In Britain, Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, along with Liberal Democrats leader Vince Cable, are the poster boys for this year’s “Islamophobia Awareness Month” a yearly campaign, which has been running under the leadership of Islamist group Muslim Engagement and Development (MEND), since 2012.
“We have to drive out racism in any form in our society,” said Corbyn – whose own Labour party has never been more anti-Semitic and who considers Hamas and Hezbollah terrorists his “friends”. The message came wrapped in a propaganda video he stars in for the campaign. “Islamophobia,” he continued, “is a terrible thing, causes terrible hurt and terrible pain”.
“I greatly welcome the contribution that MEND is making to raise awareness of this issue and mobilise people in the political world and elsewhere to fight Islamophobia”, Cable adds in the video.
Here are two leaders of British political opposition parties, virtually genuflecting to MEND, a group that was recently described, as “Islamists masquerading as civil libertarians”.
Freedom of speech is under attack in Britain.
Sharia blasphemy law is allowed to be practiced in the UK.
British MP asked the prime minister Why Everyone can criticize Christianity but not Islam.
“When people make fun of Christianity in this country, it rightly turns the other cheek. When a young gymnast, Louis Smith, makes fun of another religion [Islam]…he is hounded on Twitter by the media and suspended by his association.”
Conservative MP Charles Walker says he “no longer understands the rules” on freedom of speech and religion.
Why does opposing jihad mass murder and Sharia oppression of women, gays, and other groups make one “notorious”? Why does it get one stigmatized with the pejorative label “Islamophobe”? Is there really a distinction between sound and legitimate criticism of Islam and jihad and “Islamophobia”? Is there a way for thoughtful opponents of jihad terror to avoid charges of “Islamophobia”? What are the pitfalls of charging critics of jihad terror with “Islamophobia”?
Find out the answers to these questions and more in my new book Confessions of an Islamophobe, out next week. Preorder your copy here now.
This is why I call the Daily Mail the worst paper in the Western world: it reports with unusual accuracy about jihad plots and attacks, but then it turns around and vilifies anyone and everyone who actually opposes jihad terror. Geert Wilders and I have been its targets in the past, and now it’s Pamela Geller.
Look at all the qualifiers in the Daily Mail headline: yes, an ISIS recruit plotted to behead Pamela Geller, but she is “Islamophobic,” and her “Prophet” Muhammad cartoon contest was “offensive.” So you can see how she had it coming, eh, Daily Mail?
The Daily Mail follows the universal establishment media practice of referring to Muhammad as “Prophet Muhammad,” as if he were everyone’s prophet now. Well, he isn’t, and the actual name of the event was the Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon Contest. Its purpose was not to be “offensive,” but to take a stand against violent intimidation, and to show that at least some people in the West will not be silenced by bullying.
We were standing for the freedom of speech, and the Daily Mail calls that “offensive.”
“Rovinski, of Warwick, Rhode Island, testified against Wright, telling jurors that Wright said Geller ‘deserved to be beheaded’ because she insulted Mohammad.”
Apparently the Daily Mail agrees with them.
The Daily Mail is a key indication of why we are in such a fix in the West today.
Source: for MORE