Labour’s Approach to Islamophobia and Migration Demands Belief in the Impossible

[Social Media]

 

Angela Rayner’s plan to establish a “council on Islamophobia” to define anti-Muslim discrimination is being criticized as a de facto blasphemy law. This proposal, detractors argue, could criminalize individuals across all backgrounds—white, black, Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Sikh, and atheist—who express concerns about a parallel society developing under Sharia law, with attitudes often in opposition to liberal democratic values. Objecting to special treatment for a segment of the population with minimal integration—where women and girls frequently face second-class status—is not a phobia, but a rational reaction to what many see as religious separatism and political favoritism.  

 

Instead of launching a national inquiry into the widespread grooming gang scandal, largely linked to individuals of Pakistani origin, Labour appears more focused on pushing legislation that could criminalize public discussion of the issue. This shift raises concerns about free speech and the ability of the majority white population to object to what some perceive as its own societal and cultural decline. The authoritarian nature of this approach is reminiscent of the Queen of Hearts in Lewis Carroll’s *Alice in Wonderland*: “Sentence first, verdict afterwards!” It is a sentiment that aligns with what critics describe as the chillingly authoritarian tendencies of Starmer’s Labour government.  

 

Among the many policy shifts since Labour came to power, perhaps the most surreal is its approach to tackling illegal migration. The government’s solution, according to its new Border Security, Asylum, and Immigration Bill, is to legalize those who would otherwise be classified as illegal migrants. This move dismantles large portions of the previous Conservative government’s Illegal Migration Act (2023), which had stipulated that those entering the country illegally would be permanently barred from obtaining British citizenship. By removing this deterrent, the government is accused of enabling human smuggling operations and eroding border security.  

 

The previous legislation also allowed authorities to treat asylum seekers as over 18 if they refused to undergo scientific age assessments. Now, foster carers are once again expected to believe the impossible—that the asylum seeker placed in their home is a “child,” despite having a full beard and wearing size 11 shoes. Smuggling gangs actively coach migrants to claim they are minors, as this significantly increases their chances of gaining refugee status. In just the first half of last year alone, 1,300 individuals attempted to pass as children. British youngsters in desperate need of foster care placements have been displaced by fraudulent claims, reinforcing concerns about the government's priorities.  

 

Further complicating matters, young males from violent, war-torn countries are placed in secondary schools alongside much younger female students, raising alarms about safety and security. However, Labour appears untroubled by these risks, insisting instead that its new approach will “reduce the number” of illegal migrants—while, in reality, maintaining the status quo.  

 

After just seven months of Labour governance, public frustration with these policies is growing. Many see them as a nonsensical charade, demanding belief in the impossible, at the expense of national security, cultural cohesion, and common sense.

 

Based on a report by Daily telegraph 2025-02-07