(Tea Party 247) – In the middle of last month, the government of the UK refused “to adopt a working definition of ‘Islamophobia’ proposed by an all-party Parliamentary group.”
The proposed definition declared that “Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness.”
Now, Britain’s former “equality tsar” Trevor Phillips is warning that this definition of “Islamaphobia” is wrought with dangers.
Phillips, a former Labour politician and son of African-heritage migrants from British Guiana — now Guyana — who served as head of the Commission for Racial Equality (CRE) quango and the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) which succeeded it from 2003 to 2012, warned that the definition would “make it illegitimate to criticise anyone who uses the fact that they are a Muslim or defending Muslims to make it impossible to contest their point of view”.
The proposed definition of the inflammatory term was endorsed–no surprise here–by Sadiq Khan, the Muslim Mayor of London, whom President Trump recently referred to as a “stone cold loser.”
Jihad Watch sounds off:
Trump’s description had nothing to do with Khan being a Muslim, which as usual, Trump was presented to be “racist” for his accurate description of Khan. Under Khan’s leadership, London has morphed into a crime den, where Somalian parents are now sending their kids back to Somalia to avoid knife crime and where acid attacks have terrified the city, the most recent acid attack was on three people in two separate incidents by two people hidden under burqas.
The “Islamophobia” canard aims to shut down all criticism of Islam and offense to Muslims while shielding the human rights abuses by Muslims against unbelievers. “Islamophobia” instead paints Muslims as the victims, enabling their supremacy over disbelievers. All other religions and ideologies can be criticized but Islam. This sets the Sharia above democratic rights and freedoms. Not enough people question why more Muslims do not advocate for real victims and condemn their fellow coreligionists for widespread abuses instead of screaming the loathsome term “Islamophobia”. Instead, Muslim advocacy groups and leaders blame everyone else for their 1400 year aggression.
This is why Phillips is warning against the working definition of the word “Islamophobia.”
“You get a university or local authority to adopt this extremely vague, wide-ranging definition. Anyone who says something that could be presented as in any way related to Muslims can then be shouted down…Essentially they are told they are Islamophobic, that they are bringing the institution, council or Government department into disrepute under their employment contract. That makes them sackable.”
In other words, it will be the boy who cried Islamophobia.
Jihad Watch’s Christine Douglass-Williams has had the first-hand experience in this, in the obsessively “tolerant’ nation of Canada.
I was personally “sacked” by the Liberal Government of Canada for “Islamophobia” where CAIR-CAN (renamed the National Council of Canadian Muslims) was influential. Targeting other infidels for “islamophobia” will aggressively continue. It is high time that Western countries fully reject “Islamophobia” and replace it with “anti-Muslim bigotry”.
The United Nations has been strengthening its alliance with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, an alliance which Douglass-Williams declares is something that should cause Westner nations to pull from the UN.
“When citizens of a democracy visit Islamic countries, they are expected to show respect for the Sharia,” she says. “Sharia adherents on the other hand expect democracies to bow to the sharia once they immigrate to the West.”
“Islamophobia” initiatives cause divisions and confusion. Muslim lobbies do not accept “anti-Muslim bigotry” as an alternative because that phrase puts Muslims on par with everyone else. Such groups seek the supremacy of Islam.