Fears mounting over free speech as Labour plans to define Islamophobia - "The Policy Exchange think-tank has said Labour's working group should be suspended, warning an official definition of Islamophobia would 'almost certainly turbocharge cancel culture'. After a review by Whitehall troubleshooter Baroness Casey found public bodies covered up evidence about Asian grooming gangs 'for fear of appearing racist', Policy Exchange said Labour's measures 'would have made exposing the grooming scandal even harder and slower'."
Of course, on reddit people were claiming that the article provided no evidence for the claim in the headline. So much for media literacy - left wingers can't even read and understand articles, much less get the "subtext"
University staff face punishment if they breach Labour’s Islamophobia definition - "University staff and students will face disciplinary action if they breach Labour’s new definition of Islamophobia, a cross-party group of peers has warned. More than 30 peers have written to the working group responsible for the new definition to warn that the proposals risk having a “chilling effect” on free speech... The peers cited the case of Sir Trevor Phillips, who was suspended by Labour for Islamophobia in 2020 after the party adopted a non-statutory definition drawn up by an all party parliamentary group jointly headed by Wes Streeting. They said: “The fact that your definition will be ‘non-statutory’ does not mean it will not have a chilling effect on free speech, particularly if it enjoys the stamp of government approval and various organisations feel obliged to embed it in their equity, diversity and inclusion policies, as well as workplace training course. “Our principal concern is that if your Working Group comes up with a definition and it is taken up by the Government it will have a chilling effect on free speech and exacerbate community tensions... Among the signatories to the letter are Lord Young, the director of the Free Speech Union; Lord Frost, the former cabinet minister; Baroness Hoey, the former Labour MP; and Baroness Deech, the chair of the Lords Appointments Commission... “The definition, if it is taken up, will have wide-ranging implications for what people in public life, and those who work for public bodies, or attend schools or universities, are able to say about Muslims and the religion of Islam, with – inevitably – serious repercussions for those who fall foul of the definition, even if those repercussions fall short of criminal prosecution. “Indeed, the Home Secretary has said she would like to see more ‘Non-Crime Hate Incidents’ (NCHIs) recorded against people guilty of ‘Islamophobia’ and, presumably, she will urge the police to operationalise your definition, once it’s been taken up by the Government, as part of the NCHI regime.”"
Of course, on reddit people were claiming that the Daily Mail's article could not be trusted and there was nothing to worry about. Guess the experts (who were mentioned in the Daily Mail article too, which also mentioned other experts) didn't get the memo
The Blogs: UK islamophobia definition: Blasphemy law in drag - "If there’s one thing British politicians hate more than telling the truth, it’s letting anyone else do it. In the end, the UK Labour government—in what might be the most refined form of cowardice since Neville Chamberlain waved his paper in the air—has crossed the Rubicon and unveiled its grand initiative to define “Islamophobia.” Not as a legal concept based on clear incitement, mind you, but as a pseudo-theological construct dressed up in civil service PowerPoint. A working group led by Dominic Grieve KC (who apparently moonlights as the Archbishop of Woke) is drawing up a non‑statutory definition of “anti‑Muslim hatred.” The public consultation closes July 20, and the stakes couldn’t be higher; not for Muslims, who deserve equal protection under the law like everyone else; but for everyone else, who might soon find that articulating facts about Islamism, communal crime, or religious misogyny is now treated as a hate offence. One thing should be clear: this isn’t about protecting Muslims from abuse, which any decent society already does under existing hate-crime law. This is about ring-fencing a set of ideas from scrutiny. It is about criminalizing dissent and dressing it up as anti-racism. And it is no accident that Labour adopted the APPG’s definition (which literally frames “expressions of Muslimness” as untouchable) while simultaneously refusing to adopt the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism in full without footnotes and caveats. You’re allowed to hate Jews, just not too obviously. But question grooming gangs or Islamic schools and prepare for disciplinary proceedings. This is the old blasphemy law, rebooted through the language of diversity consultants. One can only marvel at the consistency of British elites: they won’t stop Hezbollah flags in London, but they’ll happily police your adjectives on Twitter. Say “Islamist” too many times, and a Home Office intern will slide into your inbox. The secular state is no longer secular; it is sharia-adjacent, appeasement-coded, and deeply unserious about liberty. Meanwhile, Angela Rayner is backpedalling like a clown on a unicycle. After supporting this definition in full Labour-speak, think “centering lived experiences” and “tackling systemic racism,” she now insists it won’t amount to censorship. Of course not. And Hamas Ministry of Information is a press freedom NGO. This is not some fringe initiative. It is a foundational moment in the UK’s cultural decay. The definition will shape police guidance, university codes, corporate HR manuals, and every institution terrified of being called racist by an anonymous DEI officer with a clipboard and zero intellectual curiosity. Speech will die not by legislation but by memo. Ask yourself: in a world where British Jews are attacked in broad daylight, where police stand idle at anti-Israel marches, and where synagogues require fortress-level security, why is the government spending taxpayer money defining microaggressions against Islam? Why is it that every measure to “protect minorities” ends up protecting one minority alone? Britain isn’t sleepwalking into censorship. It’s marching proudly, accompanied by the soft clinking of virtue-signalling glassware at Westminster receptions. And here’s the punchline: you can still criticize Judaism, Zionism, Israel, and every rabbi from here to Jerusalem with state-sanctioned gusto. But call out jihadism or quote Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and you’re a racist. That’s not anti-racism. That’s surrender. Islam is not a race. Ideas don’t need protection—people do. And a free society doesn’t hand out fatwas in bureaucratic prose."
Of course, on reddit people were claiming that the Islamophobia definition mirrored the IHRA anti-Semitism definition, so there were no issues here
Why Britain’s elites give a free pass to Islamism - "The BBC’s recent documentary about Gaza has been revealed to be thinly veiled pro-Hamas propaganda. The Beeb’s decision to produce and air it reaffirms a disturbing truth: the British establishment is incapable of reckoning with Islamism... When it comes to Islamism, the British establishment has an undeniable blind spot. Instead of facing up to the threat of radical Islam, the liberal media and state agencies have hidden behind a façade of multicultural tolerance. Anyone who dares criticise Islam or its extremist offshoots is tarred as a far-right ‘Islamophobe’. This has reached a point where the UK now has quasi-blapshemy laws protecting Islam from criticism. Earlier this month, a man was attacked with a knife outside the Turkish consulate in London while he was burning a Koran. The attacker was arrested – but so was the man he had attacked. Just a week before, another man was not only arrested in Manchester for setting fire to a Koran, but the police then also released a picture of his face, his full name and even the street he lives on. This was despite the obvious risk of violence this could subject him to. The message was clear: ‘Islamophobia’ may not technically be illegal in the UK – yet – but if you criticise Islam, you may still find yourself in trouble with the law as well as a violent mob. For the British establishment, Islam is treated less as a religion and more a racial badge. To attack Islamist extremism is supposedly to attack a ‘brown-skinned’ community – a notion that smothers debate and only deepens divides between Muslims and non-Muslims. Apparently, to criticise political Islam – or heaven forbid, the religion of Islam itself – is to engage in crude ‘populism’. Concern about Islamism is considered the preserve of a low-brow, working-class sentiment. Anyone who raises the alarm must be little more than an uneducated, racist rabble-rouser. In turn, many in the elite see themselves as the protectors of Muslims, as shielding them from the hordes of neo-fascists in the working classes (even though these are largely imaginary). Others fear being seen as Islamophobic. This is exactly what allowed horrors like the grooming gangs to go on for so long. It has also let Islamist terror attacks unfold unchallenged. No doubt this same patronising view of Muslims contributed to the BBC’s screw-ups over that Gaza documentary. In the Beeb’s black-and-white worldview, Muslims must always be the victims. Even if those Muslims might be members of Hamas, which is waging a genocidal, anti-Semitic war against Israel. A society that refuses to recognise the dangers of radical Islam will struggle to protect its citizens from the consequences – whether that’s terror attacks or the shutting down of free speech by mob rule. The free pass we’ve given to Islamism must be revoked immediately."
Rupert Lowe MP on X - "This is Britain. We do not have blasphemy laws, and we must not have blasphemy laws. Burning the Quran is not a crime. Free speech means protecting the right to offend, including Islam. More politicians should have the courage to say so."
Adnan Hussain MP on X - "What Rupert actually wants to say is:- Free speech means protecting the right to offend Muslims."
Rupert Lowe MP on X - "Yes, I do believe the right to offend Muslims must be protected. The right to offend anyone must be protected."
Adnan Hussain MP on X - "It's deeply worrying, Rupert, that you invest so much energy into advocating for the right to offend a minority community. Free speech comes with limitations and protections, clearly you're not happy with those protections extending to a Muslim minority, why?"
Rupert Lowe MP on X - "The establishment’s total unwillingness to criticise Islam in any form has paved the way for your absurd attitude. It's arrogant, it's entitled, it's sinister. The approach has to change."
Isn't it Islamophobic to perpetuate the stereotype that Muslims do not understand British values like free speech? Adnan Hussain should be jailed
Robert Jenrick on X - "In February a man was arrested for allegedly burning a Quran. Now he’s been charged with intent to cause distress ‘against the religious institution of Islam’. Parliament abolished blasphemy laws in 2008. They mustn’t be reintroduced by the back-door."
Tom Harwood on X - "In no liberal society should ‘causing distress to a religious institution’ be a crime."
Matt Ridley on X - "It took centuries to abolish the crime of blasphemy and many suffered in the cause. We are decivilising."
Jonatan Pallesen on X - "Here in Denmark we finally cancelled the blasphemy law in 2017. That was the final remnant, and we were heading towards a fully free and liberal society. Then in 2023 we made the Quran law, going backwards again."
UK Stabbing Suspect Pleads Muslim | Babylon Bee - ""I'm afraid there's little that can be done at this point," said lead Crown Prosecutor Aleister Burlington. "We thought we had all the evidence needed to convict the suspect, but pleading ‘Muslim' is an airtight defense. Had we realized he was a Muslim, we would have never brought the charges in the first place. We were under the impression that this was a horribly violent stabbing and weren't aware that it was a traditional, ceremonial Islamic stabbing." The suspect's barrister emphasized the importance of entering the plea. "There's simply no way my client can be charged with a crime," said Ellington Bedfordshire. "At the time he committed the stabbing, he was a practicing Muslim, thereby absolving him of any guilt in the incident. His inherent Muslimness weighed heavily into his decision to go stabbing in the first place. By entering our plea of ‘Muslim,' it is our hope that this case will be thrown out altogether, as it should. Muslim." At publishing time, the UK court had apologized to the suspect and instead brought charges against the stabbing victim for getting in the way of the attacker's knife."
Lord Talbot on X - "What did I say a few days ago? Islam is using labour until it is strong enough to dump them and take over. Well, here they are saying it themselves."
RadioGenoa on X - "A Muslim attacks a British couple just because they eat pork. They also want to dictate to us what we should eat or drink. For Keir Starmer problem in England is Islamophobia."
Islamist gangs are taking over Britain’s jails – and radicalising criminals - "The young man grinning in the sun is Baz Hockton – a troubled and dangerous individual with a string of convictions. Not long after this seaside trip, he will be jailed for stabbing two men with a knife. Then, while in custody in January 2020, having converted to Islam, he carried out the first terrorist attack within the walls of a British prison, at the high-security Whitemoor jail, in Cambridgeshire. The events of that day, when Hockton and terrorist plotter Brusthom Ziamani strapped on fake suicide belts, armed themselves with makeshift metallic weapons and tried to murder a prison officer, represented a huge wake-up call for the authorities about the threat posed by Islamist extremists in jail. But, in some quarters at least, not enough appears to have been done to counter it... Frankland, a high-security prison where Abedi is serving life for 22 murders, has become “overrun” with Islamist gangs who threaten to attack or kill other prisoners if they don’t join up. HMP Frankland is by no means an isolated case. Former inmates have spoken about a war in a number of prisons between Islamist gangs and rival groups involving acts of grotesque violence. The skirmishes are not as frequent now, but it’s not because authorities have seized back control. Instead it is said to be because the Islamist gangs have won the power battle, with many inmates converting to their side and leaving others who will not increasingly fearful for their safety. “It’s a real problem, very complex and it won’t go away any time soon,” says Steve Gillan, general secretary of the Prison Officers’ Association (POA). “Some prisoners are intimidated into joining a gang. Others do it for protection, because there’s safety in numbers, or they think there’s a status to be in a Muslim gang – they think they’ll be treated better, always allowed to go to prayers on a Friday [for example], and have better food in the evenings at Ramadan.”... Gary*, who served a long sentence at a number of jails across the country, says Islamist gangs have now established a “foothold” in the six Category A, high-security prisons, as well as several others. “They are feared. They pretty much run the prisons,” he says. “A lot of them have merged with drug gangs – being able to sell drugs and accumulate wealth is a very powerful thing in the prison system.” Gary describes how some prisoners are pressured into joining Islamist gangs while others, who are prepared to convert, are welcomed in – even those, in the hierarchy of criminals, considered to be the lowest of the low: sex offenders. “In Islam, if you convert, all your previous sins are washed away. The Muslim gangs stood by that principle for people in for sex offences. It fractured the culture of the prison system. I was there watching it for years on end, it was obvious it was going to turn into a big problem,” he says. In 2022, a disturbing report by Jonathan Hall KC, the reviewer of anti-terrorism legislation, found that faith-based self-segregation by prisoners had provided a “fertile base for violent Islamist activity” in which attacks on non-Muslim inmates, staff and the public were “encouraged”. The report said charismatic or violent prisoners acted as “self-styled emirs” to radicalise the wider Muslim prison population, exerting control through a network of “enforcers” over access to prayer meetings, the prison kitchens and showers. In some cases, Sharia courts had been set up in jails to rule on matters of Islamic law, delivering punishments such as flogging. Hall said the prison authorities had “underappreciated” the impact of Islamist groups for too long, partly due to a tendency to regard Islam as a “no-go area”. Gillan, whose union represents over 30,000 prison officers and other staff, agrees: “A lot of staff backed off because they were frightened of being accused of racism. They were a wee bit cautious about identifying individuals for fear of reprisals,” though he adds that officers are now more confident to call it out, thanks to greater awareness of the problem, improved training and more intelligence sharing... a lawyer visiting clients at HMP Frankland – which houses some of the most dangerous inmates in the country and possesses one of the country’s three separation centres – claimed prisoners had been placed in segregation for their own protection after standing up to Islamist gangs."
Islam Channel watched by millions facing Ofcom investigation - "Britain’s most successful Muslim TV channel has been accused of glorifying violent Islamist movements, inciting hostility against the West and portraying jihadist causes in a sympathetic light. The Islam Channel is now facing an investigation by the broadcasting regulator over claims it breaches rules on impartiality and incites extremism. A complaint submitted to Ofcom accuses the channel of repeatedly broadcasting material praising the Oct 7 attacks and comparing Israel to the Nazis. It is also accused of giving airtime to extremists, failing to maintain impartiality in its political coverage and misleading viewers over key facts. The channel – which claims it has two million viewers daily and is estimated by official figures to be watched by 60 per cent of British Muslims – could be penalised over its content if an Ofcom investigation finds against it. A report highlighting multiple alleged breaches of the Broadcasting Code by the Islam Channel between November 2024 and January 2025, has been submitted to the regulator by Dr Taj Hargey, the director of the Oxford Institute for British Islam. Dr Hargey, regarded as a liberal thinker within British Islam, claims the channel consistently portrays Islam as under siege from an oppressive West; presents Hamas, Iran and Islamist Jihadi groups as legitimate “resistance” movements against Western secular liberal democracies; and fails to include the Israeli government or pro-Israel speakers in its coverage of Gaza. He also accuses it of promoting a narrow Wahhabi-Salafi version of Islam while excluding Muslims belonging to Shiah, Sufi and Ahmadi denominations, as well as secular liberal Muslims. Dr Hargey alleges that the Islam Channel repeatedly presents a one-sided view of events. He claims that its news programme, Islam Channel News, used the sentencing of Southport killer Axel Rudakubana to attack the UK government’s counter-terrorism programme Prevent while omitting the fact that he was in possession of an Al-Qaeda training manual. Dr Hargey also points to the channel’s alleged attempt to champion convicted terrorist Aafia Siddiqui as an innocent Muslim victim of the “War on Islam”, in a documentary broadcast in January, without mentioning her links to Al-Qaeda and her attempts to kill US officers... The Channel’s presenters and guests are accused of promoting an unquestioning view of radical Islam, with no mention of the violation of women’s rights under the current Taliban regime in Afghanistan or Iran’s theocracy. Dr Hargey also accuses the channel of failing to mention the Oct 7 Hamas attacks during a programme on the Gaza conflict in December and of repeating claims that Israeli forces target journalists without allowing the Israeli government or Israeli Defence Forces to respond. In the letter of complaint to Ofcom, Dr Hargey alleges: “The station’s persistent lack of impartiality, spread of harmful rhetoric, and engagement in political advocacy appear to directly contravene the principles set out in the Broadcasting Code.” The Islam Channel was founded in 2004 by businessman Mohamed Harrath, who was granted refugee status by the UK in 2000 after fleeing Tunisia, where he had set up the Tunisian Islamic Front to provide what he said was non-violent opposition to Ben Ali’s dictatorship. Mr Harrath was arrested in South Africa on terrorism charges in 2010, after the Tunisian authorities added him to Interpol’s Red Notice list. He was later released without charge and accused the Tunisians of using Interpol to harass him. In a Christmas Day broadcast last year, Mr Harrath compared the situation of Muslims in Britain to that of the Jews in 1930s Germany under the rise of the Nazis, stating: “There is a targeting of the Muslim community. . . There is another way to learn from history. From the Jewish community. They were well off in Germany and they thought nothing would happen. . . We have to fight. We have to fight back.”... The channel was awarded the Responsible Media of the Year award at the British Muslim Awards in 2014 and 2015. But it has also been found to have been sanctioned by Ofcom in the past for “serious and repeated” breaches of the Broadcasting Code... In November 2010, the channel was censured by Ofcom for allowing presenters to advocate marital rape and domestic abuse. In September 2023, Ofcom found that its one-hour documentary The Andinia Plan amounted to hate speech against Jewish people. Dr Hargey told The Telegraph: “Islam Channel epitomises hideous Islamic fundamentalism in the UK. It purports to represent British Muslims, but its sectarian ideology is nothing but an insidious initiative to mainstream Muslim extremism and fanaticism in this country. “It revels in their ‘them and us’ narrative, inhibiting any effective social cohesion. Ofcom needs to take decisive action to mitigate the channel’s incendiary language and partisan guests who do not subscribe to traditional British values.”"
Lion of London Bridge, Roy Larner 'on anti-terror watch list' - "The 'Lion of London Bridge' who was hailed a hero for fighting off knife-wielding jihadis during the terror attack said he is on an anti-terror watch list after being contacted by far-right anti-Islam supporters. Roy Larner, 49, screamed, 'f*** you, I'm Millwall,' as he took on the knife murderers when they struck in June 2017 while he was enjoying a pint in the Black & Blue restaurant in Borough Market, in Southwark, south-east London. But Mr Larner has since been placed on the Government's Prevent programme over fears that he could become an extremist after he was contacted by far-right yobs. He has had to attend de-radicalisation classes and police are monitoring him"
Keywords: de-radicalization classes
Basil the Great on X - "🚨☪️FORMER LABOUR MP SAYS: "A time will come that there will be a law in place all over the world that there can be no disrespect to our prophet" They want a Blasphemy Law for Islam. They say it openly in Public. They must be stopped."
Islamophobia training cancelled over teachers’ anti-Semitic posts - "A training session for psychotherapists on tackling Islamophobia was cancelled after three academics leading the event were accused of posting anti-Semitic material on social media. Messages posted or shared by the trainers on X described Israel as a Nazi state and referred to “a Zionism problem” in healthcare institutions. The event, organised by the professional body for psychotherapists, had been intended to help therapists and wellbeing practitioners become aware of the impact of Islamophobia on mental health. But the British Association of Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapies (BABCP) cancelled the session after complaints about the three trainers prompted an internal investigation into their social media activities. The speakers at the May 15 event were to have been Ghazala Mir, a professor of health equity and inclusion at the University of Leeds; Dr Tarek Younis, senior lecturer in psychology at Middlesex University. An investigation was launched by the BABCP after UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI), a legal charity, brought a number of their social media posts to its attention. These included Prof Mir allegedly sharing posts which claimed that the “Zionist movement” placed “assets” from the state of Israel into the House of Lords and making references to “Zionist paymasters”. Her posts also describe Israel as responsible for “genocide and apartheid”, both terms which are regarded as anti-Semitic by many Jews. She also shared posts that equated Zionism with Nazism and described Israel as a Nazi state, a comparison regarded as anti-Semitic as defined by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance. On Oct 1 2024, Prof Mir reposted a tweet expressing “pure joy” at an Iranian missile attack against Israel In May 2024, Dr Younis wrote on X that “our healthcare institutions have a Zionism problem” and stated the following month: “Our work isn’t done until all Zionists are removed from our institutions and are shamed, alongside all racists, into nothingness”. Dr Younis has also compared Zionists to fascists in a social media post. Earlier this year Dr Younis wrote a report on the psychological impact of Palestinian dispossession, which was submitted in support of the legal bid to have the ban on the terror group Hamas lifted in the UK."
Kent news: Christian patient forced out of hospital chapel by 'Muslim doctors' - "A retired author was left outraged after being told to move by "a group of Muslim men" in a hospital chapel. Graham Wanstall said he was visiting Kent and Canterbury Hospital as a patient when he went to the facility's chapel for a moment of reflection and prayer. However, not long after he had been in the chapel, a group of men entered and immediately asked him to move "very abruptly". Wanstall, from Dover, said he felt "belittled and humiliated" by the men who he said were doctors at the hospital... Wanstall has said that while he has been liaising with the hospital, he is calling for separate spaces for Muslims to practice their faith. He told GB News: "The signage says chapel, and when you go in, it's just a chapel. There's a cross, maybe a picture of Christ, an altar and chairs. "There are no signs of any other religion, and it doesn't say multi-faith room. But I understand, unofficially, they use it because they haven't got their own room. "I don't go around preaching to anybody about my faith, but I strongly object to being interfered with when I'm in a Christian chapel and when I'm effectively thrown out and asked to move, I strongly object to that."
Right-wing YouTuber charged over video criticising Muslim councillor - "Craig Houston, who has nearly 70,000 subscribers, was arrested on Friday after a report of an online communication offence. The charge is understood to relate to a video in which Houston criticised Soryia Siddique, a Labour member for Glasgow city council’s Southside Central ward... In his original video — which has not been removed from YouTube — Houston accused Siddque of “fanning” racism by complaining that ethnic minorities were underrepresented, saying this was “bonkers”... In a clip for ElectHer, a campaign group which helps women get into politics, she said she had been surprised by how “pale, male and stale” the environment she entered was."
Right-wing YouTuber charged over video criticising Muslim councillor : r/unitedkingdom - "Imagine if I described the politics of a council as black, female, and whale.. I wonder how quickly the police would come knocking?"
If you call out a "minority"'s racism and sexism, you need to be jailed