Muslim historian: why Keir Starmer should NOT outlaw 'Islamophobia' | SpectatorTV
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 сен 2024
- 'One of the things that’s coming up over and over again is Islamophobia,’ says Keir Starmer in a campaign video, talking to Sadiq Khan. ‘We need to say over and over again that Islamophobia is intolerable… and I think there’s more we can do in government.' The video shows the London mayor nodding in agreement.
But - as Ed Husain, historian of Islam, tells our editor Fraser Nelson - it’s not the strategy they should be worrying about so much as the unintended consequences.
// SUBSCRIBE TO THE SPECTATOR
Get 12 issues for £12, plus a free £20 John Lewis/Waitrose voucher
www.spectator....
// FREE PODCASTS FROM THE SPECTATOR
Hear more from The Spectator's journalists on their podcasts, covering everything from the politics of the UK, US and China, to religion, literature, lifestyle and more.
www.spectator....
// FOLLOW US
/ spectator
/ officialspectator
/ the-spectator
/ spectator1828
/ thespectatormagazine
#politics #islam #labour
Would a law banning 'Islamophobia' be counterproductive Muslim integration?
how can you ban a phobia? all you can do is stop people discussing their 'phobia.'
The scriptures of Islam, the Quran, the hadith, the sharia (law), are counterproductive to Muslim integration. What is a law against an irrational fear of Islam going to do to affect that? The truth is that Muslims *_can't_* integrate into any society except one governed by sharia, and remain Muslim. That is the opinion of the scholars of Islam, the ultimate authority in Islam, the fiqh. Your guest has no standing with regard to Islam, his personal opinions are meaningless.
"Islamophobia" defines itself as an _irrational_ fear of Islam, who has that? Don't let your enemies define words for you and then make laws to restrict your speech.
Muslims do not want to be integrated.
This discussion is very relevant for all of Western Europe.
The (native) general public in Sweden is getting very tired of the "New Speak" laws aimed at protecting certain newly arrived and aggressively ethno-religiously oriented groups from any criticism.
I used to teach Swedish as a second language thirty years ago and then believed that integration (and gradual assimilation) was viewed as positive and possible by hosts and guests. Now three deacades later Sweden has increased its population by 25% and gone from a safe and well functioning, highly civilised society to a dangerous, malfunctioning and corrupt society. Sweden has payed a very high price for the hubris and ignorance of politicians on both sides and no amount of law fare against native citizens will succeed in covering up the resulting mess.
Islamophobia is not a thing. Rational fear of a group with incompatible cultural norms continuously eroding western values is both sane and unsurprising.
anti semitism is not a thing, its an intimidation tactic to avoid having reasonable conversation about the coordinated jewish influence
Do you actually personally know any Muslims?
@@AT-bq1kg as do you make it up as you go along...your hatred is visible. I'm not a muslim..I'm a Christian...I see your heart
@@ForWatching-uh6rz anti semitism is codified in the Muslim doctrine (Hadiths and Koran). Maybe Islam could be a new mental home for you?
Are your "western values" founded on Christianity or the Enlightenment?? If you say both you concede the Christian element.As the Muslim scholar said... most westerners don't understand Christianity
Reasonable risk aversion is not Islamophobia.
Blasphemy!
#ToxicMaleClimateDenierAlert
Control the language as they do. I call it islamoprudence. Nothing they can say. .
@@advocate1563 They can start calling any word racist, be real.
Nevertheless, nice idea, #islamoprudence.
Well done. 👍👍
Maybe it'll catch on.
I'm sick to the back death of islam
@@paulhickmott1770 same here mate
The silence of Muslims is what condemns them.
The ones shouting about Jews show that their speech would condemn them more.
What silence?
@@andrewsheppard3189hasbara bots
the silence of Jews is what condemns them....lets play tennis eh ...deuce
Exactly!!!
In 2024 we are considering a law to prevent criticism of a religion.
It's hard to believe our politicians can be so stupid and dishonest
It's hard to believe? They hate us, I think they've made that clear
They'll surprise you as to how stupid they can be. It's voters
Who keep putting them in office is the problem.
@@charliebrownie4158 or non voters, loads of people don't vote so we just end up with whoever could be bothered to
Not if they themselves are muslims seeking domination, see Kahn
*_Nothing_* is too stupid for Keir Starmer, it appears.
Branding the working class of this country as far right and potential 'Islamophobes' is a disgusting slur against us.
...but bearing in mind what a certain religion proclaims, entirely understandable.
Labour loathes the working class.
ISLAMOPHOBIA is a nonsense term.
Everybody take note. And here's the clue: PHOBIA which means IRRATIONAL FEAR. There is nothing irrational about fearing Islam. It's record speaks for itself.
And it's Holy principle of Dawah SHOULD be feared and STOPPED !
The Catholic phobia I was subjected in ulster
Just watch the thing. The guy is quite inspiring.(Writing as a practicing Catholic). I have muslim friends who say similar things but this guy is very articulate. Islam is not the enemy. Islamic extremists are a bigger danger to muslims than they are to us.
What record?
@@tomk8729Here’s a threat from a non-extremist:
I am a juror for a major crime where the defendant points to a non-British law as the basis for claiming his innocence.
Are there millions in the UK just like this criminal?
I don’t feel threatened by the teachings of Jesus or Buddha or Gandhi but I do feel threatened by the teachings of Muhammad.
Not threatened by Jesus bringing the sword in the 2nd coming?
You need to actually read the bible, son.
@@adamp2426 irrelevant. To fear that is to believe the faith that teaches that future happening. Fearing the effect of the teachings of a human who incited his followers to hatred of and violence against non-believers is entirely different, and rational.
Ignorance ! have you actually talked to Muslims ?
@@adamp2426 don't read it out of context
@@inkipinki8468 Yes. Many. Of many types of subtypes. My approach has always been evidence based. Many are perfectly normal. As with all religions (including the political ones) there is a significant proportion of the tribe who see the world though one pattern, and by probing and questioning you can find out if they are safe or dangerous. See how they respond to facts and questioning. ... worth while beginning your journey by looking at founding documents. Start with the Skeptics Quoran. (note the other Skeptics services for other religions). Have a look aat the work of the revisionist scholoars of Isam. Have a read of current and world wars and genocides say, Tigray, Sudan (Darfur in particular) and ask for responses
The term ‘Islamaphobia’ was invented at the end of the 1970s by Iranian fundamentalists. Enough said surely?
thats not true😂, why do you make up stuff
the term anti semite was invented by Willhelm Marr......so what?
@meecha59 whom wasn't Jewish. See the difference?
@ForWatching-uh6rz it is true. See what i did there?
I see A difference but not a fundamental one..both weasel words..did your Iranians invent homophobic?
Ha. This guy is so far removed from Islamic teaching. But lets start with ending Apostasy Laws. Freedom to leave Islam is a basic human right.
Indeed. Freedom of religion also includes Freedom from religion
Well said!
Ed Hussain is always trying to paint a pretty picture of Islam. It's a form of jihad.
@@gregorytaylor9104 He wouldn't survive in a Muslim majority country.
@narendra62 This one is a so-called moderate but still sexist enough to make his girls cover their hair. Muslims should stay in muslim countries.
Being concerned about a violent ideology is not an irrational fear. It’s a common sense response to a dangerous situation.
Out of interest, who first coined the term Islamophobia, and then blew it up until it became a thing? To me, 30 million muslims in the west paints a very different story. As for the interview between Starmer and Khan, I nearly sicked up my dinner.
It isn't a phobia if the fear is rational.
Why does this intelligent Muslim link Far-Right with working class, which leads to the question, is he intelligent making such a link?
Was giving a million pounds for a Muslim War Memorial fair when other Veteran Groups have to raise funds themselves?
Trooper Bear
My thoughts exactly, and why does a man who comes across as so intelligent follow the religion of Muhammad? Has he not learned who Muhammad really and truly was, how he truly lived? Willful blindness?
Moslems should pay their respects to all the war dead at the same memorials where everyone else goes.
It is an outrage and favouritism towards Islam. There will be no war memorial for Atheists. If you go to Menin gate, you can see the names of a great many Muslim men who fought for the British in WW1 (You also see a great many Muslim names on the Merchant Navy Memorial at Tower Bridge). To have a separate memorial would be disparaging and divisive.
They weren’t fighting to promote the supremacy of Christianity. Why did they fight? For the love and supremacy of the British empire? Peer pressure? Or was there no alternative employment that paid as well?
Will there be a memorial for those who fought with the Japanese to end the British Raj … only to ultimately be surely replaced by a Japanese Raj?
Not just the Menin Gate, other Commonwealth Graves Commission Cemeteries too. The Indian government did not pay War Pensions to WW2 Veterans, except for those who volunteered from PoW camps to fight for the Japanese.
Because he just wants to blame it all on the “Shia” so that the bulk of the Jihadists can get away Scot free❕
Don't get mixed up, fear off Islam is not the same as hatred of Islam.
Yet again we are only allowed to frame this within the confines of how it affects other minority communities. We are never allowed to express what we want as british people, ever. God forbid anyone wants to try retain traditional christian british values - these are far right apparently - in your view literally hitler. We are getting sick of this - if people think continuing mass immigration while we have all these problems already is fine, then im afraid there is going to be one hell of a backlash.
Are we sitting ducks under Mullah Starmer❓
Discussion on this is utterly futile when we continue to import millions and millions of more muslims. The gall Fraser has to suddently bring this topic up when he himself claims that mass immigration is a total 100% unblemished good. Truly awful thinking.
There is a lot to fear from islam going from past and current history.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali criticise Islam a lot, she has been describe by ADL as islamaphobic!
No criticism of violent threats against her?
They think it is justified.
I wonder if we can have debate between James O’Brien and
Ayaan Hirsi Ali
And not to forget our own Salman Rushdie and the hiding in which he has been condemned to for writing❓
I don't follow every dictate of the ADL like all Liberal-Progressives they're
The sort who blindly follow those who would kill us. Obviously as they
Refuse to bring condemnation upon Rashid Tliab and Ilhan Omar as
Extremists it's all about them being Democrats being what stops them.
Does Sir Flipflopalot have a clue on anything?
He knows what a tool is. Women on the other hand.
Oh yes, his constant lying leaves a disturbing black hole about what he actually does believe. I doubt it’s good and I’m certain it’s radical.
Always a good question if it is idiology, ignorance (it would have to be willful in this case), rank stupidity, or machievellianism. He needs the votes, and has a party chock full of identitarian idiots, path of least resistence. I hope that currying favour with the muslim "community" will come back to bite Labour in the end. But there will be blasphemy laws and other such trouble before that comes around.
Is labour serious about anti-semitism?
We have a lot of room to criticise Zionism, but we are to have no room to criticise Islamist!11?
Zionist's are behind the mass Islamic invasion to the West.
Labour are modern day Nazi's
I was thinking of voting Labour over bread and butter issues, but seeing the effects of blasphemy laws in Pakistan, this is a red line for me that will push me to vote Reform.
Great Britain created Papisthan, and now it’s turn to make the creator Papisthan❕ Is that called “poetic justice”⁉️
@@gopalramanathan7062 No the Muslims in Pakistan created Pakistan, the British and Indians went along with it because it was easier.
Neither islamophobia nor antisemitism should be inherently illegal. Discrimination can reasonably be outlawed. But people must be free to vehemently disagree about religion.
Do you think antisemitism is merely a religious issue?
You think anti semitism is purely criticism of judaism? Wow
@@spm36 No. It can also be racism against ethnically Jewish people. But we should not have vague laws against antisemitic speech which don't clearly distinguish between the two.
People should be free to disagree with anything, not just religion. Banning speech because it offends people is the wrong way to go. The offended people should train instead to make rational arguments and defend themselves that way. There is antisemitism but it should not be used as a blanket ban on criticising the policies of Israel, otherwise its just the flip side of Islamophobia.
@@lumpyfishgravy No. I also think antisemitism can be a form of racism, since a person can be ethnically Jewish even if they’re not religious.
But in legislating against that racism, we must be careful not to also outlaw religious disagreement and criticism of Israel.
He wrote a very good book called Among The Mosques about how wide spread the teaching of radical Izlam is in the UK. The problem with moderate Mzlims like him is that they champion less radical Izlamic countries, but ignore the fact that in all Izlamic countries it's still illegal to be gay and women do not have equal rights. So although Palestinians will throw gay people of buildings, Qataris will just imprison them, like they have just done to British / Mexican citizen Manuel Guerrero and refused to give him his HIV medication.
Would Islamaphobia include pointing out that the Quran contains stories mis-copied from the Bible?
For example, in the Bible, in 1 Kings 10, it says the Queen of Sheba went to visit Solomon of her own free will. Jesus mentioned her favorably. But In the Quran, in Surah 27, it says Solomon sent a talking bird to her with a threatening letter demanding she come and submit. And while she was traveling, Solomon sent a jinn to steal her throne to play a trick on her. Would pointing out that this is a fairy story be a crime?
And of course, the Quran contains passages which are not fairy stories, but clear commands to use violence against those who oppose Islam, like Surah 8:12 which says to strike the necks of the unbelievers.
You seem to know too much about Islam that you're not supposed to know. That's the dictionary definition of an Islamophobe.
They want to go after people who have a fear?
"Islamophobia is intolerable, it can never, ever be justified ..." That may be true, but only to the extent that Naziphobia is intolerable and can never, ever be justified. I don't think Sir Keir has read the holy book.
R.I.P. Great Britain.
Terrible for us ALL!!... :(
The prophet wiped out all the Jews in Saudi Arabia
WHY ???
There was no "Saudi Arabia" at the time of the "Prophet" and Medina had a thriving Jewish community after the "Prophets' famous night journey on a flying donkey.
Because they were advocating “Islamophobia”❕
@@nuqwestr "Arabian Peninsula" was the right name there, yes.
They realised his preaching was the rehash of Judaeo Christian ,old and New Testaments, with recent Greek science and Arab savagery lies and Mafia profiteering.
@@nuqwestr You're right the name of the country "Saudi Arabia" did not exist, but the barbaric practices did exist in that part of the word and the psychotic inventor of this supremacist-political ideally was rather violent with jews, christians, zoroastrians and anyone who did not want to pay the Jizyia tax and let's remind ourselves that thousands of heads rolled to the ground soon after he arrived in Medina. So right from his arrival in Medina he became violent and the followers want to emulate him claiming he's a model to imitate. Imitation of violence over 1400 years has shown enough proofs that political Islam is dangerous.
If this man represented the prominent voice of the Muslim faith, then 99 percent of the problems would disappear.
His sycophantic über approach to Mohamed still smacks of emotional immaturity. This is what is frightening, such an erstwhile rational man being nevertheless captured by the Borg-like Islam.
At the end of the day he is still a promoter of Islam: the Quran being an inerrant moral guidebook and the behaviour of Mohamed as THE exemplar for mankind. It’s so unnerving given the content of the Quran and what Mohamed actually got up to.
It is the likes of Ridvan Aydemir, the ‘apostate prophet’ and Nuriyah Khan and Yasmine Mohamed and Ayaan Hirsi Ali that represent voices who champion the West.
All I heard was blah blah blah taqqiya, blah blah blah!
@i_wouldprefer_not_to1196
Taqqiya is a Shiite concept
As islamophobia doesn't exist how can you ban it?
It will be redefined so that it does exist. Just as racism has to redefined to avoid implicating the people who complain about it the most.
Keir Starmer is not an historian, he does not realise how what he is proposing will harm many muslims, and is totally against tolerance and reasonable debate. Then again he was a member of the Haldane society so open mindedness, and support for an open society is possibly not high on his world view…. be careful what you wish for.
4:48 In America the Islamic lobby is CAIR. "Council of American-Islamic Relations". They are funding, in part, some the campus demonstrations.
You can criticize Judaism and Christianity but you can’t criticize Islam? How exactly does that work?
The guy got off to a bad start when he said that the two world wars were fought for freedom and democracy, the causes of those catastrophic conflicts were complicated, but the first world war in particular was not fought for freedom and democracy.
Are we sure that The Spectator is a Conservative newspaper any more? Agnès Poirier's recent article in the Spectator did the UK down with very biased talking points. The UK thinks it is 50% Muslim. Is this because in Muslim Enclaves they report thinking that the UK is a Muslim country, in the 90%. It is not the native people of England that are deluded but our immigrants. She reports that we have an overly forgiving view of our history, while are neo Marxist Historians talk us down. Talks of overly harsh policies towards "asylum seekers" with the Rwanda Bill that has deported 1 person. Rwanda was always a smoke screen to hide complete inaction.
This weeks edition has Nick Robinson A BBC wokeriti jewel.
Antipathy has a place in everyday life. It's not problematic to be antipathetic towards bad things.
Why special treatment for Islam.
Votes.
Since I chose Christ I have been accused of being racist, homophobic, transphobic, xenophobic, and had people try to destroy my business with reviews stating false accusations. Is this law going to protect me as a Christian as well? Because currently it's open season on us Christians.
exactly not mention the xystiwn almost set alight in speakers corner but this nob not saying anything about thst
That phrase he keeps using, “Let one thousand flowers bloom”. I can’t help but think of Mao’s similarly named campaign, which was just a ruse to flush out dissidents…
9:40 There was nothing about blasphemy, when Pakistan was created. Censorship has only recently come in relatively recently.
Yes, it was all sweetness and light, for well over 1000 years, especially around the Eastern Mediterranean. :)
If only all Muslims were as brave as Ed Husain.
How come thereare no claims about hinduphobia christophobia suhkiphobia buddhistphobia ? Why is the alleged phobia only about one group throughout europe?
"Millions of muslims died for Britain in the 1st and 2nd World Wars....." ????
When did this latest fiction occur and where, pray tell??
AFAIK, there were some colonial Muslim troops. Hardly ever used, and not in millions.
Two and half million Indian Muslim's fighting for the British empire's..
@@rashidrahman9673 Where, when?
Is this a serious question?
@@allovdem Was that a serious statement about those millions dead?
Yesterday I heard someone describe Keir Starmer as a "human windsock". God help us all if Starmer and co are able to bring this law in. But then the UK has been getting more and more like East Germany for a long time now. It is perfectly rational to fear something which represents an existential threat to western civilisation, as many have stated in this comments section.
Perhaps one should listen to Caroline Glick, JNS org explaining Islam, to get a balanced picture of current sentiment and the aims of what has been called radical Islam.
We're all equal, but some are more equal than others.
This is what happens when you have no integrity; you do what's expedient for yourself and your immediate interests.
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others. A proclamation by the pigs who control the government in the novel Animal Farm, by George Orwell .
What a terrifying couple and to think they’ll be in Government, leading the charge soon. God help us
It's literally like suggesting the Native Americans were "Anglophobic".
Ismaverse (or a similar portmanteau term) would be more to the point = justified distrust of militant -isms, including Islam-ISM.
Or are some people Civilizationphobic?
There are laws already in Britten against racism. We are free in the UK to critise any religion that should not be changed. That's the freedom we have in the UK
As usual you tube is warning me about my tone and manner. God how I hate them. I have RUclipsphobia and Starmerphobia. Muslims hate us except the money they get.
He'll saying anything to keep the Muslim vote. He won't protect women only places though. Says a lot about his character.
The general thrust of this is very reasonable. It's best not to state that millions of moslems died fighting for freedom in the World Wars. . In the First war the Ottomans were part of the German coalition. The Indian Army when deployed in both wars would have large numbers of moslems, although the majority were Hindu. As was correctly stated these troops were ""voluntary " in the sense that they were professional soldiers and not conscripts. There ideology would be professional and imperial rather than liberal.
The questioner is correct in the question he poses about the nature of the "mass " moslem electorate. The vast majority are migratory and deeply connected to their to their homelands. Their motives for moving to non moslem societies is purely economic and promotional . They are composed of the peasantry from Afro-Asia . Like poorer Europeans in the previous two centuries .They haven't moved to integrate into the society new lands . They take and strive to preserve their culture and their religion which are completely bound together. Hence their mind sets are colonial.
I also take issue with the speaker on the blasphemy laws . These haven't operated for at least centuries in the Uk if not much longer. The reasons moslems didn't enter European societies was that militarily. after the Middle Ages. they couldn't. force their way in although the Ottoman did establish imperial control over much of eastern Christian Europe.
There was no space or opportunity for poor moslems to move to European societies. until after the Second World War when it was legally possible to migrate. usually from colonial territory into the European. metropolitan centre. This coincided with a shortages of unskilled labour and the rise of welfare societies . The significance of NHS should never be underestimated or of other European health systems . None of these exist for the billions of poor moslems that live in moslem.
"There WAS a surge of Islamist feeling after the Iranian revolution"? That's either ignorance or a deliberate falsehood - "Islamist" (which most define as the type of political agitation done by extreme Muslims and governments in predominantly Muslim countries) and THAT has continued to the present day without the least interruption to the present day most especially since 11 Sept 2001, 7 July 2005 and 7 Oct 2023. Saying otherwise is ignorance or deception.
'My daughters wear hijab.' Do his sons cover themselves up too? Why is he not veiled up? Oh right, the rules of Islam are different for women.
A very honourable man doesn't want laws to protect his ideology (Islam). I'm a Christian and our ideology has been open to criticism for at least 200 years or more, and has been openly mocked and I don't want any protection laws. In fact I thank the scholars that researched the Bible to try disprove it. Their work has helped pave the way to build a stronger historical narrative for the new testament. It easy to believe your worldview is correct when it isn't challenged. But it much better putting it to the test.
Ed appears to be a bit classist...
Should we also make arachnophobia, claustrophobia and agoraphobia illegal too?
Or should we just simply recognise that the word featured in this vid is a meaningless and nonsensical term specifically and maliciously created by members of a certain religion to shut down valid and free criticism of that certain religion.
Thank you for protecting free
speech by pointing the danger of censorship. Thank you for having intellectual debate , and the courage to talk about the lack of condemnation from the Muslim society of the massacre of 7/10. This conversation gives me glimpse of hope. ❤
No phobia should be against the law. Violent actions and calls to violence should be against the law
Given that Islamic texts require the spreading of Islam, by force if necessary, and these are easily referenceable it makes me wonder how you could have Islamophobia laws without also banning the texts. Otherwise you could make an argument against Islam simply by quoting its own material. Do Muslims want this material banned?
It does come down to demographics. 45 years ago I stayed in Sweden. A white homogenous tribe educated, civil, kind hearted and beautiful smiles. I visited last year. A completely new demographic . Violence, theft, rape, the statistics speak for themselves. I remember it as a completely nonviolent society. Everyone seemed agreeable. Malmo, Swedens southern city is 25% Muslim. There is talk of federal Muslim Govern-ate there. Is this the new model for Europe. Remember Pakistan and Bangladesh were India. The Mediterranean coast of Turkey was Greek . Lebanon was Christian a few years ago. So let’s ask some new questions here. Do we value a European Judaeo Christian Civilisation, our history that unites us. Our Nature. Work ethic, charity, social inclusion historic Architecture. Magnificent geography. We are a continent , separated from the Muslims by the Mediterranean. Here lies 22 Arab States. Why are they arriving to this Continent. Why is the wealth of their Ummah not welcoming them. A United language, creed, religion and value structure. That would suit, and accommodate them. Or am I Islamophobic to see this as a separatist Invasion.
Good one, thank you.
Starmer's appalling ignorance exposed by historian Ed Husain.
Christianity so eroded that political leaders are unable to understand unintended consequences of their proposed legislation.
Truly shocking how we have such a man, as opposition PM in waiting, of our country supporting Iran's hard right intentions via Sadiq Khan.
There is violent and non-violent strife. Verbal strife is non-violent and enables us to avoid violence.
I think we should ask Lee Rigby what he thinks about 'peaceful' Islam and Islamophobia...
Respect works both ways 🇬🇧🏴♥️☮️
Islamophobia is not unjustified. I can't stand Starmer or Khan.
Cultural Stockholm Syndrome.
As the UK heads into an “overwhelming majority” time to watch at least these two presentations:
a) ruclips.net/video/b4VJofC_PFA/видео.htmlsi=Z4eUf62QuZhHyyR5
b) ruclips.net/video/a4t_4S1h4Zg/видео.htmlsi=ibp01YkIQZenY8dz
The perilous course could still be avoided if that’s not too much to be hoped 🛑
The Quran - and far less the Hadith - do not provide a strong basis for a liberal political order. The speaker here and some others might wish it was otherwise, but that does not make it so.
it's taken about a month to chill out about this business, and it needs to be said that It’s deeply frustrating when my attempts to engage in thoughtful, nuanced discussions are met with accusations of hate speech, especially when my intention is to foster understanding and address misconceptions. I want to clarify that my goal in discussing the term "Islamophobia" and framing it within the broader concept of Orientalism is to deepen the conversation and encourage more critical thinking about how prejudice and discrimination are framed and understood.
Far from being an expression of hate, my efforts are rooted in a desire to move beyond superficial labels and to address the underlying issues more effectively. In the digital age, particularly on platforms like RUclips, discussions can be easily misinterpreted. The nuances of language, tone, and context often get lost in the brevity of comments or the fast-paced nature of online discourse. This can lead to reactions that are based on misunderstandings rather than the substance of the argument.
I believe that true calls for clarification and deeper understanding are acts of love, not hate. When I challenge a term like "Islamophobia," I’m not denying the reality of discrimination; rather, I’m trying to understand it more fully and communicate that understanding in a way that can lead to greater empathy and justice. My intent is to contribute to a more informed and compassionate conversation, but I recognize that intent can easily be overshadowed by how my words are perceived, especially in a medium where people are quick to react without fully engaging with the content.
One of the reasons why Mohamed didn’t fight/kill the guy who urinated in his place of prayer/mosque might have been because the other guy was bigger/stronger and intimidating.
Mohamed hadn’t any reservations to attack and kill others who committed far less crimes. Look at Quran 9:29 where he commands that people be murdered, not for urinating in his mosque, but for the crime of not believing he was a prophet of Abraham’s god.
Or, rather, it was the early stage of building Mo's power and he couldn't afford to lose whatever support he had.
Anyone other than Spectator talking about this? More restrictions on freedom in the aid of wrongdoers to come in without serious debate or consideration of the impact
This man has an excellent stand.
I am a British Christian, originating in Czech Republic. In my opinion Keir Starmer's suggestion is a form of nanny state, which only weighs the government down, almost a populist decision.
What we must concentrate on in our free democratic world is the retaining of our freedom of opinion and choice of religion - supported by education!!!
Our children need to be educated at schools deeper on the 3 abrahamic religions, not just the differences between them and not so much from the faith/ believe point of view, but from the pragmatic critical point! They need to learn what a believe can be used for and the impact of it on our lives, but primarily the history between the religions and how they span from liberal to the radical extremes. The Crusaders were viewed by Muslims at the time as radicals and we should not assign that to history as many of them have not! And where would our NHS be without the Muslim doctors and their servitude and steadfastness to God and purpose? The British "non believer yet christian yet atheists", as many are, need to learn what does 'serving the community' mean (primarily not only as a punishment) and what does 'love your God and love thy NEIGHBOUR' really means.
We need a deeper connection between our synagogues/churches/mosques (written purely in historical time order), and together with our schools.
But isn't this a problem with confusion about semantics. Threats of intolerance and violence towards a particular group like this is bigotry. By definition Islamophobia is a nonsensical word given that fear of a particular religion and its tenets isn't necessarily irrational.
Two things are being conflated and dangerously so
This guy is amazing! I really hope he can be heard. The Labour Party is so scary these days., I have no idea who votes for them.
If this guy knew anything he'd know Tommy Robinson IS NOT FAR RIGHT. His daughters wear the Hijab, what age did they start wearing it ? and more importantly why that age?
Never heard anyone articulate so well the things that concern me. There were also lots of new things to be concerned about I hadn't even considered
A phobia is a fear as I understand it. So how can a fear be made illegal???????????
Great insights, thank you
This man deserves a wider platform. He's talking a lot of sense.
As Titania McGrath famously put it, 'Say what you like about Isis, but at least you can't accuse them of Islamaphobia '.
History should be stated without cherrypicking isolated events to bolster your case. Else it reduces to hypocrisy. To try to fool the audience by clever narration of events may suit taqiyya but not truth.
"WE" hmmmm
'We:' those who dictate the behaviour of the lesser beings 'we' look down on.
It's a shame that Sir Kier and his like have no interest in listening to voices like this
Poor Ed, like Said in his earlier days, trying to defend the indefensible with reason.
Wow, this guy is fantastic! I am glad there are people like this making the argument for tolerance in Islam
"Islamophobia" is a nonsense. If the Spectator wish to give the idea ANY time, it should be to rubbish it.
Sorry, but a daughter with hidjab is already the first step towards the muslim brotherhood which he rightly identifies as a problem.
Reform for all left and right 🎉🎉🎉
We can’t have a law that bans any discourse, criticism or phobia of a foreign non native religion that 99% of brits don’t like to see within their society.
Aside from the video's title there's nothing about
'"outlawing islamophobia" in the video. How would you outlaw a fear anyways? If you outlaw claustrophobia I'm still afraid to get in an MRI machine. It changes nothing.
Starmer is seeking to ban critical scrutiny of history and theology on behalf of the Taliban adjacent. Many causes of "offence" are triggered when lack of primary sources is referred to or for things that are demonstrably not true. For example the main English translations of the Koran used in the UK have been falsified with the addition of large numbers of additional "Mohammed" and "Mecca" insertions and the inclusion of things like battle names/places to fit a narrative that is not in any Arab version of the underlying text and which reflects things created centuries later.- so we can end up with the crime of being white whilst accurately quoting the Koran,
Very interesting and informative, thank you.
I don't understand how Khan has been voted in twice
that's just a term used by Dawah to avoid answering difficult questions about their religious texts
The fact that this type of discussion is never held regarding ANY OTHER RELIGION in Western countries should inform even the most clueless person that Islam is different than every other religion, and they should start asking why that is.
How pitiful are you guys. You start with the assumption that islamophobia is a real thing. Are you trying to be as bad as the mainstream cuz you're doing a damn good job of it.