Escape from Big Mother: Free Speech of UK in Decay

Tim Burton

Imagine if there was a loophole in the ten commandments. The eighth is “you shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.” What if there was an asterisk added on to the end of that? Down in the footnotes of the ten commandments. Imagine seeing an exception to the rules about lying.

“It’s ok to lie if you do it to advance the causes of Christianity and Jesus.”

While this isn’t the case for the Western world, it’s deemed perfectly acceptable according to the religion of Islam.

According to Qur’an 3:28:

Let not believers take disbelievers as allies rather than believers. And whoever [of you] does that has nothing with Allah, except when taking precaution against them in prudence. And Allah warns you of Himself, and to Allah is the [final] destination.
As well as a bit of Qur’an 16:106:
“Whoever disbelieves in Allah after his belief… except for one who is forced [to renounce his religion] while his heart is secure in faith. But those who [willingly] open their breasts to disbelief, upon them is wrath from Allah, and for them is a great punishment”

These two verses provide the framework for Muslims to use deceit in order to advance Islam at the expense of the “non-believers.” The Holy Bible people swear in on when giving testimony to the court within the West is foolproof. But Muslims don’t swear in on a Christian book when they go. They swear on their holy book. The Qur’an. It raises the question of whether they have a permission slip to lie to the courts.

It’s something called taqiyya, and it plays a central role in the story of Tim Burton – whom I had the pleasure of interviewing for the sake of this story. Direct comments from his point of view come up throughout.

Before we begin on this page, keep in mind that Fiyaz Mughal served on the Crown Prosecution Service’s Scrutiny and Involvement Panel. The Crown Prosecution Service is a body set up by the British Government in 1986 to conduct criminal prosecutions in the name of the Crown and to consider “the public interest” in pursuing or dropping criminal prosecutions. The very notion of all this is a breach of common law and a move toward Napoleonic (EU-wide) civil law, in which the state dispenses justice. It covers England and Wales only. Scotland and Northern Ireland have separate, but equally corrupt, arrangements for “public” (i.e. state) criminal prosecutions. The separation of powers and an apolitical court process are a thing of the past across the UK. Only jury nullification stands in the way of utter despotism in Britain now — as seen in the cases of deep state whistleblowers Clive Ponting and Katharine Gün (the latter had her case dropped before it even got before a jury because they could see nullification was on the cards).


In my interview with Tim, he pointed out to me that Fiyaz Mughal’s OBE (Order of the British Empire) title indicates his place in the British establishment. Being a part of that elite allows someone to get away with more than the average person in UK society. Thus providing an explanation as to why Fiyaz avoided any sort of lasting punishments as a result of a very-revealing expose.

The Tim Burton saga began with Andrew Gilligan’s June 1st 2013 piece on Fiyaz Mughal. Andrew Gilligan was the senior BBC investigative journalist who was made the fall guy for reporting truthfully in the run-up to the 2003 Iraq War that the British Government’s case for war had been “sexed up”. In 2013, Lee Rigby’s murder and the anti-Muslim backlash that Fiyaz Mughal was discussing were the issue of the moment. Andrew said TellMAMAUK paraded around the number of incidents being at 212.

Just one problem. The distinction between online and offline incidents wasn’t made clear.

“Tell Mama confirmed to The Sunday Telegraph that about 120 of its 212 “anti-Muslim incidents” – 57 per cent – took place only online. They were offensive postings on Twitter or Facebook, or comments on blogs: nasty and undesirable, certainly, but some way from violence or physical harm and often, indeed, legal. Not all the offending tweets and postings, it turns out, even originated in Britain.”

Indeed, the bar was set so slow that Baroness Flather (herself an Indian) saying something like “They are all on benefits [welfare] and all vote Labour” qualified as an anti-Muslim incident. 35 of the 212 incidents weren’t even verified as of Gilligan’s writing. When it came to individuals being physically targeted, the number was down to 17. There were only two serious attacks. One where a mosque was firebombed and other where a man entered an Essex mosque with a knife. TellMAMAUK was certainly the outlier of the bunch when it came to hate crime numbers. ACPO reported 71 anti-Muslim hate crimes whereas their online reporting tool tallied 136 (with a note being made about not all being crimes and some cases of duplicates).

The next day, TellMAMAUK responded to Andrew Gilligan. In the first two sections, TellMAMA states that they were among the first to condemn Lee Rigby’s murder and that they were within the standards of what a third party hate crime reporting project is supposed to do. Indirectly, they go on to admit that Gilligan was correct in pointing out the distinction between incidents.

How so? This is what TELLMAMAUK says in their blog (bold emphasis, mine):

“So the attempt by Gilligan to underplay the impact of the incidents and suggest that many were non-violent, tells us that his initial assumptions are faulty and that he reads incidents as violence incidents.

This is word-for-word what Fiyaz Mughal said to the Guardian on May 28th 2013 (bold emphasis, mine):

“These things are cumulative and I do not see an end to this cycle of violence.

All-in-all completely refuting the intention of calling Andrew Gilligan a “reductionist” in the first place.

But instead, TellMAMAUK takes jabs at Gilligan for downplaying the “community impact” and reinforcement of perceptions in Muslim eyes. When it comes to the lack of report verification for 35 cases, TellMAMAUK takes two paragraphs to explain their verification processes  to again, in a roundabout way, say that Gilligan’s statement was correct. They justify their distinction from police data statistics by asserting people in the Muslim community are afraid of reporting to police because of the PREVENT program (an increasingly widely criticized government initiative to supposedly preventing extremism, which makes great use of snoopers in society, including children and schoolteachers, and which pays large sums to the “right” kinds of Muslims).

For further reading: the lack of verification of Fiyaz Mughal on anti-Muslim incidents was proven a few years later. “EARLY MORNING ASSAULT IN BIRMINGHAM LEAVES YOUNG FEMALE FEARFUL,” posted by TellMAMA on December 1st 2015. The following month it was revealed that the Muslim woman lied to police. They spent countless hours going through CCTV footage only to find it proved she made the story up. TellMAMA quietly deleted their blog post (several months later) and brushed the incident under the rug.

TellMAMAUK clarifies what they meant about “no end to the cycle” of anti-Muslim activity, saying they received “4 – 8 cases a day of Islamophobic incidences” on average before Lee Rigby’s murder.

Let’s see what the definition of that is.


TellMAMAUK says their concerns are about “islamophobic incidences” increasing in their baseline frequency after an event like Woolwich. They do assuage concerns about filtering incidents that don’t occur in Britain, however.

TellMAMAUK acknowledges that there’s no standard definition as to what Islamophobia is.

“We therefore took in reports based on perceived prejudice which we then verified and which may not be crimes and others which may have criminally infringed on existing public order offences for example. What we made clear to Gilligan, since he mentioned the work of the CST (Community Security Trust) and its classification of Anti-Semitism, was that we were some way away in setting a definition since the body of work was growing and it was one area where the All Party Parliamentary Group on Islamophobia would also be involved in.”

Remember this part because it’s important. Fiyaz Mughal says he’s setting the definition of what qualifies as Islamophobia. One that’s defined by and based on tweets like the one shown above. This is part of why we have such a problem going on today with everyone being accused of Islamophobia. This is where that began.

TellMAMAUK says London is still one of the safest places in the world. That may have been true back then. But today? Nope. Anyway, Huffington Post covered this feud and gave a slant in TellMAMA’s favor.

Fast forward to June 9th. Fiyaz Mughal and TellMAMAUK lost their government funding. Now there’s an important distinction to be made in regards to how this played out. The Telegraph article discussing this situation makes it clear that Mughal’s funding was denied renewal even before the Rigby incident ever happened. Liberal Democrat MP Don Foster called him into a meeting and broke the news to him.

“Mr Mughal was giving data on attacks to DCLG [the UK Government’s Department of Communities and Local Government] which wasn’t stacking up when it was cross-referenced with other reports by ACPO [the Association of Chief Police Officers],” one source told the Telegraph. “He was questioned by DCLG civil servants and lost his temper. He was subsequently called in by Don Foster and told that he would receive no more money.”

A second source close to the situation confirmed the events to the Telegraph:

“There was a bit of a spat. He was called in and told that Acpo had cast doubt on his figures. He was told that he would be closely monitored for the remaining period of the grant and that there would be no more money.”

The DCLG confirmed that their funding wasn’t going to be renewed, but wrote it off as a non-issue saying that was the plan the whole time. But conversely, it seemed that Mughal was making issues of his own design. Andrew Gilligan revealed a Jewish activist named Ambrosine Chetrit got a threatening letter for tweeting “Tell Mama are sitting on Twitter on the EDL [English Defence League] hashtag, threatening anyone and everyone whose comments they do not like about Islam.” Former race adviser to Labour mayor of London Ken Livingstone, Atma Singh, also received a legal letter from TellMAMAUK after tweeting out they gave “a platform to Islamists.” These letters were written by a solicitor named Farooq Bajwa. He’s famous for acting on behalf of Islamists and their sympathisers like Raed Salah (not to be confused with the Syrian White Helmets boss of the same name) and the Respect Party founder George Galloway (a former MP, originally of the Labour Party).

NOTE: TellMAMA’s funding would eventually return. In a freedom of information act request arranged by Fahrenheit211, it’s discovered that TellMAMA’s government funding grant came back for the 2015/2016 period. To the tune of £182,000. Further, if this response from Baroness Williams is anything to go by, the arrangement continued in the years afterward. But in the end the government funding angle needs to be weighed against the fact both Faith Matters and TellMAMA have personal patrons.

Tim Burton saw everything that unfolded. He was a radio officer and an eventual political candidate for Liberty GB of London. He got in hot water with Fiyaz Mughal on two occasions.

Tim’s awareness of Fiyaz Mughal began back after the May 2013 Lee Rigby murder. The killer recited Qur’an 9:29, a declaration of war. That, coupled with David Cameron saying in his speech on the incident, “There is nothing in Islam that justifies this truly dreadful act”, infuriated Tim. Then came Andrew Gilligan’s piece, introducing Tim to Fiyaz Mughal and his operation. More to the point, Burton saw TellMAMA’s manipulation of statistics as being criminally fraudulent. So he wasn’t entirely surprised the following week when he saw the news TellMAMA had their government funding cut off.

That’s what led Tim to take to Twitter to write about it. The result was Fiyaz didn’t like that very much, and so Burton got arrested on December 5th 2013. West Midlands Police questioned him for five to six hours, and Tim explained the story and his reasoning for writing what he did. According to another interview Burton did on all this, West Midlands Police were undecided on what to do with Tim after bringing him in. It was only after the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) gave their urging on the matter that the police went through with charging him on racially aggravated harassment.

“I felt entirely justified in expressing a sense of outrage over what I consider to be fraudulent activity,” Tim says.

In a further comment made by Tim Burton to Fahrenheit 211, Tim Burton talked about the suspicious circumstances surrounding his arrest.

“It turns out that this particular mendacious Muslim scumbag taquiyya-artist LIED on his police statement to have me arrested in a way that DIRECTLY and MATERIALLY affected the charge of harassment. Should the case come to court then I advise you to bring some popcorn, as it will be entertaining.”

Liberty GB rang in the New year for 2014 by making the news of Tim Burton’s arrest public.


On January 3rd 2014, TellMAMAUK tweeted that one of Liberty GB’s activists was arrested. Fiyaz seems quite proud of it. By the way TellMAMAUK discusses it, the arrest seems more like a jab at Paul Weston more than worrying about the immediate circumstances themselves.

In a piece of writing Tim Burton did for the New English Review in February 2014, he makes his situational stances pretty clear. Fiyaz Mughal was under a lot of heat from the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) and the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) for controversy surrounding his misrepresentation of hate crime statistics. This begged the question whether or not Fiyaz would manufacture that out of thin air in order to justify his continued funding from the government. To that end, Burton says the “Mendacious Grievance-Monger-In-Chief” broadened the scope to include anyone who disagreed that Islam was a religion of peace to be a “racist, bigoted, hateful, intolerant Islamophobe” who deserved harsh punishment for questioning his narrative. Burton says Liberty GB was taking heavy fire from TellMAMAUK for “radicalising Islam and Muslims” by talking about female genital mutilation, honour killings, and terrorism. TellMAMAUK says such things aren’t limited by culture and faith. Tim retorts by saying that Lutheran and Presbyterian honor killings and FGM are non-existent. He highlights how TellMAMAUK attempts to distract from the discussions surrounding demographic impact and economic factors of immigration by painting such discourse as pure bigotry and racism. The bottom line was Liberty GB was bold enough to talk about Islam, and TellMAMAUK was taking commentary from the fringe elements of that in order to cast their whole lot as hateful (while ignoring the hate from Muslims on their own side of the political aisle).

The court date was originally scheduled for February 18th 2014. But it was postponed for seven weeks based on the “interests of justice and the complexity of the case.” This gave Liberty GB an opportunity to gather expert witnesses for Tim’s behalf. Liberty GB made note of the circumstances of the case being borderline. Fiyaz’s “partnerships” with the West Midlands Police were enough to convince the authorities to go through with this charade in the first place. They say the bottom line of this battle was between Islamic “blasphemy” laws and freedom of speech.

But let’s take a step back and look at how Fiyaz presents the situation. 


Fiyaz Mughal gave a recounting of the “hate campaign” he was subjected to by Burton. He accuses Tim of targeting him because of his faith and TELL MAMA work.  The conflict was sparked by the Andrew Gilligan article from June 2013, which revealed that Fiyaz Mughal had exaggerated the hate crime statistics he collected.

On June 2nd 2013, Tim Burton under the account name of @catstrangler101 had tweeted:

“@Official_EDL, @tellmamauk: Let’s stick it to that mendacious taquiyya (sic) artist Fiyaz Mughal.”

A point of contention is the definition of “taqiyya.” Fiyaz Mughal says that one tweet is equivalent to the anti-Semitism faced by the Jewish community. From that one tweet alone, Fiyaz said he was “targeted” for his faith.

However in our interview, Tim says the word taqiyya became the focal point of the situation because it allowed Fiyaz Mughal to elevate his complaints. He could now do more than simply allege Tim Burton was harassing him. Now he could say Tim was being a racist, too. This makes a world of difference to the police forces of the United Kingdom.
Now the open-ended nature of the term bared a similar dilemma that the term Islamophobia has. The shared trait is a lack of official meaning and understanding in the eyes of the UK legal system. In fact, Fiyaz was able to accuse Burton of being Islamophobic because of his use of the term taqiyya.

On the 3rd of June, Fiyaz says @catstrangler101 tweeted:

“@tellmamauk – I wish to report Fiyaz Mughal for being a mendacious, grievance-mongering little Muslim scumbag and I want my £214,000 back.”

Then on June 9th:

“#MyJihad – Thanks to M-CAT, the mendacious little scumbag Fiyaz Mughal @tellmamauk has had his funding withdrawn.”

What’s interesting here is that Fiyaz actually acknowledges the article written by Andrew Gilligan over at the Telegraph. He avoids going into the subject further, only mentioning how he challenged the ordeal and repeating the “sharp rise in anti-Muslim hate incidents and crimes” vague jargon that got him in hot water with the press in the first place.

Tim Burton got arrested because Fiyaz Mughal pushed West Midlands Police to act on the tweets made via @catstrangler101’s account. He was released on the condition that he not contact Fiyaz. Mughal, labeling it as an “assumption,” says that included not tweeting at @tellmamauk on Twitter.

In January 2014, Burton had Sheryl McNaught on his Liberty GB show. What both these people had in common was being targeted by TellMAMAUK.

“Hi Sheryl, it’s interesting that TellMamaUK are monitoring your posts on this site. I’m going to make sure Fiyaz Mughal gets his clock cleaned over his fraudulent and mendacious activities. By the time this trial is over his name is going to be mud throughout the world…………… Of course Liberty GB is in no way racist or Islamophobic, so if you wish to continue posting here then feel free, there’s nothing TellMamaUK can do about it.

Fiyaz Mughal says Tim Burton violated the no contact order by tweeting this on March 1st 2014.

“Threatening arrests over a tweet – the mendacious grievance-mongering taqqiyya (sic) artists @tellmamauk are at it again.” 

Mughal claims Tim Burton “continued to target and promote anti-Muslim hate” on Twitter, and asserting Burton did it because he’d “know” TellMAMA and Fiyaz would come across it.

Fiyaz alleges this “campaign” went on through until March 2014, being platformed on “a number of Far Right and extremist web-sites that crossed the United States, the UK and Australia.” On the one from Australia, Mughal quotes Burton as saying, “Excellent post Mike, and I shall be reposting it far and wide, a strategy that will no doubt include the hire of an enormous billboard situated right outside Fiyaz Mughal’s office window.”

Fiyaz Mughal mentioned more tweets in his blog. But those tweets in question did not have a direct relation to the dispute between him and Tim Burton. Some WERE from Tim’s account, but they were just general critiques and criticisms of the Islamic culture. They were were mentioned by Mughal in an effort to paint Burton as a “hater.” The rest? From possibly other people. Accounts that Fiyaz “believed” were Tim Burton’s. 

The meme below ridicules West Midlands Police for making hurt Muslim feelings an urgent priority and violent crime a low priority.


As seen in this press release, the showdown between Tim Burton and Fiyaz Mughal happened on April 8th at Birmingham Magistrates’ Court. The charges being racially aggravated harassment for a few tweets Burton said to the TellMAMAUK Twitter account.

That day, Tim Burton was cleared of any “racially aggravated harassment charges.”

Fiyaz Mughal is flabbergasted at this. He was under the impression that linking Burton to far-right critics of Islam would be a feasible enough strategy to get Tim prosecuted. Fiyaz lays the blame on the Crown Prosecution Service for “not making the case” in regards to the taqiyya term.

“CPS and its understanding of language around anti-Muslim hate lags well behind where things are today,” he said.

He says the lesson to be learned from all this is that Fiyaz needed to work harder on teaching “understanding” in regards to anti-Muslim hate.

“I also believe in State institutions and whilst I did not achieve the justice that I wanted, no doubt, change is coming and it is on the horizon.”

Let’s compare what Fiyaz said, to what Tim Burton’s recollection was.

You can read the play-by-play of the proceedings of the April trial in Birmingham. The first problem of the day arose when it came to getting the court’s video-link working. The British Government is pushing hard to make more (or even most) trials Skype trials instead of appear-in-person trials, and it is remarkable how often the video link fails when politically convenient. There were giant TV screens in the room set up to accommodate Fiyaz Mughal giving evidence remotely from an undisclosed remote location. He had previously submitted a letter to the court saying he was too fearful to come to Birmingham due to the “threatening nature” of Burton’s tweets. The CPS lawyer was missing some of his paperwork, which ticked off the judge who made it clear they weren’t going to postpone the case any longer. When Mughal finally gave his evidence, he was sworn in on the Qur’an because he was a Muslim. Burton wanted to object because the holy book of Islam gives the plaintiff the write to lie under oath if it furthers the Islam cause. Fiyaz was asked about the concept of taqiyya. Mughal described it as a purely historical concept used by the Shi’a Muslims to defend themselves from persecutors. This sidestep maneuvre avoids admitting what the four jurisprudential schools of the majority denomination of the religion, namely Sunni Islam, teach about taqiyya. Whereas Tim Burton describes taqiyya as a generally accepted license for Muslims to lie to non-Muslims about Islam, Fiyaz Mughal says taqiyya was a concept raised by “extremist far-right” groups as a defamatory tactic.

What’s key to point out here is that Fiyaz Mughal was questioned on his knowledge of what words like “mendacious” or “scumbag” actually mean. He attempted to dodge answering at first, until the judge told him he had to. It turns out Fiyaz didn’t completely understand the definitions of the words that he claimed offended him. Moreover, these terms were routine and pretty mild terms bandied about in court and by police officers to describe chancers and morally loose types, well before mass immigration to British cities. Mughal’s tactic was pushing the “guilt by association” angle, vying to pull in exterior elements as “context” for his defense. But the reality is the court was only focusing on the three tweets that Tim Burton was charged for in the first place. To that end, the intentions of those were explained when Burton’s defense lawyer questioned Tim about them. He stated Islam’s nature is a totalitarian political ideology and not a religion, and he felt obliged to raise awareness of that to people via Twitter. Tim said Fiyaz Mughal was being deceptive when he didn’t mention how Muslims use taqiyya to deceive non-Muslims about Islam in that respect. The long-term threat was being overlooked for the short-term benefits of political correctness. When it was the CPS lawyer’s turn, the dialogue was much more heated. CPS accused Burton’s tweets of being “racist diatribe,” with Tim in reply stating neither Islam or Muslims were a racial group. The same back and forth was had with regards to the assertion Tim “threatened and harassed” Fiyaz, alongside trying to call Burton’s tweets “racist, offensive, and deeply unpleasant” a few more times to see if Tim would change his mind about his answers.

Professor Hans Jansen was called as a witness of expertise when it came to his qualifications on the issue of the concept of taqiyya. In the interview I did with Tim, he says Jansen’s defining of taqiyya is what saved him back in 2014. The judge required their judgement in declaring whether or not Fiyaz Mughal’s interpretation of taqiyya was true or not. Jansen said it wasn’t, basing his argument on Qur’an 3:28 and Qur’an 16:106. This seemed to visibly impress the judge, according to Tim. Not only did he manage to back up Tim Burton’s definitions; the Professor made a point that Fiyaz himself didn’t understand taqiyya because he wasn’t a student of Shari’a law.

When it came to the final arguments, the defense put up Article 10 of the Human Rights Act allowing fair comment in the matters of free speech. Conversely, the CPS pushed the fictional (to English law) concept of “gratuitous racial abuse” as their response. The judge ended up agreeing with the defense. Despite his colorful language, Tim Burton’s tweets stayed in the limits of fair political comment and weren’t criminal harassment. To that effect, using “mendacious,” “lying,” and “Muslim” when describing the concept of taqiyya was also acceptable.

As further detailed by Liberty GB’s remarks on the trial, Fiyaz Mughal was well versed in far-left jargon. At this point, however, that knack didn’t turn out to be useful when it came to making convincing and legally sound arguments. Meanwhile, Fiyaz Mughal ended up submitting a 127-page Press Complaints Commission complaint against Andrew Gilligan. One that he withdrew and reactivated several months later. Around the same time as Burton’s first trial culminated, the Telegraph won against Fiyaz on that front as well. The PCC ruled Gilligan’s reporting was “not inaccurate” in regards to saying Mughal exaggerated the prevalence of anti-Muslim attacks, that DCLG officials were concerned about Mughal’s methods, and that his funding wasn’t going to be renewed.

This was on top of Mughal suing for a separate piece by Charles Moore, also of the Telegraph. The author wrote about David Cameron’s inaction against Islamist terrorism in the wake of the Lee Rigby incident, coupled with the attempt to shift the narrative done by TellMAMAUK.

Charles Moore pointed out the absurdity that was taking place, with TellMAMAUK trying to make the EDL equivalent to al-Qaeda in terms of their motivations.

“…you frequently find that Muslim groups like Tell Mama get taxpayers’ money (though, in its case, this is now coming to an end). You discover that leading figures of respectable officialdom share conference platforms with dubious groups. You learn that Muslim charities with blatantly political aims and Islamist links have been let off lightly by the Charity Commission. And you notice that many bigwigs in Muslim groups are decorated with public honours. Fiyaz Mughal, for example, who runs Tell Mama, has an OBE. Obviously it would be half-laughable, half-disgusting, if activists of the EDL were indulged in this way; yet they are, in fact, less extreme than some of those Muslims who are.”

Fiyaz Mughal took it to court, claiming it to be defamatory against his character. Mr Justice Tugendhat disagreed and ruled in favor of The Telegraph. This ruling happened around the same time Mughal lost against Andrew Gilligan and Tim Burton both.

Despite the triple losses, Fiyaz Mughal continued to push his narrative as usual. By only emphasizing on the worst-of-the-worst he’s able to slide in the lukewarm online cases like the example given by TellMAMAUK earlier on here.

Fiyaz would come back to get his revenge against Tim in 2016 and 2017.


On March 22nd 2016, TellMAMAUK posted a job opening for a caseworker. The main responsibilities included things like assisting callers, listening to what they had to say, and communicate with them further support resources as necessary. 12 months prior experience in a similar role was preferred, having an understanding of empathy and sensitivity, along with basic IT skills and proficiency with social media.

The opportunity was open to anyone. It didn’t exclude Tim Burton from emailing, and that’s what he ended up doing.

Email Number 1. Sent by Tim to TellMAMA on April 4th 2016.

To whom it may concern,

I see that I have just missed the deadline of 31 March for my application to be considered for the post recently advertised on your website.

However, it’s probably just as well, as those who know me consider [me] to be honest and trustworthy, and as such, I would most likely NOT fit in with a cowboy outfit like yours, run as it is by the Mendacious Grievance-Mongering Taqiyya-Artist-in-Chief, “Fizzy Bollocks” Mughal.

It’s a real shame, because otherwise I am qualified – nay – some might say over-qualified, to [fulfil] all the requirements of this position, together with the ability to dispense some much-needed honesty and integrity which appears to be sadly missing from your organisation on every level.

Fortunately, my current gainful employment will undoubtedly sustain me for the foreseeable future, so please don’t worry about parachuting me into the position over the heads of your less-qualified applicants who have managed to submit their application forms by the due date.

Just as a reminder of what you are missing, I herewith attach a link to the write-up of my recent court case, as published in the New English Review.

Yours faithfully,

Timothy M Burton

TellMAMA’s response to that email. April 4th 2016.

Your communication has been passed onto the MET. Cease and desist in sending us any further communication. You have been notified.

Best Wishes,


Email Number 2. From Tim Burton to TellMAMA on April 4th 2016.

To whom it may concern,

Well, that’s not very Christian of you. However, my email and your reply will no doubt prove a great topic of conversation on our radio shows in the UK, Canada, Australia  and the USA. So thank you very much for that!

Yours faithfully,

Timothy M Burton

Email Number 3. From Tim Burton to TellMAMA on April 5th 2016.

To whom it may concern,

I forgot to thank you for passing my communication on to the Middle East Transgender organisation. I [think] that it’s wonderful that you have such an enlightened group that supports persecuted minorities in this way.

It’s such a welcome change from the backward, misogynistic seventh century attitudes that we have come to expect from the followers of your ideology.

On a separate note, I do hope that you will be able to support the forthcoming “Reform, Renounce, Or Get The Hell Out Of My Country” petition recently initiated by Jeppe Juhl. He refers in this article mainly to Denmark, but obviously we all have the same problems with this fascist, totalitarian political ideology wherever we happen to be in the Western world, as I am sure you will agree.

Yours faithfully,

Timothy M Burton

Email Number 4. From Tim Burton to TellMAMA on April 6th 2016.

To whom it may concern,

I just thought you’d like to see this article –

You guys sure are the epitome of sore losers. Right now the world and his dog are laughing their socks off at Fizzy Bollocks and the rest of his motley crew.

Oh, and by the way – Is there any more news on my job application? 

I know that I must be the obvious front-runner with my qualifications and experience, but I should warn you that once I am hired, I will set about the place with a new broom, cleaning out the Augean stables of taqiyya-laden manure, casting sunlight into the darkest recesses, spreading the disinfectant of truth [and] generally keeping you on your toes.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours faithfully,

Timothy M Burton”

TellMAMA’s response to emails 2, 3, and 4, of April 6th 2016:

You have been expressly notified not to contact us. You have failed to heed this. All of the material is being sent to the police and solicitors. Any subsequent material will also be passed on for action and rest assured we will push for action against you.

 Best Wishes,


Email Number 5. Tim Burton to TellMAMA on April 6th 2016.

To whom it may concern,

Well there you go. Not only do I try and solve your employment problem, I try to point out how you are perceived in the media and around the world, and what thanks do I get? 

Some empty threats without even the courtesy of a “Good morning” or a “Good afternoon” or even a “Thank you for your enquiry, your email is important to us.” 

Not even a snifter of a “Best regards” or a “Yours faithfully” or even “Your humble servant, Fiyaz Mughal.”

It just goes to show how polite manners have deteriorated in the wonderful multicultural society that has developed in the last forty years or so. The “cultural enrichment” that we [have experienced] has resulted in a feral, snarling response to the even the most polite of enquiries.

I tell you what, Fizzy Bollocks old chap. If you really don’t want to receive any more communications from me, just go to your email settings and select “Block Sender” – this will result in my emails being ignominiously consigned to the Junk folder and you will no longer be troubled by my eloquent, well-thought-out missives.

Other than that, you will just have to put up with me exercising my right to Free Speech. Remember that concept?

Terribly inconvenient, I know, but for some things you just have to get off your lardy posterior and do it yourself. It’s too important to leave to your underlings, even the expensively acquired caseworker that you seem determined to hire over my obviously superior job application.

I normally charge a minimum of £500 for technical advice of this nature, but as I am feeling [particularly] benevolent at the moment, I will waive my usual fee.

Best Regards,

Timothy M Burton

Email Number 6. From Tim Burton to TellMAMA on April 26th 2016.

For the attention of Fizzy Bollocks – a.k.a. Fiyaz Mughal

Good morning Fizzy old chap,

I just thought I would enquire as to how that new “caseworker” is working out for you. Not very well by the sound of it – I detect a certain amount of desperation from within your organisation as you stoop to lower and lower depths of depravity to try and pin charges of “racism”, “bigotry” and “Islamophobia” onto people who have done little more than express a healthy contempt for a medieval belief system that teaches hatred and violence towards non-believers and which is completely incompatible with a free, tolerant and democratic society such as ours.

(You should have taken up my offer to come and work for you – it’s difficult to see how I would have done more harm to the public image of your organisation than you guys are doing unaided.)

I refer of course to your unwarranted persecution of one Cllr Dr Teck Khong, [a local councillor with a large Twitter following who writes about Islam and its incompatibility with English common law] which has been brought to my attention courtesy of Fahrenheit 211, a prolific blogger and counter-jihad activist who has been tirelessly and diligently working to highlight the many ways that Muslims exploit the tolerance and goodwill of us non-Muslims in order to promote the cause of a barbaric, totalitarian political ideology which contributes absolutely nothing to the advancement of peace and harmony.

Here is Fahrenheit 211’s take on the disgraceful activities of Tell Mama – I have to say that I agree entirely with the sentiments expressed in the article – and the sooner that the bottom-feeding rock-dwellers of your organisation wake up to the fact that such activities merely deepen the entirely justified suspicion and dislike that most normal people have for the followers of the religion of the Perpetually Offended, the better.

By the way, this month we at Liberty GB celebrated the two-year anniversary of your ignominious defeat (at Birmingham Magistrates Court on 08 April 2014, in case you had forgotten.) We raised a glass in your honour, and toasted you with a bacon sandwich.


Timothy M Burton

PS – I thought that you might have blocked my email address earlier this month, but it turns out that I merely made a spelling mistake when typing your email address, which meant that my email was bounced back to me. It just goes to show that even the best of us are not infallible. 

Of course, the fact that you yourself haven’t as yet blocked my email address demonstrates that you want – and indeed need – emails from people like me to justify your enormous and undeserved public grant. For that reason alone, if any more reasons were needed, the breath-taking hypocrisy of you and your organisation is thereby exposed for the world to see.

According to Burton, he was writing as if speaking to anyone within the TellMAMAUK organization (when it came to the “To whom it may concern” ones, anyway). Tim was mindful in tone to consider that no person with common sense would feel anything other than mildly annoyed. There was no intent to cause fear or distress, nor be threatening and aggressive in any way. Tim Burton argues that anyone who would take a significant gravity of offense to his emails has too thin of a skin. To that effect, it’s in Burton’s opinion Mughal’s motivations to pursue this case within the court system were to make an example out of Tim. Given Fiyaz’s large degree of influence over the Crown Prosecution Service, Mughal saw opportunity to show those who oppose Islam what happens to political detractors. Tim Burton makes it clear that he was NOT motivated by race or religious hostility, but to challenge the political views of Fiyaz Mughal’s organization that was pursuing an effort to silence free speech as a sacrifice to the altar of political correctness.

To understand how fast the ball started moving with this, Burton says he was first interviewed by West Midlands Police on June 2nd, 2016. It happened without warning. That is to say, he had no clue what their interests were about until the interview itself began.

It would take until September 2016 for Tim Burton to get a court summons saying Fiyaz Mughal was charging him with racially aggravated harassment. Again. Liberty GB revealed this to the public on September 18th, and Tim himself spoke about it in an interview that happened on the 24th.

This was the same CPS that refused to press charges against a gang of Muslims that assaulted Tim back in 2015 when he was campaigning. The perpetrators were ID’ed by police but CPS didn’t prosecute them because it wouldn’t “be in the public interest” to do so.

Within a Westminster Magistrates Court hearing (magistrates’ courts have no juries sitting in them, another common trick of the British establishment in recent decades) on October 6th 2016, they charged Tim with racially/religiously aggravated harassment. He was set for another pre-trial hearing the next month. A second interview Burton did shortly beforehand revealed that Fiyaz Mughal was still in reception of the public’s money and he expanded his connections within the government in the years following his fraud controversy.

The charges were amended on November 3rd 2016 during the pre-trial preparatory hearings. A copy of which was made public here:




TIMOTHY MARTIN BURTON is charged as follows:


RELIGIOUSLY AGGRAVATED HARASSMENT, contrary to section 32(1)(a) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998


TIMOTHY MARTIN BURTON between the 3rd day of April 2016 and the 20th day of April 2016 pursued a course of conduct which amounted to the harassment of Fiyaz Mughal and which he knew or ought to have known amounted to the harassment of him, by sending Fiyaz Mughal a number of unsolicited emails containing Islamophobic and other offensive material and the offence was wholly or partly motivated by hostility towards members of a religious group, namely Muslims and Fiyaz Mughal’s membership of that group.

(Note: I asked Tim in my interview with him about date discrepancies in official documents like this. Apparently the UK court system is allowed to adjust for that sort of thing as they go along.)

The showdown this time was going to be at Southwark Crown Court (a proper court with a jury) on January 30th 2017. Tim Burton did the proper build-up he could this time around: from securing a barrister (attorney) from the Kings Bench Walk Chambers in London, to gathering expert witnesses to speak on Burton’s behalf. The court (before the jury was called) rejected allowing Robert Spencer, Usama Dakdok, and Dr Bill Warner from giving testimony. They finally allowed Professor Sami Aldeeb to be the expert witness on Islam and taqiyya for the trial. In the end it didn’t even matter because Tim’s barrister never decided to utilize this person and call them in.


The stakes were set higher this time around, as Tim Burton’s trial held implications for the legal status of Islam within the UK. As explained by Liberty GB:

  • “to the best of our knowledge and belief, there has never been a ruling on the legal status of Islam as a religion in the UK”;

  • “there are characteristics of Islam that conflict with Article 9 of the ECHR (European Convention on Human Rights) and consequently Islam should not indeed, must not be legally considered as a religion under UK law, as UK law is currently subordinated to the ECHR in this respect”.

To put it bluntly, “the legal status of mosques, the validity of Muslim marriages, the legality of halal slaughter” would all be brought into question if the court ruled against Fiyaz.

Burton says many things went wrong with the 2017 trial. His biggest regret was handing over control of his defense to someone who wasn’t educated on the nuances involved with this situation. Tim assumed his barrister would’ve done all due diligence necessary in order to prepare and act in Burton’s best interests. He said that was a mistake because it became apparent to him as the proceedings went on she wasn’t up to snuff.

Tim didn’t have any experience in dealing with the Crown Court before. His solicitor (pre-trial lawyer) warned him of that weakness. That there was a world of difference between the 2014 Magistrates’ Court and the then upcoming Crown one. Now, Burton would be up against the rhetorical brilliance and learning of prosecuting barristers and would have to hire defense barristers. Tim’s solicitor was able to get him an experienced barrister from a decent set of legal chambers in London.

The solicitor laid it out to Tim that they needed to find someone they could trust to perform to their best of abilities here. Burton’s first assigned barrister sounded like he was definitely on Tim’s side and knew what he was talking about. Unfortunately, this first barrister had to recuse themselves a few weeks in. Other commitments needed to be tended to and he didn’t have the necessary free time available in order to work on Tim’s case. Tim Burton was referred to a second barrister, and the same set of circumstances that happened with the first barrister happened again. Tim Burton said his third barrister was “as much use as a chocolate teapot.” But because he wasn’t familiar with the Crown Court process, he didn’t realize how useless this lady was until it was too late — a common occurrence among British defendants.

Tim had difficulties in the vote of confidence department as far as his barrister choices went. And this was all before the trial even started.

The day(s) of the trial came. Fahrenheit 211 sent a correspondent to the courtroom to make a record of events:

“In evidence given to the court by video link, the chief prosecution witness, Fiyaz Mughal, said that he had opened emails sent to the Tell Mama business email account and that they had distressed him. One of the emails he said appeared ‘psychologically designed to give him a bad day’.”

Right at the start of the trial, Tim Burton set out that Fiyaz Mughal complained to the police and got the Crown Prosecution Service involved to lay the charge of religiously-aggravated harassment against him. The same Fiyaz Mughal who sat on a board that advises the Crown Prosecution Service! Tim brought up the fact that this was a conflict of interest, and because of that basis he requested a copy of all communications between Fiyaz, the Metropolitan Police (the police force covering London), and the CPS in relation to what had led up to Tim Burton being charged. Tim’s solicitor thought the request was reasonable, but Tim’s barrister had never bothered to follow up on that angle. (Again, this kind of sloppiness, or worse, among barristers is routine. They won’t tell their clients that at law they are officers of the Court, so their loyalties are at best divided.)

He asked her why. “Well I don’t think you’ll find that’s necessary,” she said to Tim. It seemed strange for a barrister of 20 years’ experience to be saying things like this.

Before going into court on the trial’s first day, Tim asked the barrister if she had a copy of all Burton’s notes handy. She told him she hadn’t even bothered reading it. That is to say, Tim Burton’s barrister didn’t bother to read the document written by him explaining his point of view and arguments.

Then came the composition of the trial jury. There were people within that jury who quite visibly self-identified as Muslims. Tim Burton asked his solicitor if he could challenge that in any way, and they replied such a challenge was allowed. But the prosecution was allowed to do that too, so all in all there was risks to going down that route. But Muslim jurors were a problem here because they automatically, by default, have to take the side of the Muslim party in this sort of instance. They couldn’t side with a non-believer in Islam. When Tim Burton questioned his barrister as to why she didn’t challenge the jury because of these reasons, she told him, “It’s not as important as you might think.”

Then came the Crown Prosecution’s witness. Dr Matthew Wilkinson came in and gave a definition of taqiyya that matched the false narrative Fiyaz Mughal gave on the subject — one that falls flat when compared to the arguments Professor  Hans Jansen presented in the 2014 trial. Tim’s defense barrister never challenged Dr Matthew Wilkinson’s presented definition of taqiyya. Switching off whenever religious or foreign terms were mentioned (as is typical of English barristers), she simply took the opposing party’s word for it that they were telling the truth. Tim Burton had his own expert witness ready to go. His barrister decided to not call on this person because “it might confuse the jury.”

On top of that, the chief of CPS was a patron of an organization led by Dr Matthew Wilkinson.

This is something incredibly important. Huge enough, in fact, to hit the brakes on everything momentarily, in order to properly point this out.


Let’s establish the grounds first. Dr Matthew LN Wilkinson is the Director and Principal Investigator of an organization called the Curriculum for Cohesion. This organization has a sizable list of patrons who believe in the group’s stated aim of “the systematic application of well-researched ideas.”

It’s through this system of patronage that the conflict of interest between Dr Matthew Wilkinson and the Crown Prosecution Service occurs.

Dr Matthew Wilkinson himself made the announcement on January 30th 2015 that Chief Crown Prosecutor Ms. Baljit Ubhey OBE (that’s another recipient of an award from the Queen, then) was becoming a patron of his Curriculum for Cohesion group. There was absolutely no way he could have overlooked that in the courtroom when testifying against Tim Burton. Given the blatant conflict of interest on display in Tim Burton’s case, it’s entirely likely this isn’t the only overstep made by Wilkinson’s history of acting as an expert witness on Islamic theology and law.

Now this is the part where it might be suggested that Tim Burton should have appealed the ruling and brought this to the attention of the courts. He and his associate Graham Milne have gone to great lengths already trying to do that. To this day, they have not received an official response or acknowledgement of any kind. So no declaration of a mistrial, or overturning or mitigation of the verdict, can be had. They are being held in limbo.

The organization where these expert witnesses come from is called The Expert Witness Institute. I came across a document outlining their Code of Professional Conduct and Practice. At this point, I’d like to highlight the failures of duty on Dr. Matthew Wilkinson’s part, as stated by that very code:

  • “Not accepting work that is likely to damage your ability to fulfil existing commitments”
  • “Act reasonably and ethically in identifying and resolving conflicts of interest”
  • “Neither offer or accept gifts, hospitality or services which could create or imply an improper relationship or obligation”

That last one, especially, hits the point home.  But wait. There’s more. Dr Matthew L N Wilkinson sat on the same Crown Prosecution Service panel as Fiyaz Mughal. It’s vital that you are made aware of what this CPS panel does. This is how Fiyaz Mughal is capable of influencing hate crime policies.

“We acknowledge that public trust is measured against our ability to work with the public in key areas, which is why we established a community panel to examine key parts of CPS Policy.”

This description is saying that Fiyaz Mughal is seen as a representative of the public’s best interests when it comes to CPS policy. In other words, the CPS has outsourced their core function — the unlawful notion of the state determining “the public interest” — to Fiyaz Mughal. The Crown Prosecution Service listens unchallengingly to the input of people like Fiyaz and Matthew Wilkinson, as if they had no ax to grind..

Furthermore (with bold emphasis added by me):
“The Panel focuses on working with communities to ensure that CPS London is informed by the real-life experience of people from diverse backgrounds so that we can prosecute cases effectively. The majority of files scrutinised by the panel are hate crime cases. CPS hate crime policy lays out our committment to prosecuting these cases robustly. As hate crime is a form of hostility against a person because of their identity, the panel prioritises these crimes, making sure that victims are supported and obtain justice.”
To top it all off, the description says the Chief Crown Prosecutor serves as a co-chair. Ms. Baljit Ubhey. The same Ms. Baljit Ubhey who became a patron of Dr. Matthew Wilkinson’s organization.

When the trial concluded (spoiler alert: Burton loses this time), Tim’s barrister wrote to him saying she believed he had no grounds for appeal at all. 

The lightest of due diligence by Burton’s barrister would have revealed the conflict of interest involved with Dr Matthew Wilkinson. Things like this impact the validity and truth behind any presented evidence Wilkinson gives as an independent witness. Yes, Dr Matthew Wilkinson was called upon by the Crown Prosecution Service’s side in this situation. But that doesn’t mean this guy has a license to twist the facts in subjective favor. There’s an expectation of objectivity when an independent expert witness is brought in. Influences like having a member of CPS be a patron to Dr Matthew Wilkinson’s organization are key when it comes to the jury weighing evidence.

Let’s go back to talking about the trial, for the time being.


The trial ended up going on for an extra day, showcasing the sporadic nature of these courtroom showdowns. The emails, according to the prosecution, left Mughal feeling distressed and “intimidated.” Again, Fiyaz asserted the definition of taqiyya was merely that people in the Shi’a Islamic minority are given permission to lie in order to save their own lives. Again, not a word about the doctrine of taqiyya in any of the four schools of scholarship of the denomination that represents the vast majority of British and worldwide Islam, namely Sunni Islam. Mughal ranted about the “far right,” attacking PEGIDA Radio, Mike Holt of Restore Australia, and Fahrenheit 211 and accusing them of being part of an “international far-right network.” On the 29th, Fiyaz Mughal became “visibly angry” when Tim’s defense counsel questioned him. It escalated all the more when she suggested to him that the emails sent by Burton weren’t a threat, as he had just denied exaggerating the level of his fearfulness, and had already denied the suggestion put to him that he aggressively pursued litigation against those who criticized him.


“Mr Mughal leaned into the video link camera and shouted his denials that he was an aggressive man who had sent libel threat letters to a number of people who had criticised the Tell Mama organisation. He became so angry at the line of questioning that at one point Mr Mughal had to be told to ‘stop shouting by Ms Lycourgou. Mr Mughal also appeared to evade questions about why he found the allleged [sic] communications threatening and instead  made various negative comments about the defendant, various counterjihad writers and others. Mr Mughal also claimed that when he was a public figure as part of Tell Mama, the criticism and mockery that he and his group received in alleged emails from Mr Burton was because of his ‘identity as a non practising Muslim’ .”

The final verdict came down from the Court and can be seen here in this newsletter. Tim Burton was (of course, given the stacked deck against him) duly found guilty of religiously-aggravated harassment at the end of his Inner London Court trial in February 2017, and was sentenced to 12 weeks in prison, starting on April 28th of that year.

CPS lawyer Adeolu Odusote said:

“Timothy Burton harassed Fiyaz Mughal by sending a series of emails and the content of those emails showed clear hostility based on the fact Mr Mughal is a Muslim. He claimed his emails were satirical and part of his freedom of expression but under the law no-one should have to suffer harassment or hostility based on their religious affiliations. A restraining order to stop Burton contacting Mr Mughal, and employees of Tell Mama, was also imposed, to prevent further harassment.”

One hell of a leap from the 2014 acquittal.

TellMAMA did their victory lap at the end of March 2017 as soon as the indictment was official. They asserted Tim Burton had been running was running a four-year long campaign against Fiyaz Mughal, “targeting” him and his faith through “extremist far right networks.” They named Pamela Gellar among the friendships of “far right conspiracy minded individuals” that Mr. Burton had made. The post goes on to talk about Burton’s political aspirations as a candidate for the Liberty GB group, using his victory against Mughal as a base for his platform. TellMAMA used this opportunity to speak ill of Liberty GB’s Paul Weston and Jack Buckby, painting them as “toxic.” Accusing Tim Burton of harassing Fiyaz Mughal TellMAMA in early 2016, despite the initial email sent as a result of the public job opening the organization put out to the public in the first place being sent SOLELY to the company in general, the TellMAMA blog post glosses over the contents of the emails themselves.

I recommend reading TellMAMA’s blog post for yourselves and decide whether or not the criticisms of Islam ascribed to Tim Burton and Liberty GB staff are worthy of Mughal’s scorn.

Fiyaz had a few words to share:

“The defendant’s actions have led to endless nights of anxiety and fear and a sense of being targeted to my core.” 

To be clear, the above statement is what he told the Independent. Compare that to his blog quote given below, and you’ll see the biggest U-turn in tone of all time:

“I am relieved that the jury have seen this for the criminal conduct it is. For the last four years I have been subjected to a long running hate campaign at the hands of Mr Burton. I have received unacceptable abuse which has no place in modern day Britain. The outcome of the trial sends a very clear message – racial and religious abuse is completely unacceptable and is punishable by law. It also sends a message to far right activists who break the law in targeting people through religiously aggravated harassment. You will not succeed and you will be held accountable for your actions within the laws of our land. There is also a message for Islamist extremists and those who perpetuate an Islamist narrative of the State being against Muslims or Muslim rights not being protected. This result corrodes your toxic narrative that holds back some Muslims from reporting in and accessing justice and your manipulation of our fellow British Muslim citizens against the State and its structures, is challenged by this ruling. The legal system works for all. For others suffering from similar abuse, my message is very clear: report any racial and religious abuse you receive to third party hate crime agencies like Tell MAMA and to the police because this behaviour breaks the law. This judgment also sends a very clear message to social media companies, which have been extremely slow to monitor and curb this type of activity, that they have a responsibility to act to ensure their platforms are not used to break the law.”
They say in writing that it’s best to know your audience. Fiyaz certainly knows how to play to the strengths of his.

With the Tim Burton cases in mind, let’s reflect on how much the times have changed between 2013’s Andrew Gilligan article and March 2017’s indictment of Tim Burton for online communications. Something changed between point A and point B. How exactly Fiyaz Mughal was able to be the subject of controversy and scrutiny in regards to the June 2013 incident, only to be able to turn around and come out on top when it came to convicting Tim Burton four years later, is revealing to discover.

“There has been enormous amount of anti-Muslim hatred… that’s been pumped out by groups and individuals and which has been in the online space and easy to find,” said Fiyaz Mughal on February 1st 2018 to BBC Newsnight.

Of course “anti-Muslim hatred” is easy to find when you have it defined in the broadest scopes and definitions possible. Therein lies the problem. The Tim Burton cases are emblematic of British deep state’s the shaping of politics that Fiyaz Mughal has a hand in since the start of the 2010s. By influencing UK government policy to kow-tow to the broadest definitions of “islamophobia,” “extremism,” and “hate crime,” a deliberate communitarian imbalance has been created in the country and the common law has been insulted.

Then there’s the whole Dr Matthew Wilkinson conflict of interest. Ms Baljit Ubhey is higher-up on the CPS employee ladder, too. Click here for a chart of Crown Prosecution Service leadership.


It’s a criminal contempt of court to not declare this sort of conflict of interest. Southwark Crown Court never responded when presented with this information.

Tim Burton has provided me with the paperwork outlining the complaints he had regarding the situation to Southwark Crown Court. Going on the timing when this process was started, the authorities have had more than ample time to reply to Tim Burton. They have not. They have not said “yes.” Yet on the other hand, they have not said “no.” Given the severity of the allegation, it’s reasonable to conclude that the Court of Appeal would have taken the time to provide a rebuttal to Mr. Burton if they had nothing to be ashamed of.

If Tim Burton’s case were ever to be overturned by the Court of Appeals, all of the other cases in which Dr Matthew Wilkinson was involved (after the time in January 2015 when Ms. Baljit Ubhey became his patron) would then come into question. And we can’t be having that, can we?

This would include the potential declaration of mistrials in high-profile cases involving terrorists from Guantanamo Bay, and any retrials might bring out more than the public is meant to know about state collusion with Islamists.

After realizing Southwark Crown Court weren’t going to acknowledge this at all, Burton asked around about further action he could take. He was pointed to the Queen’s Bench Division at the Royal Courts of Justice in London. Same thing: no reply (although QBD specifically exists to ensure British citizens’ speedy access to justice). The Court of Appeal was the next stop. No response from them, either..

What you’re looking at here is the central cog in the London court system’s machine that made the incredibly broad and open-ended interpretation of hate crime in the United Kingdom (in this case, the jurisdiction of England and Wales) possible. This is how Fiyaz Mughal was able to go from being laughed at in June 2013 for his methods, to having Tim Burton prosecuted at the end of March 2017 for religiously aggravated harassment. The CPS make it up as they go along, and they can do so because the British establishment has decided without officially abolishing the evidentiary standards of English common law — to replace it in practise with the Napoleonic model of opportunité des poursuites or prosecutorial discretion (to pursue or to drop charges). This allows tyrannical prosecution but also tyrannical failure to prosecute where politically expeditious. To do so, the establishment has spent a century doing its damndest to all but abolish private prosecutions (which already are nearly impossible in Scotland) and give the state a de-facto monopoly on prosecutions, as in most EU member states. In addition, the police and the CPS end up having the intrinsically contradictory job of collecting both incriminatory and exculpatory evidence on the same suspects, supposedly without fear or favor!

The court system of the United Kingdom is a sham. As seen in this paper by Tim’s friend Graham Senior-Milne, there’s grounds to question Islam’s grounds on being recognized as a religion in UK law altogether.

28 Replies to “Escape from Big Mother: Free Speech of UK in Decay”

  1. The British have doomed themselves.

  2. “The dude likes being the center of focus. The spotlight.”

    In my research over the years I have encountered some of the people who personally knew Tatchell. One of them (an immigrant and an anarchist) told me that he used to be part of the Outrage group before he moved on to international anti-capitalist/anti-globalist protests. He said that at Outrage meetings it was clear that Outrage was about Peter Tatchell and nothing else.

    Years later when I challenged Tatchell on Twitter concerning his promotion of lowering the age of consent and his claims about the sexuality of boys of the Sambia people of New Guinea, Tatchell blocked me after a few tweets. It was clear he didn’t like the fact that I’d read the anthropological texts on this tribe and he had not (in fact, I took photos of the relevant pages and highlighted them to prove to Tatchell that he had massively misrepresented what went on with these children).

    The texts show that the boys only engage in homosexuality after being taken away from their mothers (for years) and the boys are violently beaten (one could describe it even as torture) if they did not engage in homosexuality. Before Tatchell blocked me on Twitter his response was something like “well I was going off what I was told”. You’d think if someone was going to take a high-profile campaigning issue on some controversial topic like children and homosexuality that he would actually read the books on which he was basing his controversial claims. These books were published ten to twenty years before Tatchell was spouting the false version of what the books contain, so Tatchell had plenty of time to read the books to which he alluded as the academic evidence informing articles such as that above for The Guardian.

    That Tatchell blocked me in this discussion was evidence to me that his ego was fragile, even if his body has supposedly taken 300 kickings.

Leave a Reply