Britain is cursed with a number of groups who whine loudly about so called ‘Islamophobia’ whether this is a real or imagined issue. The problem is that these groups, some of which receive public funding and which I have written about extensively, appear less concerned with what many would see as the reasonable cause of protecting individual Muslims from physical attack, but in censoring debate about Islam. These Islamic and Left/Islamic groups want nothing less than a situation where no media can report negative things about Islam, no politician or political candidate can criticise Islam or aspects of Islam and where the ordinary British subject, no matter what their race or creed, is criminalised for criticising or mocking Islam or its adherents.

For those who want to see zero criticism of Islam and even zero criticism of violent Islamic extremism, the word ‘Islamophobia’ is a handy snarl word that is used for no other purpose than to shut down debate. An Islamic apologist or a non-Muslim Islamic appeaser can deploy the word ‘Islamophobia’ as a accusation to an opponent in a debate or discussion and end the discussion.

The term ‘Islamophobia’ is a handy weapon in the hands of those who do not wish the more troublesome aspects of Islam to be either reported or debated as the senior political writer for Spiked Mr Brendan O’Neill discusses in a recent article over on Spiked. In his article he aims his barbs at the Muslim Council of Britain who have published a report into the reporting of Islamic issues in the media. In this report the MCB whines about how Muslims and Islam are reported negatively and even criticises Mr O’Neill himself and calls him an ‘Islamophobe’ for calling the murderous Islamic extremist group ISIS as ‘fascists’.

This is clearly an attempt by the MCB to classify all and every criticism of Islam, even the more extreme and, yes, fascistic kinds such as that practised by ISIS, as ‘Islamophobia’. The MCB do not even want a group that has carried out some of the most gross terrorist and human rights atrocities to be criticised using what many would see as very appropriate language. Mr O’Neill said that the MCB had ‘defamed’ him as a promoter or ‘fringe Islamophobic ideas’ and that it was ‘dangerous’ to allow Mr O’Neill to appear in mainstream media.

Mr O’Neill said:

Let us take a moment to reflect on how preposterous and outright immoral this implication of racism is. I made those comments in the wake of ISIS’s mass slaughter of Christians in Sri Lanka in March 2019. Three churches and three hotels were targeted by suicide bombers. More than 250 people were killed. Entire congregations were wiped out as they celebrated the most important day in the Christian calendar. One of the bombers blew himself up among children who were attending Sunday school. Fourteen kids were killed. A 12-year-old boy had to be identified by his teeth. He, along with his classmates, had been literally incinerated for the crime of being a Christian. And the Muslim Council of Britain thinks I’m a racist for asking if the monsters responsible for this crime are possibly neo-fascists?

This isn’t only defamatory – it is depraved.

Depraved is a damned good and pretty accurate description of the MCB and their dodgy report. ISIS and those like them are monsters in human form because they see nothing wrong with engaging in mass murder of people merely because they believe differently than they do. The 20^th century saw some forms of fascism engage in mass industrial murder of people not because of what these people did, but because of who they were and what they believed. Set against that backdrop, calling ISIS and groups like them who kill thousands over religion then the word ‘fascist’ is more than justifiable.

Mr O’Neill then went onto highlight other complaints made by the MCB that include reports that the Islamic Manchester bomber had been seen praying prior to the murderous attack and the mention of Muslim men in connection to the Islamic Rape Gang cases that have plagued dozens of British towns and cities. The MCB is also whining, Mr O’Neill said about the use of the term ‘Islamic gunmen’ when an attack by Islamic gunmen is being reported and the MCB decried accurate reporting of a Sharia linked domestic killing. Mr O’Neill said that it was ‘chilling’ that the MCB expected the media to adhere to their preferred descriptions of Islamic atrocities.

Mr O’Neill added:

This is an effort by a religious organisation to make the free press bend the knee to the ‘correct’ way of thinking about Islam. It is a regressive campaign for religious obedience dressed up as an argument against ‘racism’.

Spot on there Mr O’Neill

Mr O’Neill continued:

This report, more than anything else I’ve read, illustrates, unwittingly of course, how dangerous the idea of ‘Islamophobia’ is. It is beyond doubt now that accusations of Islamophobia are wielded to the end of protecting Islam, and even Islamism, from public discussion, criticism and ridicule. The Islamophobia industry is focused less on calling out anti-Muslim bigotry – which certainly exists – than it is on institutionalising an informal, unspoken blasphemy law that seeks to forcefield Islam from the kind of commentary and critique that every other religion and ideology is rightly subjected to.

Mr O’Neill is 100% correct here. The term ‘Islamophobia’ is dangerous as it is used not to describe those who engage in wholly unwarranted physical attacks on innocent Muslims, but to shut down debate about Islam. Groups like the MCB and similar groups with much more access and influence over the entities of the State than they have, want to protect Islam from criticism. They want to do this even when, such as in the context of Islamic violent extremism and on subjects such as the position of women in Islam, debate and criticism are wholly justifiable. Islam, like any other faith should have no protection from blasphemy in the UK but it is plain to see from the MCB’s dodgy report, that there are some Muslims who want such an Islam specific blasphemy protection in the UK.