The election of Labour’s Sadiq Khan to the office of Mayor of London should come as no surprise. Labour selected well. It’s the perfect time for it – Khan is a Muslim and so Labour can do what it does best: play the champions of “tolerance” and “equality”, all the while cloaking real intolerance and inequality and protecting it from public scrutiny.
To listen to the BBC, one would think that Khan had been subjected to a terrible “racist” smear campaign orchestrated by his Conservative opponent Zac Goldsmith. But of course it was Goldsmith who had been subjected to a smear campaign, by a Labour Party using one of the great weapons of modern British politics – the word “racist”. The smearing of Goldsmith, both during the campaign and since, demonstrates so perfectly this: reality is irrelevant, it is speaking of reality that causes problems.
Goldsmith became a terrible “racist” when he questioned his opponent’s apparent friendships with some rather nasty characters. He was right to. It was entirely valid. Goldsmith wrote in the Daily Mail that Khan, and others in the higher echelons of the Labour Party, had “repeatedly legitimised those with extremist views”. He’s right, they have.
We all know that the Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has described the anti-Semitic terror group Hamas as his “friends”. This is the same Hamas that has a founding charter calling for the religiously-motivated annihilation of Jews. Khan himself has referred to moderate Muslims as “Uncle Toms” – a derogatory term describing non-white people who act subserviently to white rule. This alone would be considered unforgivable for most candidates, and would render them unelectable, but with Khan, it actually gets much worse.
Throughout his career, he has mingled with and represented Muslim extremists, and according to Daniel Johnson in Standpoint, has supported incorporating sharia law in to the British legal system. He has argued that there are “uncontroversial” aspects of sharia that we ought to permit. Needless to say, these are highly likely to be the exact same “uncontroversial” bits of sharia that Islamists and jihadis are constantly clamoring for – “uncontroversial” family law.
In other words, marriage, divorce, child custody, domestic violence, and other family areas that are increasingly dominated by known Islamists in Britain and across Europe.
De facto family law jurisdiction gives Islamists power over Muslim communities and their personal lives, effectively removing them from the realm of British laws in this vital legal area. Power in family law is one of the Islamists’ favourite and most potent tools. That Khan supports the sharpening of these tools is a serious matter, and should cause us grave concern.
Furthermore, the new London Mayor has given ‘three cheers’ to the Islam Channel. This TV channel has been censured by Ofcom for advocating violence against women. Nevertheless, Khan praised it at a conference while the black flag of jihad flew freely in his audience.
In response to all of this, Goldsmith was, if anything, too timid. It is important if a Mayor of London holds these views about sharia, and it is serious if he mixes among Islamists and jihadis. Merely for politely mentioning this however, Zac Goldsmith immediately became a villain, and the very real concerns about Khan’s associations were forgotten; buried under an avalanche of Left-wing halos and sanctimonious slime.
Let us imagine a scenario. Imagine that Zac Goldsmith had once spoken to an EDL rally and had shared a platform with Tommy Robinson. Would he even be a member of the Conservative Party today, much less its candidate for Mayor of London?
Keep in mind that Tommy Robinson has never called for brutal theocracy, the killing of homosexuals or Jews, or the subjugation of women, and yet he is deemed to be morally inferior to those that do. Why? Because Tommy opposes Islam. He questions Islam. He tells the truth about Islam. He tells the truth about jihad. Goldsmith went nowhere near as far as Robinson of course, but he now finds himself equally maligned, merely for telling the truth. He is maligned because he pointed out inconvenient facts – facts which might cause us to look unfavourably towards Islam, and that is something that we will not do, irrespective of the cost.
Islam has turned our society upside down and inside out. Now, those who call for violent theocracy, oppression, and subjugation, are deemed to be the victims of those who oppose them. The British public has been persuaded by the Left-wing media that pointing out uncomfortable truths about Islam, or any given Muslim, is a manifestation of bigotry and racism and that this is far more important than active jihadism or the desire to overthrow the British state and replace it with tyranny.
The Loony-Left in London is congratulating itself on its tolerance and is bleating on about “hope”.
What they’ve actually done is remind every jihadi in Britain that the deception still works. They can continue to be as anti-Semitic, homophobic, and misogynistic as they like, and if anyone complains, or even points it out, the Left will immediately spring in to action and silence awkward questions. They have empowered the worst of the worst, and they have yet again shut down democratic scrutiny and bullied their way in to power. They have made absolutely sure that more and more jihad is coming our way.
Anne Marie Waters is the founder of Shariah Watch and co-organiser of the PEGIDA UK movement