UK “Faces Social Unrest” if Labour Pushes Ahead with Islamophobia Definition
Britain will face social unrest and reinforced perceptions of a two-tier society if the Government pushes ahead with plans for a formal definition of Islamophobia, the head of a new campaign group has warned. The Times has more.
Angela Rayner, the Deputy Prime Minister, has set up a working group to provide recommendations to the Government on “appropriate and sensitive language” to describe “unacceptable treatment, prejudice and discrimination against Muslims”.
Fiyaz Mughal, the founder of the Tell Mama organisation which monitors anti-Muslim hate incidents, is leading a campaign against the definition, which he believes risks having a “chilling effect” on free speech and creating a “blasphemy law by the back door”. The campaign is called Keep the Law Equal.
While the definition will not be legally binding, Mughal raised concerns that the police, prosecutors other public authorities and employers would adopt it and that criticism of any practices associated with the Muslim faith would effectively become an offence.
He suggested it could curtail public discourse about the grooming scandals amid concerns that a disproportionate number of Asian men have been responsible. He also said that it could discourage legitimate debate about the hijab, the niqab and sharia courts.
“We are seeing a sense of people being very unhappy about two-tier application of the law, two-tier society,” he said.
“The same narrative is being potentially, I’m hearing, it’s being used around this definition. Why are Muslims getting extra protection? Why do they have to have more laws?
“I worked with the police. We have seen the systems work really well. We need proper enforcement of existing laws, not additional definitions which in fairness given that the world has also changed, given our country and the dynamics has changed, any definition that marks out one community is going to cause major social divisions. and it’s happening in our society. We don’t need social divisions. We need the implementation of existing laws which are more than sufficient.
“It will raise community tensions and it will just add to the narrative that actually one community is getting a better deal than another. And that just leads to local anger.”
He said it would have a “chilling effect” on free speech. “It creates a sense of a deeply chilling effect, where people are scared to raise things about religion, which can be used against them, and where digital traces can be placed online that are difficult to remove,” he said.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Angela Rayner … [wants] recommendations … “appropriate and sensitive language” to describe “unacceptable treatment, prejudice and discrimination against Muslims”.
Apparently “our” government is concerned about non-Muslims criticising “expressions of Muslimness”. This is very interesting. Since 1979 there have been over 48,000 terrorist attacks carried out by Muslims. Almost 90% of these attacks have been directed at Muslims, and they have resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of entirely innocent people. What I’d like to know is this: if I expresses sympathy for the victims am I also guilty of the vast crime of criticising the perpetrators’ “expression of Muslimness”?
FGM, 4 wives, sex concubines, the Christophobic (mein) Koran, mention say the 14 yr old girl at your son’s school who was FGM’d and you end up in prison….you can pluck some of my fav hate speech from (mein) Koran like 5:32 and repeat it verbatim in Arabic – under 3-house-Rayner, you could go to jail in this country. But if I am a delusional atheist and I slag Christianity – nothing but applause and congrats.
Ask your MP to write to Ms Rayner and put this question to her. Do let us see her response please.
Okay – that’s a good idea.
Quite so. Although Muslim is an overarching definition of a concept, it is not a monolithic religion. No shortage of fighting between sects within it, after all.
Yes, I remember news reports a few years back when Sunni Muslims threw hand grenades into a Shia Muslim mosque during their Friday prayer service, somewhere in the Islamic world. Or was it the other way round?
Quite so. Applying existing laws could work wonders in so many areas, not just discrimination against Muslims. Of course this would leave the politicians with little to pontificate about, lawyers with less work to do, newspapers with less news to report, and the police would have to actually do some work. NGOs and QUANGOs would scrabble to maintain their relevance. The electorate would be not so easily distracted by promises of ‘new laws’.
You could also argue that the ‘definition’ would become embedded in public life – so the definition of discrimination, applying to just one group, is in itself discriminatory.
So Keep the Law Equal and Simple perhaps?
Which existing laws do you wish to see applied, and to what?
Almost anything since we joined the Common Market and started our journey towards Napoleonic Law, plus Tony Blair?
“Applying existing laws could work wonders in so many areas”
I am just wondering what existing laws you are referring to – I presume laws relating to speech and “discrimination”?
Equality before the law was an ancient and respected principle but the introduction of “protected characteristics” by the risibly named Equalities Act was the death knell of that idea. A Blairism naturally. I hope Satan is even now stoking up the fires of hell in anticipation of Tony’s arrival there.
The “chilling effect” is the intention. All part of the desperate attempt to avoid the obvious – mass immigration has been bad for this country and multiculturalism is nonsense.
I am not sure what existing laws are being referred to, but IMO most laws concerning speech need to be repealed and not replaced.
I just can’t grasp why socialists are so twisted.
I think the idea of being able to perfect the world or make it a better place is quite attractive and then people get carried away
I think the world is already pretty ok, the fact of our continuance as a species is proof enough. Why they think their ideas are superior is a mystery considering every experiment with their insane ideology has resulted in complete failure. But I suppose anyone who thinks they can control every aspect of existence, including the weather in normal circumstances would result in them being committed to an insane asylum.
Yes it seems pretty nuts to me. It’s common to think that human life has improved since humans began – personally I think this is true, overall. In more recent times some may argue that it has improved in some ways and got worse in others, or maybe got worse in almost every way. The reasons for this improvement are doubtless complex and views will differ wildly – and I think the “problems” start where people attribute improvement to structured thinking imposed on others by wise people, rather than the wisdom of crowds or luck. They then fixate on finding more of these “wise improvements”.
I agree that human life has improved, as one commenter wrote a caption for the painting “The Kansas City Spirit” by Norman Rockwell and John Atherton: “The world is a better place… because of the White Man”.
Love that picture!
They think they can perfect us and world. But in order to do that they have to get rid of humanity as it is. As George Watson points out in his The Lost Literature of Socialism, the socialists’ great innovation is extermination of whole populations to make the world a better place!!!
There’s no solid historical evidence that the figure called Mohammed (570-632 AD) existed. The Hadith and Quran were compiled in the 8th century, at least 100 years after the supposed prophet’s death. Likewise, the Sira, the Ibn Ishaq biography. All were compiled from fragmentary desert and tribal traditions, and all involved major purgations of false and forged material. Never mind. The muslim world accepts the Quran and Hadith as holy writ, and the Sira as an accurate record of the prophet’s life. He was born in AD 570, began to experience visitations from the angel Gabriel at the age of forty, consummated his marriage to the 9-year old Aisha in 622 (when he was 52), and in 624 personally supervised the beheading of the entire male population of the Jewish Qurayzah tribe, and the enslavement of its women and girls. The prophet of God the muslim world believes in was therefore a paedophile homicidal maniac. Will it be Islamophiobic to say so?
EP 63. FREE SPEECH IS DEAD IN THE UK
https://therealnormalpodcast.buzzsprout.com/1268768/episodes/17715179-ep-63-free-speech-is-dead-in-the-uk
This week we talk about the dwindling free speech freedoms of the UK under Two-Tier-Kier’s Labour government. The Flag wars in Birmingham. The history of Master and Commander. The massacres of Christians in Africa. Culture Club and listener emails. Enjoy and PLEASE leave us a ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ review!
iTunes: https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-real-normal/id1528841200
Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4TvMounXNnJPuycMbn3kj7?si=f52f87b1ed244547
“Fiyaz Mughal, the founder of the Tell Mama organisation which monitors anti-Muslim hate incidents, is leading a campaign [ called Keep the Law Equal ]…”. This will later turn out to mean “Keep Sharia Law Equal to British Law”.
He rightly says he has “worked with” police, but fails to mention that it was the sterling investigative work by the British Police Force which exposed EVERY “HATE CRIME” INCIDENT recorded by “Tell Mama” as FALSE!
A few years ago, the media were full of tales of Roving Gangs of Vicious White Men Prowling the Streets, attacking Muslim Babies in Prams, Ripping Off their mothers’ headscarves, and spreading White Terror amongst the helpless, innocent Muslim communities, quaking & trembling with fear. All these tales were provided by Muslims ringing up the “Tell Mama” hotline to report Fake Hate Crimes, all encouraged by their imams.
The whole thing is a cringeworthy farce. And now the perpetrator is changing his tune in a chameleon fashion, pretending to object to blasphemy laws, like a Fox in a Henhouse. Please do not be taken in, people.
Has anyone delved into how she financed her 800k second home?
Once again the failure to implement adequate legislation is answered with more legislation or is this to secure the Muslim vote. If the latter then it’s too late they’ve got their own party.
Last night on Patrick Christies show on GB news a woman called Khadija khan explained the problem. The new Islamophobia laws would stop people discussing the abuse of women and girls because it wants to separate religion from culture. She argues that you cannot separate the two things and that the abuse (misogyny, forced marriage, female genital mutilation, honour killing etc) all emanates from the religion of Islam. She also accuses politicians of pandering to Muslims to get votes, and being prepared to allow this to continue, and with this new definition of Islamophobia we would no longer be allowed to discuss these very serious issues. Effectively we would be SILENCED and the abuse swept under the carpet.