a deflection because critics have no reasoned reply. I’ve never looked at CGPT. I have written and spoken at the highest levels in business, government and media for over 50 years. My content is original. I use tools only to research facts, sense-check and assemble data as I compile my arguments and principles – all are mine. Accusing someone of using AI is not an argument; it is an admission that the critic has nothing of value to say.

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘂𝗹𝘁 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗲𝘃𝗮𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗮𝗶𝗻𝘀 𝗰𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗿:
Why do people only respond with insults but fail to engage with the actual issues? Evasion instead of engagement. And, still no one has addressed the actual issues: obvious double standards on mocking Christians and Christianity, while Labour opens a back-door blasphemy law favouring Muslims and Islam, while ignoring the shocking, well-evidenced persecution of Christians in Britain as they lawfully and peacefully conduct themselves in their work, in public and even on line.

I remain open to respectful discussion on the substance. Until then, the pattern of a small, evasive, incoherent ranting group in Huntingdon speaks for itself.

Kind regards 🙂

𝑴𝒐𝒄𝒌𝒆𝒓𝒚 𝒐𝒇 𝑪𝒉𝒓𝒊𝒔𝒕𝒊𝒂𝒏𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝒊𝒏 𝑯𝒖𝒏𝒕𝒊𝒏𝒈𝒅𝒐𝒏: 𝑹𝒆𝒔𝒑𝒐𝒏𝒔𝒆𝒔 𝑻𝒉𝒂𝒕 𝑹𝒆𝒊𝒏𝒇𝒐𝒓𝒄𝒆 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑵𝒆𝒆𝒅 𝒇𝒐𝒓 𝑭𝒂𝒊𝒓 𝑫𝒆𝒃𝒂𝒕𝒆
In the Huntingdon Facebook group, my post questioning a meme’s parody of a sacred Christian text—and its implications for equal treatment in light of Labour’s push for Islam and Muslims being given protected status in Britain—elicited responses heavy on insults but light on substance.

Rather than engaging with issues of fairness, free speech, and avoiding special privileges for Islam in our historically, constitutionally and culturally Christian nation, commentators resorted to personal attacks.

This post, a condensed response of my more detailed article (see below for link), analyses those comments while restating the core concerns. Far from undermining my position, the reactions highlight its validity: mockery of Christianity is casually accepted, yet challenging inequalities provokes malice without rationale.

𝘼𝙙𝙢𝙞𝙣 𝘾𝙤𝙣𝙛𝙞𝙧𝙢𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣𝙨 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙐𝙣𝙚𝙭𝙥𝙡𝙖𝙞𝙣𝙚𝙙 𝙍𝙚𝙥𝙤𝙧𝙩𝙨
David Landon Cole, as admin, stated: “Admin hat on - a couple of people have reported this post. It doesn’t break any of the group rules, and it can stay up.” Jo Harvey added: “Admin hat on: the rules haven’t changed in the last 30 minutes, so please, stop reporting this post! As David Landon Cole has already said, no rules are being broken here!!”

Despite multiple reports, they confirmed no rules were violated. Yet, no explanation was given for the reports themselves. Why flag a post promoting equal treatment? This lack of rationale suggests discomfort with open discussion questioning Labour’s push for “anti-Muslim hostility” definitions that would privilege Islam and Muslims to the detriment of all else.

𝘼𝙗𝙪𝙨𝙞𝙫𝙚 𝘾𝙤𝙢𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙨: 𝙄𝙧𝙤𝙣𝙮 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙋𝙤𝙩𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙞𝙖𝙡 𝙍𝙪𝙡𝙚 𝘽𝙧𝙚𝙖𝙘𝙝𝙚𝙨
Many responses (some shown below) were insulting, potentially breaching group rules against harassment. David Landon Cole and Jo Harvey please comment. The People of Huntingdon need to know how you make these judgments.

Samson M Feeney said: “You don’t represent Christianity any more than I represent dog walkers… your kind of ‘Christianity’ is an anathema… He also wouldn’t give one s**t about that cartoon you clown.”

Alex Dale called me a “snowflake”, Paul Kirkby a “melt”, and Gӓreth Cheesmӓn urged “grow up”.

Daniel Ackerley-Holmes deemed it “a truly silly post”, while Nic Pheebs said “Nice try, sunshine.”

These are bullying and malicious, yet admins noted no “out of order” comments. The irony is profound: objectors to my reasoned post offered no basis for disagreement, instead unleashing abuse.

This underlines the double standard—tolerating offence to Christianity and Christians, while suppressing critique elsewhere.

𝙀𝙫𝙖𝙨𝙞𝙤𝙣 𝙤𝙛 𝘾𝙤𝙧𝙚 𝙄𝙨𝙨𝙪𝙚𝙨
No commentator addressed equal treatment or Islam’s proposed privileges. Sam Booker claimed: “This post seems to be an attempt to stir up division for self-promotion.”

Matthew Hope argued the meme is “just funny word play”.

Stephanie James focused on process: “Did you contact David and Saul directly?.. concentrate on potholes.”

Such sidestepping reinforces why these issues must be restated: Labour’s “anti-Muslim hostility” risks a backdoor blasphemy law, chilling criticism of Islam and Muslims while Christianity and Christians face mockery.

In a democratic society, why do “Islamophobia” advocates impose this unlawfully? The question demands answers.

𝙄𝙧𝙧𝙚𝙡𝙚𝙫𝙖𝙣𝙩 𝙋𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙤𝙣𝙖𝙡 𝙑𝙞𝙚𝙬𝙨
Stephen Ferguson wrote: “Saul and David are two of the finest gentleman that I have ever had the pleasure of calling my friends.” Darren Moseley agreed: “hear hear”.

Respectful friendships are fine, but they bear no relation to the post’s focus on free speech and fairness.

Danny Taylor noted: “The fact people are getting upset and reporting it just kinda proves the point”—intentionall or otherwise he was supporting my thesis.

𝙊𝙣 “𝙎𝙝𝙖𝙡𝙤𝙢”: 𝙈𝙞𝙨𝙨𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙩𝙧𝙪𝙚 𝘽𝙞𝙗𝙡𝙞𝙘𝙖𝙡 𝘿𝙚𝙥𝙩𝙝 (𝙙𝙤𝙣’𝙩 𝙧𝙚𝙡𝙮 𝙤𝙣 𝘼𝙞)
David Landon Cole commented: “Using shalom to gloss ‘true peace’ in Luke is a bit odd… precision is important here.”

While noting David's limited and shallow analysis (likely AI-sourced), it overlooks "shalom’s" overarching role in Scripture—as wholeness and restoration, the Bible’s central objective for humanity and thes rest of God's creation. Luke’s “eirene” echoes this profound theme.

𝙊𝙫𝙚𝙧𝙡𝙤𝙤𝙠𝙚𝙙 𝙊𝙛𝙛𝙚𝙣𝙘𝙚 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙎𝙚𝙡𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚 𝙎𝙚𝙣𝙨𝙞𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙞𝙩𝙮
None considered the meme’s potential offence to Christians, yet David Landon-Cole previously monitored 2024 General Election comments on “What is a woman?” for trans sensitivity—despite the later 2025 Supreme Court ruling on biological s*x (that everyone knew would be stated). Why protect that particular group but not Christianity, Britain’s historic, moral and cultural foundation?

𝙁𝙧𝙚𝙚 𝙎𝙥𝙚𝙚𝙘𝙝 𝙋𝙧𝙤𝙩𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙚𝙙 𝙗𝙮 𝙇𝙖𝙬
The meme and responses plainly show the authors believe it's legal to be offensive towards, mock, parody and even vilify Christianity and Christians.

Article 10 ECHR safeguards expression that may “offend, shock or disturb” and the English courts confirmed this (Handyside v UK, 1976). The case of Redmond-Bate v DPP (1999) upholds the right to be provocative.

Freedom isn’t free without including offence; but unequal application erodes values. You can be offensive towards mock, satirise, vilify Islam and Muslims, just as you can Christianity and Christians and anybody else. This is why there is no basis for granting Islam and Muslims special status in Britain. Yet no one engaged with these matters of fact. Why?

𝙐𝙆 𝘾𝙝𝙧𝙞𝙨𝙩𝙞𝙖𝙣𝙤𝙥𝙝𝙤𝙗𝙞𝙖 𝘼𝙢𝙞𝙙 𝙂𝙡𝙤𝙗𝙖𝙡 𝙋𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙚𝙘𝙪𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣
But this also is serious and grave for other reasons: the active persecution of Christians in the UK and worldwide that exceeds all others but you won't hear this from the BBC or the rest of the legacy media.

See my forthcoming article “Systemic Christianophobia in a Christian Nation” for irrefutable evidence of UK bias against Christians—arrests for "praying in your head", job losses over beliefs—while Islam and Muslims gain privileges and support from government and even the monarch.

Globally, Nigeria saw 3,490 Christians killed in 2025-2026; North Korea suppresses faith totally; Mulsim Pakistan’s blasphemy laws incite violence against Christians.[1][2][3]

London Mayor Sadiq Khan’s “From the river to the sea” defence has been investigated by the Metropolitan Police, confirmed and registered as a hate incident against Jews. Enquiries are ongoing.[4][5]

Geeta Guru-Murthy’s inappropriate "hiss" over a Christian rapper saying Jesus Christ was his hero shows BBC bias (and is being investigated by the BBC before going to OfCom). Would she or anyone at the BBC have reacted in this way to a Muslim speaking of Muhammed like this?[6]

Martine Croxall was castigated for saying “pregnant women”, undermining Christian views on distinct genders.[7]

𝘾𝙤𝙣𝙘𝙡𝙪𝙨𝙞𝙤𝙣: 𝙒𝙚 𝙘𝙖𝙣 𝙙𝙤 𝙗𝙚𝙩𝙩𝙚𝙧
These insulting, evasive responses prove my post’s point: Christianity endures mockery without outrage, reinforcing the need for equality.

Let’s demand transparent debate, rejecting privileges that divide. In Christian Britain, fairness for all faiths is essential. Let's have this in Huntingdon, too.

𝗠𝘆 𝗳𝘂𝗹𝗹 𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗹𝗲 𝗱𝗲𝘁𝗮𝗶𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝗶𝘀 𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲:
https://www.chanabraham-changingbritainforgood.com/post/mockery-of-christianity-in-huntingdon-a-catalyst-for-discussing-fairness-and-free-speech

Footnotes
1. Open Doors World Watch List 2026: https://www.opendoors.org/en-US/persecution/countries/nigeria
2. Christianity Today 2026: https://www.christianitytoday.com/2026/01/christian-persecution-2026-countries-open-doors-watch-list
3. Global Christian Relief Red List 2026: https://globalchristianrelief.org/resources/red-list
4. User’s site on Khan: https://www.chanabraham-changingbritainforgood.com/post/when-the-mayor-says-from-the-river-to-the-sea-is-fine-but-the-police-won-t-tell-us-why
5. User’s site on Khan: https://www.chanabraham-changingbritainforgood.com/post/metropolitan-police-refuse-to-investigate-sadiq-khan-s-defence-of-from-the-river-to-the-sea-chant
6. User’s site on Guru-Murthy: https://www.chanabraham-changingbritainforgood.com/post/bbc-bias-exposed-formal-complaint-over-geeta-guru-murthy-s-reaction-to-christian-rapper-s-faith-dec
7. BBC on Croxall: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3epwz08ewzo

𝑾𝒉𝒚 𝒘𝒐𝒖𝒍𝒅 𝒂𝒏𝒚 𝒈𝒐𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒏𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕 𝒕𝒉𝒂𝒕 𝒖𝒑𝒉𝒐𝒍𝒅𝒔 𝒇𝒓𝒆𝒆𝒅𝒐𝒎, 𝒉𝒖𝒎𝒂𝒏𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒗𝒂𝒍𝒖𝒆𝒔 𝒉𝒖𝒎𝒂𝒏 𝒅𝒊𝒈𝒏𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝒇𝒂𝒊𝒍 𝒕𝒐 𝒔𝒖𝒑𝒑𝒐𝒓𝒕 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒑𝒆𝒐𝒑𝒍𝒆 𝒐𝒇 𝑰𝒓𝒂𝒏 𝒊𝒏 𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒊𝒓 𝒉𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝒐𝒇 𝒈𝒓𝒂𝒗𝒆 𝒏𝒆𝒆𝒅?
Deeply moving to see a meme posted by Judy Escayo from Hen Mazzig which “members of the UN Human Rights Council refused to endorse a request for an urgent session on Iran’s massacre”: Iraq, Egypt, South Africa, Qatar and Pakistan.

𝑰𝒇 𝑴𝒐𝒄𝒌𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝑪𝒉𝒓𝒊𝒔𝒕𝒊𝒂𝒏𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝒊𝒔 𝑭𝒊𝒏𝒆, 𝑾𝒉𝒚 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑹𝒖𝒔𝒉 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒉𝒊𝒆𝒍𝒅 𝑰𝒔𝒍𝒂𝒎? 𝑨 𝑳𝒂𝒃𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝑴𝒆𝒎𝒆 𝑴𝒂𝒌𝒆𝒔 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑪𝒂𝒔𝒆
Full credit is due to Cllr David Landon Cole (Labour, Huntingdon Town Council) for posting a meme on 21 December 2025 in the Huntingdon FB group, attributing it to Saul Jeavons (former local Labour candidate/activist) who have shown it’s fine to ridicule Christianity right here in Huntingdon, and equally there should be no special laws to shield Islam from any criticism.

The meme was of two cartoon men at a table with a globe covered in peas and a sliced Gouda cheese wheel. Caption: “Peas on earth, Gouda wheel, two men.” Hilarious only if you know what it refers to.

It’s a clear, deliberate parody of Luke 2:14—the angels’ joyful announcement at Jesus’ birth: “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, goodwill toward men.”

This verse is at the heart of the Christmas message: hope, true peace (shalom—wholeness and reconciliation with God and others), and God’s goodwill to humanity amid turmoil. It’s cherished by billions worldwide—in carols like “It Came Upon the Midnight Clear,” nativity plays, Christmas cards, and even the late Queen Elizabeth II’s broadcasts. In Britain, with our Christian constitution, heritage, culture, and values, mocking it ridicules something profoundly sacred to many, whether practising Christians or not.

Around 10-15 Huntingdon people liked or reacted positively here. No outrage, no calls for removal—just amusement. But would they create memes parodying Qur’anic verses or phrases central to Eid al-Fitr or Eid al-Adha—the two biggest Muslim festivals of joy, prayer, charity, and devotion—and share them here for laughs, especially during those times? If not, why not? This is serious issue for all who want to maintain Britain's cherished democratic values and especially Free Speech.

Labour continues to pursue a non-statutory definition of “anti-Muslim hostility” (rebranded from the old APPG “Islamophobia” wording that tied it to racism targeting “Muslimness”). This would guide councils, schools, police, and public bodies on prejudice toward Muslims—but critics (including free speech groups, Hindu/Sikh leaders, and experts) warn it risks a “back-door blasphemy law,” chilling legitimate criticism of Islam, ideas, or history while existing hate crime/equality laws already protect people from real harm.

British people of all faiths and none largely oppose it. Reports from think tanks like Policy Exchange, the Free Speech Union, and community leaders highlight dangers: unequal protections creating a “hierarchy of sensitivities,” potential discrimination against Christianity/Hinduism/Sikhism (e.g., suppressing discussions of historical persecution), “thought control” vibes, and deepening divisions.

It wasn’t in Labour’s manifesto, polls show it harms their support (shifting voters elsewhere), and many see no need—free speech, including the right to offend or critique religions, is a British value.

For more on why the Hindu community (and others) rightly challenge this for equal treatment see: https://www.chanabraham-changingbritainforgood.com/post/safeguarding-free-speech-why-the-uk-s-hindu-community-is-right-to-challenge-labour-s-islamophobia-d

This meme unwittingly exposes the double standard: If Labour activists can parody and mock Christianity’s core Christmas message right here in Huntingdon without consequence, why push special legal shields for one faith only?

Credit David and Saul to them for highlighting the inconsistency—no special privileges needed for any religion.

Should Labour drop this unequal approach and ensure fair treatment for all?

What do you think, Huntingdon and the wider community? Share your views in the comments and let’s keep Free Speech alive for all.

𝑺𝒂𝒇𝒆𝒈𝒖𝒂𝒓𝒅𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝑭𝒓𝒆𝒆 𝑺𝒑𝒆𝒆𝒄𝒉: 𝑾𝒉𝒚 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑼𝑲’𝒔 𝑯𝒊𝒏𝒅𝒖 𝑪𝒐𝒎𝒎𝒖𝒏𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝑰𝒔 𝑹𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒕 𝒕𝒐 𝑪𝒉𝒂𝒍𝒍𝒆𝒏𝒈𝒆 𝑳𝒂𝒃𝒐𝒖𝒓’𝒔 𝑰𝒔𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒐𝒑𝒉𝒐𝒃𝒊𝒂 𝑫𝒆𝒇𝒊𝒏𝒊𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏
The Free Speech Union has highlighted a key issue: the Labour government's proposed definition of Islamophobia could impose restrictions on free speech. The Hindu community’s response is a vital part of this discussion but there is also a much wider, deeper historical and continuing perspective that far too many otherwise well-informed, intellgent people don't know.

Are you one of them?

Dive into the article here: https://www.chanabraham-changingbritainforgood.com/post/safeguarding-free-speech-why-the-uk-s-hindu-community-is-right-to-challenge-labour-s-islamophobia-d

𝑻𝒘𝒊𝒏𝒌𝒍𝒆’𝒔 𝒇𝒊𝒓𝒔𝒕 𝒔𝒏𝒐𝒘 (𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝑩𝒓𝒂𝒎𝒑𝒕𝒐𝒏’𝒔 𝒇𝒐𝒓 2026)
It’s been a cold day but beautified by God’s creation. Twinkle turned one year just after Christmas.