That “Working Definition” Of “Islamophobia” Just Won’t Work

In Britain, That “Working Definition” Of “Islamophobia” Just Won’t Work

The problem is that the Muslims invented a word, and then invented a definition for it.
Now we need to clarify an actual legal definition.



There has been heated debate in Great Britain over the “working definition” of “Islamophobia” that has been presented for the government’s adoption by the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on British Muslims. The Independent describes the opposition of British police chiefs here:

“Police leaders have raised concerns that a proposed definition of Islamophobia will undermine counter-terror operations and threaten freedom of speech.

“In a letter to the prime minister, the head of the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) said the change could “undermine many elements of counterterrorism powers and policies” including port stops, bans on terrorist groups and propaganda, and the legal duty requiring schools, councils, and the NHS to report suspected extremism.

“NPCC chair Martin Hewitt said: “We take all reports of hate crime very seriously and will investigate them thoroughly; however, we have some concerns about the proposed definition of ‘Islamophobia’ made by the All-Party Parliamentary Group [APPG] on British Muslims.

“We are concerned that the definition is too broad as currently drafted, could cause confusion for officers enforcing it and could be used to challenge legitimate free speech on the historical or theological actions of Islamic states.

“There is also a risk it could also undermine counterterrorism powers, which seek to tackle extremism or prevent terrorism.

“It is important that any definition of anti-Muslim hostility is widely consulted on and has support across the Muslim community.”

“After a six-month inquiry taking evidence from Muslim organisations, legal experts, academics, MPs and other groups, the APPG called on the government to adopt the definition:

“Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness.”

The indispensable word here, the word intended to elicit horror and guilt, and to shut down all criticism of Islam and of Muslims, is “racism.” It does not matter that Islam is not a race but a faith, as has been quietly, insistently, repeatedly pointed out. Muslim groups pay no heed; they don’t think they should be asked to explain exactly what they mean when they invoke that fright-word “racism.” Nor do they explain that bizarre neologism “Muslimness.”

 

An important point to point out here is the government is going to use this definition to criminalize free speech.

It will basically shutdown political discourse and make the citizens too afraid to say anything about the topic, for fear of possibly being arrested.

The muslim population has grown to a large enough level that they're already demanding laws to criminalize anything that insults their religion, just like the laws that exist in nearly all muslim countries.

Most of the Left would be all too happy to give that to them.

(Clearly a double standard when looking back at how the Left treated Christianity in the 70s and 80s)

 

What is the proposed definition?
Without it, there is little to be said.

 

I think we have to wait and see.
Whatever it is, it will be legal.
Personally I think it will disappear in all but childish chatter.

To give it a meaning, they had to change the meaning of the word Phobia.

Of course there is still no such thing as Christianophobia Buddhistophobia Jewophobia. Polishophobia, Germanophobia, etc etc etcophobia

 

Once the law passes there will likely be no going back. That's how these things typically work.
(It's hard to bring a law to the floor to repeal a prior law)

"Waiting and seeing" is not a prudent strategy.

 

Considering it will require legal input, I think it will blow up on the Muslims.

The more they bring stuff into court, the more openings to expose the religion.

 

Unfortunately no. Look at how Holocaust denial laws have played out in Germany.
Lawyers have been arrested in the court room defending clients.

There are some old threads in this forum about that, if they're still around.

 

I think we will have a different verdict than in Germany.

To many people are learning what the religion is about.

 

This is the UK we are talking about.

I don't think they really believe in freedom.
They've been conditioned to let government decide what's good for them and what the truth should be.

 

Crap, that's right, I got caught up in the moment.

 

When you consider that the publics reaction to the islamic terrorist attack in 2017 was staged by the UK Government, what credibility can anyone give to a definition of islamophobia created by that government.
A definition of a word is only someone elses opinion.
An islamic definition of islamophobia will always be a victims definition in comparison with a non islamic
definition. Perhaps, whilst theyre at it, they should create a definition of dhimmitude and taqiyaa.
After all, the islamic dregs of humanity need to be appeased, dont they......
In any case, the UK is totally fked, like Europe, and will be totally islamic in years to come.
https://gellerreport.com/2019/05/bo...s-muslim-responses-to-terrorist-attacks.html/
Oh BTW...
Ramadan bombathon update:
islamic attacks: 106
deaths: 519

 

Personally, I like the term "Islamo-fascists." It has a lot more justification than Islamophobia.

 

And the term Islamophobia has turned into an "Answer all questions".
If you don't know anything about the subject, scream Islamophobia.
If you don't want to answer the question truthfully, scream Islamophobia.

And so on and so on and so on.

 

yeah, not free to condemn random Muslims for supporting some alleged terrorist ideology with no idea if that Muslim you victimized indeed supports it.

 

Islam is a terrorist ideology.
Sure not all muslims are terrorist, but just belonging to the cult should make them guilty by association.

If I see someone in a KKK costume, sure, he/she might be the nicest person in the world, but just belonging to that cult will draw no respect from me.

 

a Muslim is a free country, does it of their own free will.
Nobody is holding a sword over their head.

 

You go source that one from your nazi sites you like to visit.

Last time I checked, it's not your opinion that counts who or what is on the terrorist watch lists.

 

LOLOLOL

Dude.

Islam and Nazism are very similar, they fought together in ww2.
They both hate the Jews.
They were both friends to each other.
Hitler was fascinated with Islam.

Now you are claiming Nazi sites,
You, a person who, every other post is crapping on the Jews
You are the authority on the Nazi sites here.
I have never been to one, but it seems you know all about them.

Please show me a Nazi site that sh-ts on Muslims.
I am curious to read it.

 

That's not entirely true. Muslims have been killed in Europe for leaving Islam, there have been some documented cases of that.

At the very least they are likely to be shunned by all their family members and their community. And face danger if they go back to the country of their parents to visit their relatives, if the word gets out.

I do overall agree with you though.

 

The second best selling book in the Middle East, after the Koran, is Mein Kampf.

(Or at least it was for many years not that long ago, not sure if that's still the case now)

 

This is what progressives do when they wish to avoid discussing the issues within one of their 'rainbow coalition' groups.

They create a term which is synonymous with 'racist', then start hurling it at anyone with a divergent view. This not only allows them to bypass and change the topic, but also allows them to taint their target and delegitimize them as well.

 

Hitler was fascinated with Islam, not for the religion,
But for the control it had on the masses.
"They make the perfect soldier, wanting to die in battle.'

 

The Spanish learned a few things from Islam too, which they applied during the Inquisition, and then not long after the subjugation of the Aztecs.

The Spanish were finished driving out the muslims by 1492. The Spanish Inquisition started in 1478. The Spanish conquest of the Aztecs occurred in 1519.

There were probably a lot of Arab genes in the Spanish population by that time because the muslims had taken Spanish women (often by force). One wealthy man might have a harem of 8 native women from that area.

 

The following article calls you an Islamophobic. lol

https://www.thenational.ae/second-world-war-record-of-muslims-is-worth-marking-1.462418

Islamophobic and other hostile voices in the West often mischaracterise the Arab and Muslim participation in the war as largely or entirely pro-Nazi, while Arab and Muslim societies tend to focus on anti-colonial struggles at the expense of the Second World War.

The record is a complex, mixed and nuanced one, but the overarching fact is that Arab and Muslim involvement in the war was overwhelmingly on the Allied side, and was a significant factor in fighting on the ground. The overwhelming majority joined the cause voluntarily, despite British and French colonialism.

Moroccans estimate that 1,700 of their countrymen participated in the D-Day invasion as part of the Free French Army. This only hints at the scale of North African participation in Allied fighting.

The majority of the French army in North Africa in 1939 and 1940 were Arabs. In the French defeat of June 1940, about 5,400 Arab soldiers were killed fighting on the Allied side, and an estimated 60,000 Algerians, 18,000 Moroccans, 12,000 Tunisians and 90,000 other Muslims were captured by the Germans. It has been estimated that 233,000 North African Muslims were serving in the Free French Army in 1944, and that about 52 per cent of all its troops killed during the final year of the war were Muslims, mostly from North Africa.

 

This has absolutely nothing to do with what we were talking about
We know when Hitler raided N Africa, for oil, he had to fight Arabs and Muslims