Britain is no longer a free country. In the space of just over one hundred years, since the period between roughly 1890 to the start of World War One, when most people’s dealings with the state were mostly limited to the local police constable, the locally run and funded school and the post office, broadly accepted and acceptable freedoms such as freedom of speech, freedom of belief and even the freedom to declare the existence of basic biological facts, have been completely eviscerated.
Whilst in the past there were restrictions on political speech, such as contained in legislation relating to Seditious Libel, which has been repealed since 2009, there has not been a conviction under this legislation since 1972 and that was in relation to an IRA/Irish Troubles based case. To all intents and purposes the general public, apart from those members who were politically radical, were not affected by such legislation, but that’s not to say that it was not a good thing that its gone as it was used to curtail political speech far too often, especially in the 19th century.
Personally as a supporter of freedom of speech (even for those who despise me and my views) I’m pleased that there’s no longer a crime of Seditious Libel that can be used to enable the police to obtain wide ranging and easy to abuse search warrants. It’s also right in my view that the State cannot deprive those who criticise institutions such as the Monarchy of their liberty merely for holding the views that they do, and I say that as a reluctant Monarchist.
But although Seditious Libel has gone it can be argued that what has replaced it is much worse. Instead of being censored on the whims of a Home Secretary on advice from Civil Servants, Britons today get censored and worse by noisy and unrepresentative members of minority groups such as the votaries of the Cult of Trans and the public sector organisations that have been captured by this cult.
The story of Caroline Farrow is a good case in point to illustrate what happens when an ideology like the Cult of Trans slithers into a police force like some sort of parasitic wasp larva burrowing into an unfortunate caterpillar. Ms Farrow has been a long term critic of the Cult of Trans and has not shied away from using honest language when discussing this subject. She has correctly in my view referred to what the gender identity cult calls ‘MTF gender affirming surgery’ as castration and been the subject of a police complaint and arrest over. Ms Farrow has also had her home raided by Surrey Police over an allegation, which Ms Farrow strenuously denies, of doxing someone on the Kiwi Farms site.
Now it appears that Surrey Police have not given up on harassing Ms Farrow. Surrey Police are applying for a court order that would require Ms Farrow to give up to the police and the ‘offender management authorities’ every password and login to every electronic device that she owns or has control of including business and personal email addresses. This is an obscenely draconian act by the police. It’s the sort of restriction that is properly applied to convicted paedophiles. It is not something that should be applied to a Christian woman who understands that women don’t have penises and who believes, as many of us have come to believe, that there is much in the Trans movement and in trans ideology that is dishonest, destructive and abusive.
Below you will find screenshots of Ms Farrow’s Twitter thread on the actions of Surrey Police. While I understand that this is only one side of the story this note of caution does not take away from the fact that Surrey Police might be engaging in a fair bit of overkill here. Neither does being aware that this is one side of the story remove concerns about wondering just how much and how deeply Surrey Police has been captured by the promoters of gender ideology?
My advice to her, is to turn up in court and tell the police to GET FUCKED. I also suggest she take out a “stalking injunction” against the police chief and lay charges of harrassment.
Also turn up in court with a simple biology book and wearing a tee shirt that states “there are only TWO genders”.
Naturally she should refuse to refrain using social media, plus inform all of the national and international media she can. Perhaps GB News would like to take this on.
I think that she should get seriously lawyered up. There’s more people willing to support and indeed fund pushbacks against the cult of trans especially as more and more people are starting to realise that the extremes of the cult of trans are indeed after our children.
I must say I do not have a lot of sympathy with Caroline Farrow. She has put herself out there as a politically very Right of centre Christian campaigner with apparently no regards where she stands in the wider Anglican communion. Farrow alone is reponsible to defend her own fundamentalist beliefs against accusations of ‘hate crime’, notably against LGBTQ+ people, an accusation the police have to investigate on public order grounds.
The concept of ‘free speech’ is also interesting. I am not antisemitic, not even a bit, but further thought indicates that alleged antisemitism for instance has been highlighted by the CAA and to lesser extent the BofD to secure criminal convictions against political or social views regarded as antisemitic and so justifying hate speech prosecutions. These may have been valid but I am still wondering ATM about a possible distinction between free speech, and potential hate speech which arguably needs regulation of some kind.
First of all I do have sympathy for Ms Farrow. My sympathy is not because I agree with all her beliefs or all her points, but I sympathise with her because she should have a right to speak her views. Where she stands with regards the wider Anglican communion is neither here nor there, Anglicanism has, at least since the mid 19th been a literal broad church with regards to viewpoint, some members may be more conservative in their views than others.
Secondly I have no truck with the whole idea of ‘hate crimes’. It is not just total bollocks but a perversion of law as it treats people differently depending on what their characteristics are. The ideal in law should be to treat everyone equally but having laws that only some people can make use of and sometimes abuse isn’t equal justice. As this case with regards Ms Farrow goes back several years and started out by her telling a trans advocate that she had castrated her son in order to make him the simulacrum of a female the police here are not so much defending public order but doing the bidding of trans activist groups that have become embedded in all too many police forces.
I disagree with the BOD and groups like them coming out in favour of speech controls. Personally I don’t think that this is the sort of thing that will end well. At the very least it makes some people think that Jews control what can be said and at worst you end up with situation as existed in the Weimar Republic where every ‘hate speech’ prosecution brought by the WR was used as propaganda by the Nazis to illustrate how the Jews and the Socialists were attacking them.
As regards regulation my ideal would be something similar to those restrictions that exist in the USA on the First Amendment. Basically you can say what you damned well like but you re not allowed to credibly incite immediate violence against persons or property and nor are you allowed to knowingly libel knowing that the information is false.