Some Christians believe homosexuality is a sin – get over it - spiked - "This is the news that Labour lefties and gay-rights activists are shocked – shocked, I tell you! – that Labour leader Keir Starmer visited a Christian church that adheres to Christian doctrine on sexual matters. On Good Friday, Starmer swung by Jesus House in Brent in London and praised its mostly black congregation for the good works they have done in helping to roll out the Covid vaccine and running the local food bank. Instantly the identitarian set went into meltdown, because Jesus House is home to Christians who, get this, actually believe what it says in the Bible. Pink News freaked out, as it always does. Starmer should not be mingling with ‘notorious’ homophobes, it said. The Labour Campaign for LGBT+ Rights said Starmer’s visit to Jesus House was ‘unacceptable’. Owen Jones slammed Starmer for associating with a ‘rampantly homophobic’ church. This is the same Owen Jones who spent the past five years as a prominent supporter of Jeremy Corbyn, who frequently met with hardcore Islamists and called Hamas his ‘friends’. If Jones is shocked by black Christians in north London who write letters to newspapers opposing same-sex marriage, he is going to collapse when he hears what Hamas does to gay people. (It kills them.) This is literally what Jesus House is being hauled over the coals for: opposing same-sex marriage. Just look at the Guardian’s headline: ‘Keir Starmer criticised over visit to church where pastor opposed same-sex marriage.’ By the same token Starmer should also never set foot in a Catholic Church, given the Vatican recently reiterated its hostility to same-sex marriage. (The church cannot bless same-sex unions, because God ‘does not bless sin’, it said. Ouch.) Or a mosque, for that matter. Although it will of course be a cold day in the hell that Jesus House thinks is populated by gay people before leftists and identitarians criticise someone like Starmer for meeting Muslims who disapprove of homosexuality. The only standards these people have are double standards... Starmer eventually apologised for his visit to Jesus House. The spineless one also took down the video of the visit, which showed him meeting black Christians who have done some great work in their local community. They’re the wrong kind of blacks in the eyes of the woke scolds; shove them down the memory hole... We need more tolerance in society. But tolerance doesn’t mean nodding along with everyone’s views or lifestyles. That’s moral relativism, not tolerance. What it means is that Jesus House can think what it wants but it must also tolerate the existence of homosexuality and gay culture because it operates in a free society. And it means politicians will frequently meet with individuals and groups whose views they disapprove of because we live in a pluralistic society in which all sorts of outlooks must be allowed to flourish. There was nothing wrong with Starmer’s visit to Jesus House. It’s his apology that was immoral, and which potentially sets a dangerous precedent."
From 2021. Time to ban Christianity for homophobia, and crack down on "anti-Muslim hatred"
Nick Dixon on X - "This is hilarious. Dominic Grieve says everyone in the Working Group who came up with the new definition of so-called ‘anti-Muslim hatred’ all agreed it would do no harm…and they were all Muslims!"
Imtiaz Mahmood on X - "Christopher Hitchens predicted in 2009 that the term ‘Islamophobia’ would eventually be used to criminalize any speech that is critical of Islam. The whole concept of ‘Islamophobia’ is about implementing Sharia blasphemy laws in the West. - @realMaalouf"
The good and bad news about Labour’s leaked social cohesion strategy | The Spectator - "the new strategy is clear-eyed that Islamism – responsible for three-quarters of the police’s counter-terror workload and 94 per cent of all terrorist deaths in the last quarter-century – is the country’s greatest extremist threat. And it recognises Islamism’s institutional strength... A section entitled “resetting the social contract” makes clear that “those who come here must make a genuine effort to integrate into and engage with our shared way of life” and must speak good English, as almost a tenth of the non-white population do not: “the ability to use and understand our shared language should be a fundamental basis for participating in society and an expectation of those who wish to call the UK home.” Perhaps the same principle could be extended to Green Party election leaflets?... The risk, of course, is that the bad things in the strategy happen, and the good ones do not. As one colleague put it, the document reads like “Morgan McSweeney’s last hurrah.” That underlines that there is likely to be significant pushback from the left against some of the proposals. The Government is unstable and has a record of policy reversals. If Starmer falls, Prime Minister Angela Rayner and Communities Secretary Wajid Khan are unlikely to take the same view. And at the operational level, the strategy suffers from the classic delusion that any objective can be achieved by setting up new boards and committees. These will almost certainly end up stocked with the same identity-politics activists, woolly-minded councillors and forty-watt policemen who helped bring about the mess we are in now. Previous efforts at resets, including by Tony Blair’s government, failed for the same reason. As the saying goes, personnel is policy. The creation of an “anti-Muslim hostility” tsar, with his or her government megaphone, constantly finding tendentious new examples of “hostility,” constantly pressuring for new restrictions, constantly present on Radio 4, could alone cancel out a significant part of the good which the strategy’s other policies would do."
Can the report's authors be prosecuted for anti-Muslim hatred?
Wall Street Apes on X - "Criticism of Islam is now effectively illegal in the UK
“Today is a dark day for the UK. Labour have made a move that doesn't just undermine free speech. It entirely removes it in an unprecedented way The only chance of Islam reforming was through scrutiny, debate, and pressure from the government, and now Labour have made even having this conversation potentially unlawful using this definition, prejudicial stereotyping of Muslims and treating them as a collective group defined by fixed and negative characteristics with the intention of encouraging hatred against them, irrespective of their actual opinions, beliefs, or actions as individuals. It has removed the ability to not just robustly debate Islam, but even criticise individual Muslims, irrelevant of their behaviour. This unbelievably clever wording means any negative view of Islam or indeed individual Muslims can now be silenced as stereotyping from a place of prejudice and make any criticism of Islamic ideology illegal as it would be treating Muslims as a collective. I've been working all day to find a way round, and there is none as if those thresholds fail. There is always the possibility of being seen to be encouraging hate, as it is impossible to prove that wasn't your intention as it is entirely in the eyes of someone else. It is now impossible to even in a respectful or intellectual manner, discuss any negative aspect of Islamic ideology or behaviour of any Muslim without the risk of persecution. This is a stance I never thought Labour would go as far as implementing, and especially whilst singling out only Islam. This offers no protections to any other religious group and places Islam, not just on a pedestal, but in some cases above the law. If I find a video like I often do of a Muslim expressing entirely unacceptable views, that in some way happens to align with the Quran or Islamic ideology, I cannot share this or discuss it in a negative light without appearing to be spreading hostility. Coming from a place of prejudice or indeed highlighting fixed and negative characteristics of said ideology, I will take some time to decide where I go from here, but my aim has only ever been to share what I consider to be the truth and my personal perspective and not to break the law, and I'm not sure that is possible to do anymore. Well played Labour well played. You haven't just bought in de facto blasphemy laws. You have gone a whole lot further. If it wasn't terrifying, it would be impressive, but it is a reminder to us all how fragile freedom is and how quickly it can be taken away as it has been today.”"
The war on dogs is barking mad - spiked - "Has Britain become ‘too dog-friendly’? Apparently, even as war rages in Iran and an energy crisis bites at home, the question of whether too many public spaces are welcoming to dogs is one that BBC News felt it had to address this week. ‘From coffee shops, restaurants and retailers… dog-friendly spaces are becoming easy to come by’, opens a news report from BBC Wales. ‘But people who are allergic to dogs, or afraid of them, say that the rise of these dog-friendly spaces is a concern’, the reporter continues... as more than a few people have pointed out on social media, there could be more to the BBC’s story than a concern for cynophobes. It could, some have suggested, be yet another reflection of the growing influence of Islam in the UK – a religion that considers dogs to be impure. This might sound like a bit of a stretch, but the link is not entirely tenuous. Indeed, the UK government itself has been leading the anti-dog discourse, seemingly on behalf of British Muslims. Earlier this year, when the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) outlined how it planned to make the English countryside ‘less white’, it claimed that dogs are one of the main impediments to ethnic-minority Britons enjoying rural England. ‘A lot of Muslims find dogs very difficult’, a Labour Party adviser and advocate of the policy told GB News. Nor has DEFRA been the only state body with dogs in its crosshairs... Camden Council in London has also proposed banning dogs outright, leashed and unleashed, from several of the parks under its control. It was surely only a matter of time before the culture warriors came for man’s best friend. After all, everything else that the British people love and cherish, from football to the national flag to the local pub, has long been considered fair game. Still, if the powers-that-be think Britons will give up their dogs without a fight, then they really must be barking mad."
Drive to ban 'racist' dogs from the Welsh countryside to make the outdoors more 'inclusive' - "Labour-run Wales has been told to ban dogs from parts of the countryside to help make the outdoors 'anti-racist'. The devolved administration has vowed to end racism in the country by 2030 and ensure 'all areas' of public life are transformed. According to a report funded by the Welsh government to help steer its 'anti-racist' policy, dog-free zones should be set up to make outdoor areas more inclusive... Others include creating more urban allotments where people can grow their own food and handing out grants and subsidies to students, members of ethnic minorities and asylum seekers to help them 'commit more to environment and climate change issues'. The taxpayer-funded report has been widely slated online and was described by Welsh Tory leader Andrew RT Davies as 'virtual signalling nonsense'. 'This kind of outdated virtue signalling nonsense is completely out of touch with the needs of the people of Wales,' he told the Telegraph. 'Labour is stuck on yesterday's thinking, the kind that is being roundly rejected globally. Time to turf them out.' On the basis of reports provided to date, the Welsh Government has concluded that ethnic minorities face 'barriers' to the outdoors created by 'exclusions and racism'. The reason why dog-free areas would help tackle racism is not explained in the report, which will be used by the government to 'support policy teams' that are 'developing and implementing' Wales' anti-racist plans. Climate Cymru BAME was set up by Climate Cymru, a larger environmental campaign group made up of 370 organisations from across Wales. Climate Cymru BAME consists of around 20 members made up of students and professionals who have interest in environmental preservation and protection, who work with North Wales Africa Society (NWAS), Sub Sahara Advisory Board (SSAP) and the Northwest Wales Climate Action Group. A separate set of recommendations submitted by the NWAS also called for 'dog-free areas'. It said that during one of its focus groups, 'one black African female stated that she feels unsafe with the presence of dogs'. Others also kept 'seeing dog fouling on the floor', the report added. The NWAS report said that barriers to outdoor activities include the perception that growing food in gardens or allotments is 'dominated by middle-aged white women'. Its authors also informed the Welsh government that people from ethnic minorities were upset about the 'low quality' of local green spaces. One person complained that 'the green spaces are not respected in areas where there is a bigger population of ethnic minority people'. Other problems flagged included lack of public transport to non-urban green spaces and poor air quality in towns and cities. The report also found that some BAME who provided evidence had 'concerns of the lack of understanding and relationships by the wider white population particularly in rural areas'. It added there were 'concerns of the lack of understanding and relationships by the wider white population particularly in rural areas, from personal experiences'."
Eyal Yakoby on X - "Convicted terrorist Shahid Butt, who is currently favored to win the race for Birmingham MP in the UK: “Don't take Christians and Jews as your friends; non-believers cannot be trusted. Stick with the Muslims.” The UK is committing suicide."
If you criticise him, that's Islamophobia
Michael Deacon: The Islamists are winning - "On the evening of July 7, 2005, Tony Blair sought to reassure a shattered nation with the following promise. The terrorists, he vowed, would never win. “When they try to intimidate us, we will not be intimidated,” declared the then prime minister. “When they seek to change our country or our way of life by these methods, we will not be changed.” Stirring words. Sadly, however, they proved to be flatly untrue. Two decades later, it’s becoming ever clearer that the terrorists are indeed winning, that we are indeed intimidated, and that they have indeed succeeded in changing our country and our way of life. And if anyone doubts it, let me point out that we are about to pass the fifth anniversary of one of the most contemptible episodes in modern British history: the driving from public life of the Batley schoolteacher. In March 2021, a Religious Studies teacher in West Yorkshire was said to have shown his pupils a caricature of the Prophet Muhammad during a class discussion. After furious protests and death threats, the teacher and his family were forced into hiding – where they remain to this day. Five whole years later. What the teacher did may have been unwise. But it wasn’t illegal. So why was an innocent man deprived of both his livelihood and his liberty? The answer is as simple as it is shameful. No, it’s not – or not primarily – to do with political correctness. It’s to do, above all, with fear. Whatever they may claim, the truth is that our elites, from politics to policing, are pursuing a policy of spineless appeasement towards Islamist extremists – because they’re utterly petrified of what will happen if they don’t... The lesson, for the people of Britain, is that we must obey the rules of a foreign religion, or else. Which is why I say the terrorists are winning. The aim of terrorism is not just to kill. It’s to gain and exert power – through fear of further terrorism. And it’s working. Our elites, it seems, will do almost anything to avoid arousing the ire of Islamist fanatics – because they remember not only 7/7, but also the murder of Lee Rigby, the Manchester Arena bombing, the 2017 Parsons Green train bombing, the 2017 Westminster attack, the London Bridge attacks of both 2017 and 2019, the murder of Sir David Amess, the attack on the Manchester synagogue… And no doubt, at the time of the protests against the Batley teacher, they were panicking about a possible repeat of what had happened in France, less than six months earlier. In October 2020, during a lesson about freedom of expression, a schoolteacher named Samuel Paty had shown his class a caricature of Muhammad. Ten days later, after word of his transgression had spread, an enraged Islamist beheaded him in the street. So, in the desperate hope of preventing more bombings or beheadings, our feeble powers-that-be perpetually pander and placate. What else can we conclude, when we see a man dragged through the courts for setting light to a Qur’an, or Israeli football fans being banned from Birmingham, or schools in the North of England being warned that children’s drawings could be deemed blasphemous under Islamic law? Such an approach, however, is not just humiliating. It’s counter-productive. Just ask Sir Salman Rushdie. “This is quite simply a lesson we learn in the school playground,” he said in 2012. “If you appease the bully, you make sure that he will bully you some more. Not less. It doesn’t solve the problem. It makes the problem worse.” Every child knows this. Shame so many politicians don’t."
Row over ‘Islamic prayers’ at Church of England primary school - "A Church of England school is at the centre of a row after claims that children were asked to participate in a Muslim prayer. Richard Tice, the deputy Reform UK leader, has written to Dame Sarah Mullally, the Archbishop of Canterbury, over allegations that a primary school in his Lincolnshire constituency encouraged seven-year-old pupils to kneel and bow their heads in the style of an Islamic prayer. Mr Tice received a complaint from a parent in his Boston and Skegness constituency last week, who claimed that seven-year-old pupils were “coerced, manipulated and cajoled” into the act “despite none of the children in the classroom being of the Islamic faith”. The father claimed his seven-year-old daughter’s class was shown a video of people kneeling on prayer mats in the direction of Mecca and reciting a prayer to Allah during a religious education lesson last Wednesday, before being told to “have a go” themselves. He said he was shocked when he was putting his daughter to bed last week and she said: “We did prayers to Allah yesterday.”... a different Church of England primary school invited a Muslim speaker who compared the war in Gaza to the Holocaust to teach pupils how to pray to Allah. Mark Khadim Jackson, a white Muslim convert, spoke to pupils aged seven and eight at Chester-le-Street Church of England school, in Co Durham"
If you object to living under Sharia Law, that's anti-Muslim hatred
Time to abolish Church of England schools to prevent Theocracy
Dr. Maalouf on X - "There are over 500 mosques in London, but they chose to pray on the grounds of Westminster Abbey, the most sacred site in the Anglican Church. Why?"
Is public prayer un-British? - "“Too many are too polite to say this,” Timothy wrote. “But mass ritual prayer in public spaces is an act of domination. Perform these rituals in mosques if you wish. But they are not welcome in our public places and shared institutions.” While he was not suggesting everybody at Trafalgar Square was an Islamist, he continued, “the domination of public spaces is straight from the Islamist playbook.” He said the event was “an act of domination and division” and “shouldn’t happen again”... Public expressions of faith tend to receive a cool reception. A YouGov poll in 2012 found that 67 per cent of Britons thought religion should be a personal matter with no place in public life. More recent polling is more divided: a 2024 survey by the Institute for the Impact of Faith in Life found 42 per cent saw religion in the workplace as positive, against 41 per cent who disagreed. Views also vary sharply by faith: 80 per cent of Jewish respondents said Britain is a Christian country, compared with 64 per cent of Christians, 63 per cent of Hindus and just 38 per cent of Muslims. In 2012 there was a similar row in Spitalfields, when hundreds of Muslim men assembled in the street for the Salat al-Jummah (Friday prayer) at the same time as Bideford council lost a High Court battle over the right to begin meetings with Christian prayer. The ongoing success of the Trafalgar Square event reflects a growing confidence among Muslims in Britain about public displays of faith. Since 2021, the Premier League has allowed breaks during Ramadan so Muslim footballers can end their fast with liquids and energy gels once the sun sets. Nadhim Zahawi, the former Conservative chancellor, who was raised in a Muslim household, said prayer should be done in private. “It makes me feel deeply uncomfortable that fellow Muslims feel they have to do this in the middle of the street,” he told journalist Harry Cole. “The place for God is inside the house of worship. Don’t bring it into politics. Don’t make it into something that is a symbol of defiance.”"
"Christians have prayed publicly in the past, so it's okay for Muslims to do that today. But of course, if Christians do that today, that's theocracy"
Some Islamic sources say you shouldn't pray in public, too. Obviously they're Islamophobic
Claire Coutinho on X - "A hijab used to hide the abuse of 10-year-old Sara Sharif at the hands of her father. Women forced into cousin marriages while the NHS praised its ‘benefits’. Children groomed by gangs while police and social workers looked the other way. In each of these cases public services turned a blind eye to the harm of women and girls because they were scared of being called Islamophobic. Labour’s Islamophobia definition will make this worse. If we put one group on a pedestal and make it harder for public services to do their jobs, then we will only foster more inequality and resentment."
Liza Rosen on X - "British Parliament stunned by the following speech of a female MP refusing to bow down to the narrative about Islam benefiting and enriching British society. Please listen to the powerful speech and share it to remind everyone that women and girls deserve protection from Islam’s norms and practices."
Justin on X - "There can be no doubt in anyones mind that Labour are doing nothng to protect women and girls. This week another example: 40m GBP gifted to protect mosques. 1m GBP from the home office for extra policing for women and girls. Mosques are not under serious or constant attack. The occiasional idiot. More churches and Synogoges are attacked than Mosques. Thats beyond a joke."
Labour won’t say it, so I will: Islam has an anti-Semitism problem - "Anti-Semitism is a disease in the soul of British Islam today. The religion I grew up in was one of gentleness and deep spirituality. But the first thing I noticed when I came to Britain from East Africa was the fractured nature of ethnic minority communities here. In Kenya – where I grew up – Sikhs, Hindus and Muslims shared religious events together, ate together, and regularly socialised together. In the England of 1983, though, I came to realise that identity politics was the norm and each community viewed the other with suspicion and hostility. This sectarian tendency has worsened over the past four decades, and one of the nastiest expressions is the anti-Semitism that has infected British Islam – spread by Islamists and their useful idiots. Merchants of hate have repeatedly used the Palestinian issue as a recruiting tool to encourage hostility to Jews, while successive British politicians have over decades failed to challenge and call out the anti-Semitism within the small but significant parts of my religious community. The reason is for fear of being called “divisive” or “racist” or “Islamophobic”. As someone who set up Tell MAMA, the first government-backed national monitoring centre on anti-Muslim hate, I can tell you that there is nothing “Islamophobic” about calling out Jew hate; in fact, after six national anti-Semitic incidents in the last five weeks, we are all duty bound to call out what we see. I have known for years that Islamist campaigners and activists have used support for Palestine as a rallying call to promote a set of repugnant and poisonous views. This has included calls for the Islamic takeover of Israel and the subjugation of Jews. We are now seeing the decades-long effects of a supine unwillingness to challenge Muslim anti-Semitism for fear of a community backlash, or because of a passive unwillingness to “rock the boat”. With little challenge to these narratives, it was only time before anti-Semitism became a reality on the streets of our country. Another indicator of the depth of anti-Semitism has been the range of conspiracy theories that have percolated among my co-religionists. One of these conspiracy theories is the idea that Mossad spreads disinformation within Muslim communities to control them. Or consider the mad idea about 9/11 and 7/7 being the work of “Jews”, and the notion that terror attacks by Muslim perpetrators were conducted by Israel to smear Muslims. You would have expected that such conspiracies would have fizzled out some decades ago, but in the two decades of working with Muslim communities I have had these ideas whispered to me, as though I was a “fellow brother in the fight against Israel”. Little did they realise that I thought that such people needed to be locked up. We have heard Sir Keir Starmer speak about the scourge of anti-Semitism, and the need for communities to stand with Britain’s Jews. I applaud and commend him for these public calls. However, have you ever heard Starmer speak about the other elephant in the room? The giant one that has “Muslim anti-Semitism” written across it? Given the problems affecting Labour, and the real possibility of a range of independents being elected who see their world through the prism of Palestine, I suspect that Starmer will continue to dodge the obvious. He can’t say it, but I will. Whilst the vast majority of Muslims are an asset to our country, unless we have a root and branch rejection of Muslim anti-Semitism, calls for commiserations with British Jews are futile. Jews deserve much better than that; they deserve the truth."
