Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

UK: Employment judge rules that English nationalist’s ‘anti-Islamic views’ are not protected under equalities law

By

The court may have a point in objecting to Thomas apparently wanting to remove all Muslims from the UK. At this point, such an operation would be unlikely to avoid bloodshed. Also, there are some Muslims who are in the UK precisely in order to escape from Sharia, and have no desire to bring Sharia to their new home. Still, Thomas is right that Sharia is incompatible with a free society. That is why, in its determination to accommodate believers in Sharia, the British government is sharply curtailing the freedoms of dissidents such as Thomas, to the degree that Britain will soon not be a free society in any recognizable way.

“English nationalist’s ‘anti-Islamic views’ not protected by equalities law, employment judge rules,” by Charlie Moloney, Law Society Gazette, September 5, 2024 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

An English nationalist has lost his appeal in a discrimination case, after a court found his views are not capable of protection under equalities laws.

Steven Thomas had his role providing consultancy services to the Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS Foundation Trust terminated in 2018.

The trust’s stated reason was that it had come to light that Thomas had an unspent conviction which he had failed to declare. Thomas believed the real reason elated to his philosophical belief, which he described as ‘English nationalism’….

Employment Judge Hyde, at London South Employment tribunal, dismissed Thomas’s claim for discrimination under the Equality Act 2010, on the basis that his belief in English nationalism, which includes anti-Islamic views, is not capable of being a protected belief.

The judge said Thomas’s beliefs in English nationalism itself – which was described as promoting the cultural unity of English people with a focus on national identity which does not depend upon ancestry or race – would likely have been protected at law. But Thomas also had anti-Islamic beliefs, which included a belief in the ‘coercive removal’ of Muslims from the United Kingdom, the judge said. The findings were partly based on Thomas’s social media posts, one of which carried the hashtag ‘RemoveAllMuslims’.

Oscar Davies, the barrister representing Thomas, argued Thomas’s views had been ‘misunderstood or misinterpreted’. Thomas argued he had only used the hashtag on one occasion on June 4 2017 while he was in a ‘very emotional state’ after the London Bridge terror attack.

At the Employment Appeal Tribunal, Davies argued Thomas’s belief was ‘nowhere near the types of beliefs that should be restricted’ under Article 17 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which provides states with a mechanism for ensuring that individuals or groups who seek to employ the right to freedom of expression for ends clearly contrary to the values of the convention are not protected.

But Mr Justice Sheldon ruled that the claimant’s views of an English nationalism which believes that there is no place in British society for Muslims or Islam itself aligned with the types of belief which would fall foul of Article 17 of the convention. The judge said: ‘In my judgment, that shares features with an ideology such as Nazism which did not see there being any place within German society for Jews. In my judgment, these views are not capable of protection under the convention as they would offend Article 17.’…

Comments

  1. Let’s face it, if Western Civilization is to be preserved, Islam must be excised from Western shores. That’s not Westerner’s choice. Islam provides no other alternative. 1400 years of prolific and outrageous violence leads any clear thinker to that conclusion.

  2. In the U.K. it is now a crime to express dislike for islam and/or the people who adhere to the system of evil.
    There is no longer ‘equality’ in the U.K. because mozlums are more equal than any other people and they are beyond criticism, per the government’s new laws and rules.
    The filth of islam must not be *questioned*….as in the prison sentence of the Brit who asked a question…and if one doesn’t like it, they will need to not speak about it if they wish to remain free and employed.
    Pretty soon, every British citizen who is non-mozlum, will be able to read the writing on the wall…written in arabic….that you can’t tell the Truth, even if the Truth is only how one feels about the government, islam, ‘migrants,’ how money is spent, and anything to do with mozlums. Judges and prison guards await those who refuse to bend to the new ways.

    • Who you vote for is what type of government you will have. Vote for a muslim you will be an Islamic country. Vote for a Christian you hopefully, will have the country of your ancestors.

      • I didn’t vote for bo, biden and will not for the camela hyena. But the government ruling over me is just as awful as I imagined it would be before they cheated themselves into the seat of power.

        Jesus said, “My kingdom is no part of this world.” My vote goes to Him.

    • For now! Sooner or later either Islam or the UK citizens will prevail and may god help the judges and the moslems if the Nationalists take control, justice will be swift, harsh and well earned. Supressing Tommy just quieted the expression of the peoples anger, it did not remove that anger.

        • Actually, he has been critical of Whitehall in his last couple of posts or so

        • Well, good to hear, Infidel–but he still doesn’t want any non-Briton to be allowed to be openly concerned about Britain being taken over by Islam. He is far more upset by this than by Islamization i jthe UK itself. Disturbing stuff.

          I’m American (with an English mother) and I am glad when others are concerned–as I am concerned about other nations myself. We are all in this together.

    • Being anti Islamic and calling for the removal of all muslims are two different things. Can you imagine the reaction if a US person was to make the same call?
      Nobody minds Muslims who are happy to be British citizens and follow Uk laws. It is the other kind that are the problem those who defy Uk laws and do not have the interest of the country at heart but consider Islam as the superiorand the Umma as their real community..

    • Thanks for that troubling story, Somehistory. Great to see any article covering this issue.

  4. What do you do when your government becomes a menace to society? Western governments and their helpers have already created conditions that will eventually lead to civil war in every western country. When that happens muslims are not going to welcome guys like the one in the picture in to their army. He can never be welcomed in to ours either. No mans land is a very lonely place. As hard as I try I cannot think of a punishment that fits their crimes.

  5. UK: Employment judge rules that English nationalist’s ‘anti-Islamic views’ are not protected under equalities law
    ……………………………………..

    If you cannot say anything critical about a creed that wants to destroy your nation and your culture, then what good are those laws?

  6. No judge should offer any legal opinion on Islam and Muslims without having thoroughly studied the Qur’an for the purpose of assessing its compatibility with British law, which is his or her responsibility.

    When will our legal system react to the many commands which are not only hateful but which instruct the believers to commit criminal acts, including by cutting the necks of unbelievers? (8:12 etc.)

    • So, if someone criticizes the Pakistani Muslim “grooming gangs,” is that an indictable offense, even though one could credibly argue that the Qu’ran has verses which permit the taking of non-Muslim women and girls as sex slaves?

      One could even argue that the Qu’ran allows for pederasty, due to the descriptions of Jannah (Islamic Heaven) as having boys “of eternal youth, you would think them scattered pearls.” Is it a crime to condemn pederasty?

      Just askin’.

      • Good questions, Mike. Musims have already used Islamic norms as a defence.

  7. Accommodation of madness and evil cannot end well. Who put the government in charge of favoring one group over another? When does favoritism transform into an outright war on the other side. I would’ve thought
    the UK had learned a lesson from the Germans who fell down this same slippery slope not so long ago. I hear the sound of goose stepping in the distance.

Discover more from

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Skip to content