The Labour Government has pledged a national inquiry into the scandal of the Pakistani-Muslim rape gangs, but just how serious is it about the issue? Not enough to shelve its plans to bring in an ‘Islamophobia’ definition to be used across government and the public sector that will make it considerably more difficult to discuss those very crimes – and just who is perpetrating them.
The definition is currently being drawn up in private by a Working Group convened by Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner, whose five-member committee is exclusively composed of Muslims, save for the Chair Dominic Grieve. Grieve, the wettest of Tory Remainers, was the Vice-Chair of the APPG on British Muslims which came up with a definition of ‘Islamophobia’ in 2018 that called the discussion of “grooming gangs” an example of “anti-Muslim racism”.
The Working Group has been tasked with coming up with a definition “which is reflective of a wide range of perspectives and priorities for British Muslims” (52% of whom would criminalise depictions of the Prophet Muhammad, lest we forget, according to polling by the Henry Jackson Society).
While having no statutory force, i.e., it won’t create a new law against Islamophobia, the definition will carry significant weight, with the intention that it be rolled out across government and the public sector. The APPG’s definition was adopted by the Labour Party, the Lib Dems, the Greens, the Scottish Conservative Party and by numerous local authorities, including those that witnessed some of
Discussion
Comments
This week across the site:
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.
Favouring one ethnic group in this way is a recipe for unintended consequences.
Reform and the Tories should announce that they sill scrap this ‘guidance’ after the next election.
Labour has a choice to make: is it on the side of justice for grooming gang victims, or Muslims’ supposed hurt feelings?
Grooming gangs victims and free speech.
Government conducted in secrecy and indecent haste, seen across a range of fundamental areas recently, is not good government.
I look forward to an APPG on Kafirphobia.
I for one am confused as to what Islamaphobia actually is and who suffers from this fear. Or is it just another modern bastardisation of words to create a false word? If we were to apply this concept to Christianity, would it be against Catholic, Church of England or any other sect of that religion. Would a Catholic be able to make a joke about a Methodist and not breach the law, but a Jew not be able to make the same joke? In other words, as an atheist would I be banned from criticising Shias, but a Sunni would free to criticise that branch of his religion as a false version. We should equally always be told in reports such as these, reports on rape gangs, terrorist attacks etc which branch of Islam the individual is beholden to, so we can see any trends in behaviour.
This link to the original Hamas charter https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/hamas-covenant-full-text include justification from some Hadith sources on reported sayings of the prophet. Although since sanitised for public consumption the Islamic justification for Hamas action is clear, and clearly Hamas and Iranian leadership follow this. They are meant to follow the words and decisions of the prophet (and hence also justification for grooming etc). This is also what has made Israel,s never again, a current now. If these issues cannot be highlighted and challenged i.e that the belief system itself is behind it, then we are in big trouble. Clearly jihad or struggle in the UK has moved on from its first stage of living peaceably. It’s well into it’s 2nd stage.
Muslims are not an ethnic group. Islam is one of the world religions and has followers of all kinds of ethnic backgrounds across all countries of the world.
This week’s podcast includes a very disturbing comment by a guest – the gang rape enquiry should be led by a non-Brit! Such is the penetration of the sick ideology into the highest levels.
Disgusting woman, especially because she’s yet another example of somebody who’s a traitor to her own sex. But we’re surrounded by them to varying degrees, aren’t we? The enablers, the ‘flying monkeys’…They even dwell on this site;
”The council chief executive who reportedly tried to bury an asylum seeker’s r*pe charge…
Her name is Natalie Brahma-Pearl.
She is a career civil servant who previously held senior posts in Horsham and Crawley councils before being appointed to Portsmouth in 2023.
Her annual taxpayer-funded salary?
Between £149,099 and £164,794, according to the council’s website.
According to reports, Brahma-Pearl personally phoned individual councillors and warned them not to speak publicly about the charge—insisting it would breach the council’s code of conduct.
In reality, it didn’t.
A council spokesman later all but admitted the effort to suppress the news was political—citing “community tensions”.
The exact same excuse authorities used in places like Rochdale, Telford and Bradford to cover-up grooming abuse.
In light Baroness Casey’s audit, you’d expect resignations to follow.”
https://x.com/StarkNakedBrief/status/1936831988654104958
Same woman. Apparently preventing violence against women means covering up actual violence against women, thereby protecting the perps because ‘community tensions’;
”Natalie Brahma-Pearl, Chief Executive of Portsmouth City Council said:
“It is… Read more »
That (Portsmouth City Council policies) seems to be the same kind of scam I already wrote about yesterday: Brahma-Pearl is committed to ignoring actual violence against women (or anybody else, for that matter) which is evidenced by the fact that she doesn’t plan to tackle violent crimes. She wants to fight a culture war against all men instead (transform harmful cultures […] around masculinity) and uses the violent crimes she’d determined to ignore as pretext for that.
It’s also pretty certain that her harmful culture is exclusively one of white people.
I’m also wondering what this harmful culture precisely is. The one I’m aware of considers violence against women dishonourable/ unmanly and thus, generally off-limits, while violence against men is perfectly acceptable.
“Labour has a choice to make: is it on the side of justice for grooming gang victims, or Muslims’ supposed hurt feelings?”
Oh, Labour made that choice many years ago: in order to secure the Muslim vote, they were quite happy to overlook the rape gangs.
This time they want to take it further and make it a criminal offense to talk about it.
It seems that people who try to close down debate on this issue are supporters of child rape.
The term denial of this issue is another attempt at deflection, it is not denial it is outright support for these activities and why should people be labelled as such that their false prophet was in fact, by today’s standards, a child molester.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant. Open discussion about Islam, including criticism and satire would be the best way of stopping “Islamophobia.”
But of course, Muslims are not known for tolerance or turning the other cheek when their faith is challenged.
I predict that an Islamophobia “law” will cause quite an electoral backlash.
It won’t protect Labour’s Block Vote; the separate “communities” they have imported and nurtured now have the option of Sectarian MPs … and that will increase.
Meanwhile, the British (non-Muslim) working class will abandon the Party in favour of Reform.
Yes but Reform are going to give us a massive “Robert The Bruce” ( see Braveheart ) moment ! Already doubling down on Tommy Robinson !!..
Except that Farage has said he will not reverse immigration and that immigration is the “lifeblood of the UK”. I thought stopping and reversing mass immigration was the reason Reform was gaining ground?
Of course, we are still waiting for Farage to fulfil his promise to turn Reform from Nigel Farage Ltd into a party controlled by the members.