'Can't wait to be arrested': John Cleese formally reported to UK's 'counter-terrorism' regime for criticizing Islam



Anti-woke comedian John Cleese has infuriated leftists and Islamists alike with his public criticism of Islam and mass migration.

Now it appears that some of those offended by the "Monty Python" co-founder's commentary want him shut up for good.

'Tell the police to contact my agent.'

Muslim activists campaigned last month to pressure Birmingham Town Call to cancel Cleese's Sept. 20 comedy show.

After the censorious radicals failed, Cleese was referred to Prevent — the government-run "counter-terrorism" program coordinated by the U.K. Home Office that is supposedly "designed to support people away from radicalisation before they commit an offence" — over his opinions about Muslims, Islam, and associated threats.

According to the Sept. 22 complaint that was first reported by 5Pillars — an English-language Muslim publication run by a Islamic propagandist who previously worked for Saudi, Qatari, and Iranian-funded media — Cleese's commentary on social media allegedly meets "several indicators used in PREVENT risk assessments for anti-Muslim hate and counter-extremism concerns" and claims that such commentary risks setting the stage for "radicalisation, communal tension, and hate incidents."

The complaint highlights multiple examples of online activity where Cleese allegedly "demonises, dehumanises, and collectively attributes violence and criminality to Muslims and Islam," including an April 27 post where he stated that halal food is "a barbaric custom and English law should not allow it" and his March 31 post stating that "to criticize a culture whose holy book advocates the killing of all the people they disagree with ... is not racist."

RELATED: 'Beyond evil': Nightmarish report reveals full scale of mass Islamic rapes of '250,000' white British girls

Amanda Stronza/Getty Images for SXSW

The complainant, whose identity has not been publicly disclosed, alleged that "these statements go beyond criticism of ideas and attach intrinsic criminality, violence, and moral depravity to a religious group."

Cleese — who has emphasized that "criticism of Islam is not racist, it's culturalist" — does not appear too cut up about the complaint or the possibility the state will take action against him.

The 86-year-old comedian tweeted on Monday, "I can't wait to be arrested."

"This is a real life sitcom!" he continued. "Please tell the police to contact my agent."

He noted in a separate post about the complaint, "The Islamic male ego becomes so bloated by its lack of restraint that it believes any criticism is blasphemy."

Suella Braverman — the former home secretary who caused a stir in 2023 by acknowledging that multiculturalism "has failed because it allowed people to come to our society and live parallel lives in it" — condemned using the counterterrorism regime to silence criticism of Islam.

"Prevent is supposed to identify potential terror threats and interrupt them through deradicalisation," wrote Braverman Tuesday. "Not to silence legitimate comment or debate about Islam. If progressed, this referral will really expose how broken our counter-terrorism system is and that a blasphemy law has been re-introduced into the U.K. by the backdoor."

Robert Spencer, the director of Jihad Watch, noted, "The government is likely to take this quite seriously, for to do otherwise might risk enraging the nation’s Muslim population, and that is what they want to avoid doing above all. What, however, did Cleese say that was not true? And that is the problem with all 'Islamophobia' initiatives: they make it a crime to tell unwelcome truths."

The Free Speech Union stressed that the government's assurances that the official definition of "Islamophobia" would not adversely impact Britons' free speech turned out to have been meaningless and that "Mr Cleese is not alone in being targeted by those who wish to silence legitimate criticism of Islam, its history, or its practices."

The union noted, for instance, that Restore Britain leader Rupert Lowe was reported last month to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards — responsible for investigating alleged breaches of House of Commons Code of Conduct and Registers — over his criticism of Pakistani Muslim rape gangs and "the islamification of Britain."

In July, Afzal Khan, a Pakistan-born Labour member of parliament, also submitted a complaint about Lowe to the commission, concern-mongering about the conservative lawmaker's criticism of the state's apparent tolerance of Sharia courts.

Cleese has advocated for Lowe's Restore Britain ascendant political party, which seeks to deport millions of migrants from the isles.

"The ability to criticise, debate, challenge, and mock a religion is a fundamental right in Britain. It is not extremism. Parliament voted to abolish our blasphemy laws in 2008, eighteen years ago, but we now have one for Islam alone, said the Free Speech Union.

Blaze News did not immediately receive a response from Prevent.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Monty Python joked about harvesting organs from the living. Now we need laws against it.



My mom wouldn’t let me watch Monty Python when I was growing up in the ’80s. The British comedy troupe was a little too crass for her taste.

So it wasn't until later in life that I watched their 1983 feature "The Meaning of Life," a collection of outrageous sketches lampooning everything from birth to death. One of the 1983 film’s most grotesque bits was “Live Organ Transplants.”

For decades, we have chipped away at the principle that every human being possesses inherent dignity regardless of age, health, consciousness, independence, or usefulness.

Two men in lab coats arrive at the home of an unsuspecting organ donor and ask for his liver. The man points out the obvious: He is still alive. In fact, he is using his liver.

No matter. He signed an organ donor card.

When he protests that the card applies only in the event of death, the response is pure Monty Python: Nobody who has had his liver removed by them has ever survived!

That joke isn't funny anymore

The scene works because it’s absurd. No civilized society would harvest vital organs from a living person. More than four decades later, the sketch is considerably less funny.

Anthony Thomas “T.J.” Hoover II suffered a drug overdose and was taken to a Kentucky hospital in 2021. His family agreed to organ donation after believing he would not recover.

Then Hoover began showing signs of life.

According to subsequent reporting and federal investigations, Hoover cried, moved his body, and shook his head as preparations for organ procurement continued. Doctors ultimately refused to proceed, and Hoover survived.

Earlier this month, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services began the process of decertifying Network for Hope, the organ procurement organization whose predecessor was involved in Hoover’s case.

Federal investigators reviewed 351 cases in which donations had been authorized but later canceled. They identified concerning features in 103. In 73 cases, patients exhibited neurological signs that should have made them ineligible for donation. Network for Hope disputes the findings and is appealing.

Dead certain

Kentucky lawmakers responded with House Bill 510, signed into law in April. It requires a “pause” in organ procurement when questions arise about a patient’s neurological status or other indications of life.

Think about that.

We’ve reached the point where state law must explicitly ensure that organ procurement stops when there is evidence the donor may not actually be dead.

Monty Python couldn’t have written it better.

Let’s be clear: I support organ donation. Donating organs after death can be a profoundly generous act that saves lives. Precisely because it is so noble, the public must have absolute confidence that a donor’s life is protected until death has actually occurred.

The deeper issue is how our culture views vulnerable human life.

Inherent dignity

For decades, we have chipped away at the principle that every human being possesses inherent dignity regardless of age, health, consciousness, independence, or usefulness.

Abortion tells us that the right to life can depend upon whether an unborn child is wanted.

Doctor-assisted suicide extends that mentality to the sick and disabled, where suffering can become not merely something to alleviate but a reason to help someone die.

Consider 26-year-old Australian Annaliese Holland, who suffers from autoimmune autonomic ganglionopathy, a devastating illness that has left her in constant pain and dependent on intravenous nutrition. Holland has been approved for voluntary assisted dying and has chosen a date to end her life, though she has kept that date private.

Much of the coverage has treated Holland’s decision with solemn approval, framing her planned death as an understandable — even empowering — exercise of personal choice.

But Holland deserves compassion, not termination. That is precisely the point: When someone is suffering terribly, our response should be to surround that person with care — not offer death as the solution.

RELATED: 'Threats will not stop us': Lila Rose's pro-life group tells radicals to pound sand after legal threat over calling abortion 'killing'

L/R: Fotopress/Getty Images; Ian Waldie/Getty Images

What Teresa knew

Mother Teresa offered a radically different answer.

She spent her life among those the world found easiest to overlook: the abandoned, diseased, disabled, and dying.

In her Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech, she described taking in a man found dying in the street, his body partly eaten by maggots. After being washed and cared for, he told her that he had lived like an animal in the street but was going to die “like an angel,” loved and cared for.

That was Mother Teresa’s answer to suffering.

She didn’t calculate whether someone’s life was still worth living. She was convinced that the person before her possessed infinite worth simply because he was human.

The saintly nun understood an essential distinction modern medicine must never lose: There is a vast moral difference between allowing a person to die naturally and deliberately causing that person’s death.

Once human dignity becomes conditional — dependent upon health, independence, consciousness, or perceived quality of life — the boundaries protecting all of us begin to erode.

A culture that accepts ending a human life because that life is judged no longer worth living should not be surprised when other calculations about the value and usefulness of human beings creep into medicine.

Human dignity is inherent. Life is valuable precisely because it is human. Our Creator has granted that dignity, and we have no authority to withdraw it.

Monty Python once imagined the unthinkable for laughs.

When reality begins catching up with satire, it is time to ask whether we still believe every human life is worth protecting.

Thanks for the life lesson, Mom.

Monty Python's John Cleese backs deportation champion Rupert Lowe, tells off haters: 'Some cultures are better than others'



Anti-woke comedian and writer John Cleese has come out swinging in support of Rupert Lowe, the Restore Britain leader who has become a magnet for leftist abuse over his criticism of mass migration and systemic anti-white racism.

On Sunday, an X user who goes by "The English Crusader" shared an image of Rupert Lowe captioned, "What is the first word that comes into your mind?"

'I am not a racist. I am a culturalist.'

Cleese, a former supporter of the Liberal Democrats, responded, "I trust this man more than any of the other leaders."

Lowe is a member of the British Parliament who departed Nigel Farage's Reform U.K. party early last year on bad terms. He then founded Restore Britain in February as a party "for those who believe that our nation has been hollowed out by weak leadership, broken institutions, and a political class that no longer serves the people."

Although presently nowhere close to having the numbers or the support sufficient to displace Reform or one of the legacy parties in Westminster, Lowe and his party have nevertheless made a significant splash in British politics. According to YouGov, Lowe is the third-most popular public figure in the United Kingdom.

Cleese appears to support Lowe and his party chiefly for its proposed approach to immigration — overwhelmingly the most important issue for Restore Britain voters, recent polling shows.

RELATED: 'I don't care': Meet the man building Britain's new populist, anti-immigration right

Clemens Bilan/Getty Images

While appreciated by Lowe, Cleese's recent political advocacy has ruffled quite a few feathers across the Atlantic.

Alastair Campbell, a political strategist who served as a spokesman for former Prime Minister Tony Blair as well as for the Labour Party, was among those prickled by Cleese's comments, accusing the comedian of having "totally lost the plot."

So-called immigration policy expert Zoe Gardner attributed Cleese's support for Lowe to "brain worms."

Deluged with similar reactions online, Cleese silly-walked over his critics' hurt feelings, noting, "I see I am being ritually insulted for my support of this man. The uneducated call me a racist. I am not a racist. I am a culturalist. I believe that some cultures are better than others."

Cleese added that he prefers cultures that "do not advocate stoning, pederasty, wife beating, female genital mutilation, and beheading opponents."

Again, Cleese's critics seethed, but this time the world's richest man, Elon Musk, weighed in, stating, "John Cleese has (all too rare) common sense."

The comedian has shown no signs of stopping when it comes to sharing posts supportive of Lowe and Restore Britain.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Jill Biden’s stroke excuse was pure ‘Black Knight’ politics



One of the enduring gifts of “Monty Python and the Holy Grail” is that 50 years later, people still quote it.

My favorite scene involves the Black Knight.

King Arthur encounters him guarding a bridge, and a duel follows. The fight goes badly for the knight. Arthur lops off one arm, then the other. When the knight keeps fighting, Arthur removes both legs as well. Reduced to a torso lying in the dirt, the knight somehow surveys the situation and announces, “All right, we’ll call it a draw.”

The older I get, the more convinced I become that much of human behavior can be explained by that scene. We possess a remarkable ability to keep arguing with reality long after reality has settled the matter.

And which of us has not, in some absurd situation, said, “It’s just a flesh wound”?

Reality has a way of reminding us that some things we carry are, indeed, more than a flesh wound.

That thought crossed my mind recently while reading statements coming out of Iran. Whatever one thinks about the conflict itself, leaders standing amid rubble and declaring victory have a distinctly Monty Python quality. At a certain point, the rhetoric sounds less like confidence and more like the Black Knight insisting he still has a chance.

But Iran does not have a monopoly on reality rejection.

Recently, Jill Biden said she feared her husband was having a stroke during his one and only 2024 presidential debate. She described watching him struggle on stage and wondering whether he was experiencing a stroke or some other medical emergency.

As a caregiver, I am apparently behind the times. For 40 years, I foolishly assumed that if one suspects a spouse is having a stroke, the next step involves medical attention. Evidently, the new protocol may include chants of “Four more years!” at the after-debate rally, followed by a late-night visit to Waffle House.

Medical science has made huge strides.

Someone’s Waffle House hash browns were clearly scattered and smothered. Whether they were covered as well remains an open question.

As the Black Knight might say, it’s only a flesh wound.

Like Jill Biden, I am not a licensed physician. But watching her reminded me that I know enough to recognize when someone may need urgent care — or at least a cranial specialist.

Yet while I laugh at the Black Knight, sigh at Iran, and look with exasperation at Jill Biden — and at the reporter who let that remark pass without serious follow-up — I have to admit that defiance in the face of reality is not limited to them. Sometimes it appears in my own bathroom mirror.

The absurdity of these public examples points to a common problem in the human condition. Most of us have our own version of the same speech. We insist the exhaustion is not that bad, the debt remains manageable, the resentment is justified, the addiction is under control, or the diagnosis must be wrong.

RELATED: Caregivers should not have to lie to prove compassion

Samuel Corum/Getty Images

Every day, I talk with family caregivers who insist things are fine while staggering under impossible burdens.

We twist ourselves into pretzels defending positions reality abandoned long ago. We can mock Iran’s leaders and Jill Biden. We can laugh at the Black Knight. But are we prepared to admit that we often travel the same road, just not as far down it?

The Serenity Prayer asks for the wisdom to know the difference between what can be changed and what cannot. Most of us would prefer a third option: the ability to negotiate with reality until it agrees to call the whole thing a draw.

Sooner or later, reality delivers its verdict and waits.

The question is whether we will acknowledge it.

The Black Knight never did. Iran’s leaders and Jill Biden seem intent on following him into absurdity. That is why we laugh at the knight and deride the others.

But perhaps we should stop laughing long enough to see ourselves.

Reality has a way of reminding us that some things we carry are, indeed, more than a flesh wound.

Filmmaker Terry Gilliam Credits Donald Trump For Making Comedy Great Again

'Trump has changed things considerably'

Democrats’ Biggest Problem Right Now Is That They Are Out Of Touch And Uncool

Do Democrats have a plan other than being awful and making fools of themselves?

Harris falters, Trump rises: And now for something completely different



Those of us who grew up laughing at the antics of British comedy troupe Monty Python remember the film “And Now for Something Completely Different,” which compiled some of the best sketches from their hit TV series.

The humor throughout “Monty Python’s Flying Circus” and their various films was inventive, original, and often unexpectedly off-the-wall.

For better or worse, this election season has followed that quirky formula.

None of us “of a certain age” has ever witnessed political antics like those unfolding since the disputed close of the 2020 election season. Up until that year, we had never seen anything like what happened leading up to — and beyond — Nov. 3, 2020.

But just when it seemed “safe to go back in the political waters” (to borrow a line from a 1978 “Jaws 2” movie poster), something “completely different” would surface.

The Democrats, in particular, seemed ready to outdo their last incredible “Gotcha!”

How surprised should any of us be if the Democrats, out of total desperation in the waning days of the 2024 election, come up with something ... completely different?

These are the same shysters who claimed the 2020 election was “the most secure in American history”; who locked up citizens for peacefully protesting what they saw as an obvious steal; who, by omission or commission, allowed an assassin to target a presidential candidate and former president; who insisted they are the party on the side of good and suggested that if you believe “Jesus is Lord,” you’re “at the wrong rally”; and who repeatedly used "Hitler" to describe the president who once leaned through a McDonald's window and asked, "Would you like fries with that?"

Now, with just days to go, the “Hitler candidate” has surged in popularity, like the TV series “Seinfeld” in its prime. Everyone seems to be watching, eagerly awaiting the next episode. It’s a stretch, but imagine Trump as Jerry, with an intriguing new cast: RFK Jr. as George, Tulsi Gabbard as Elaine, and, yes, the wild and unpredictable Elon Musk as Kramer.

All and all, this cast of characters is fun to watch.

But the other show that just could not quite get it in gear, “Harris” (whose working title was “Build Back Biden”), is now bleeding ratings and is about to be canceled. So what do they do?

They go back to what got them on the lineup in the first place. They are the anti-Trump cast. And they trot out old have-beens or never-were “stars” with thread-bared storylines; nefarious characters like Hillary and Obama who badly deliver their never-could-stick lines chalk full of accusations of racism, sexism, and Hitlerism.

You can almost see the deep state, which is storyboarding this particular "last episode," calling in the star of the show, Kamala Harris, and laying it on the line with her.

[Door opens: Harris ENTERS]

D.S.: Ah, Ms. Harris. Come in. Sit down.

K.H.: Yes, I will sit down on this chair that was made for sitting and on which I will then sit.

[Harris SITS]

D.S.: OK, look. Whatever it is you’re doing it’s not working ...

K.H.: Yes, working is what we want to work here so I am working to make it work.

D.S.: Shut up. Here’s what's going to happen. You are going to keep calling Trump “Hitler.” You are going to keep repeating that since we know you are good at repeating everything.

K.H.: Yes, repeating what needs to be repeated —

D.S.: Enough! Listen. The last time we repeated “Trump is Hitler,” we had at least two assassination attempts on his life. That means we can gin up more attempts using the same strategy. That way, by Election Day, Trump’s name may still be on the ballot but the man himself will be in the funeral home.

K.H.: [Cackles]

D.S.: And if Trump is not gone from this planet in the next few days — someone will be taking a shot at you.

K.H.: [Stops Cackling]

D.S.: You heard us. But don’t worry, we will make sure — fingers crossed — that they just nick you on the arm ... or something. Then, we will blame Trump and his MAGA crazies and say that their hateful rhetoric led to one of their own trying to destroy our Democracy. And to save our Democracy, we will disqualify Trump, jail him and anyone wearing a red hat (whether it says MAGA or not). And while you are recuperating (if you’re lucky) in the hospital, we will declare Hillary our candidate. She will win, and we will continue to fundamentally transform America and finally complete the directive initiated in 2008.

K.H.: [Long pause] But ... but ... but ...

D.S.: You may go.

[Harris STANDS up from the chair she has been sitting in that was made for sitting in and EXITS.]

This scenario is a stretch. No doubt about it.

But how surprised should any of us be if the Democrats, out of total desperation in the waning days of the 2024 election, come up with something ... completely different?

Editor’s note: A version of this article appeared previously at American Thinker.

John Cleese refuses to remove 'Life of Brian' joke about a man becoming a woman and having a baby that critics call 'transphobic'



John Cleese refused to bend the knee to the outrage mob who called for a joke to be removed from an upcoming stage version of Monty Python’s "Life Of Brian." The controversial scene features a man claiming that he is a woman and he can have a baby.

Cleese is working on a stage production of Monty Python's "Life of Brian," a 1979 movie about a man who is mistaken for Jesus Christ. However, actors allegedly told Cleese that one scene would need to be cut out of the reproduction for it not to be offensive in today's social environment.

The scene in question features a character named "Stan" – who wants to become a woman and have babies.

"I want to be a woman," Stan declares. "From now on, I want you all to call me Loretta."

Cleese's character Reg bewilderedly asked, "What?"

Stan fires back, "It's my right as a man."

When asked why he wants to be a woman, Stan explains, "I want to have babies."

Reg quizzically replies, "You want to have babies?"

Stan shoots back, "It's every man's right to have babies if he wants them."

When Reg informs Stan that he "can't have babies," Stan plays the victim, "Don't you oppress me."

Cleese's character notes, "I’m not oppressing you, Stan, you haven’t got a womb. Where’s the fetus going to gestate? You gonna keep it in a box?"

Other characters agree that Stan can't have babies, but argue that he should have the "right to have babies."

Reg responds, "What's the point of fighting for his right to have babies when he can't have babies?"

Another character says, "It is symbolic of our struggle against oppression."

Reg quips that Stan has a "struggle with reality" for thinking he can give birth to a baby.

Monty Python - "Loretta" www.youtube.com

Critics claim the scene in the movie from 44 years ago is "transphobic."

Despite the controversy, Cleese confirmed that he would not be removing the questionable scene from the upcoming stage show of "Life of Brian."

Cleese wrote on Twitter, "A few days ago I spoke to an audience outside London. I told them I was adapting the Life of Brian so that we could do it as a stage show ( NOT a musical ). I said that we'd had a table reading of the latest draft in NYC a year ago and that all the actors – several of them Tony winners – had advised me strongly to cut the Loretta scene. I have, of course, no intention of doing so."

Cleese slammed the media for "misreporting" him about cutting the Loretta scene from the new version, "Amazingly none of the British media called to check."

Cleese said of the actors in the upcoming production, "These were absolutely top-class Broadway performers and they were adamant that we would not get away with doing the scene in NYC! I asked them, 'Are Python fans not going to come because we're doing a scene they've been laughing at for 40 years.'"

The Monty Python comedian said, "Producers tend to be scaredy-cats, and they don't remember that the protests in NYC when 'Brian' was released meant we never needed to do publicity!"

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

BBC’s ‘Cunk On Earth’ Mockumentary Is Brilliantly Stupid

The death of human culture, as laid out by 'Cunk on Earth,' is the desire to talk about something more cheerful, or maybe to skip talking altogether.

Anti-woke, anti-cancel culture comic John Cleese to debut show on TV channel one critic calls the 'British Fox News'



Monty Python's John Cleese — a legendary comic who's become an outspoken opponent of woke culture and cancel culture in recent years — is debuting a TV show in 2023 on a United Kingdom channel that one critic has called the "British Fox News."

What are the details?

Cleese's new show on GB News will be a collaboration with satirist Andrew Doyle that will encourage "proper argument," BBC News reported. Doyle hosts "Free Speech Nation" on the channel, which launched last year, the network said.

Cleese warned GB News watchers that they "may not be used to hearing the sort of things I'll be saying."

Former GB News chairman Andrew Neil told the BBC last year, via the Guardian, that one of the reasons he exited the network was because he didn't want to be a “minority of one” at a “British Fox News.”

Cleese apparently doesn't feel similarly about GB News.

"I was approached [about the new show], and I didn't know who they were," Cleese told BBC News. "I don't know much about modern television because I've pretty much given up on it — English television."

Cleese further explained that he then "met one or two of the people concerned and had a dinner with them, and I liked them very much. And what they said was, 'People say it's a right-wing channel, [but] it's a free-speech channel.'"

GB News launched in June 2021, BBC News said, becoming the U.K.'s first TV news start-up in 30 years.

As for any possibility of returning to the BBC in the future — "Monty Python's Flying Circus" and Cleese's "Fawlty Towers" comedy series are both BBC properties — Cleese told the network, "Not on your nelly."

Why? "Because I wouldn't get five minutes into the first show before I'd been canceled or censored," he told BBC News.

What else has Cleese been up to?

In July, Cleese told an audience at the FreedomFest conference in Las Vegas that "woke attitudes" are having a "disastrous effect" on comedy and that he has seen writers and comics censoring themselves over fear of getting canceled.

In November 2021, Cleese actually canceled himself from a speaking gig at Cambridge University after he learned that an art historian at the school had been canceled over an impersonation of Adolf Hitler that reportedly offended students.

In 2020, Cleese ripped keyboard leftists, refusing to bow to them in the wake of their "transphobia" accusations after he signed a letter of solidarity with author J.K. Rowling, who herself has come under fire for statements challenging transgenderism.

"I hope they fry in their own sanctimoniousness and narcissistic posturing," Cleese said of the woke mob. "Until they get a sense of perspective, that is."

Way back in 2016, Cleese declared that political correctness would lead to a "1984" society and cautioned against hypersensitivity to anything and everything deemed hurtful and offensive.

"All humor is critical. If we start saying, 'Oh, we mustn’t criticize or offend them,' then humor is gone, and with humor goes a sense of proportion — and then, as far as I’m concerned, you’re living in '1984,'" Cleese said in a video, referring to George Orwell's classic dystopian novel. "So the idea that you have to be protected from any kind of uncomfortable emotion is one I absolutely do not subscribe to."