Whites are becoming the minority by 2056Whites- are becoming the minority by 2056

[Thestarsmayalign]

I read this ( not daily mail!) on MN -is this actually a true / statistical prediction?
I can send the link to the thread that stated this .
I have never heard this before . I assume that this is not accurate at all .( also assume applying to uk) .

MunicipalDarwinism
8 appreciate the link , and what the government / law does about this barbaric practice.
I also know that this practice is rife - why else would Fgm clinic s for victims facilities be funded and needed ?
Have you ever been and lived in a community day to day were women are treated in certain ways because they are women? Have you lived in a Yorkshire town were certain roads are unsafe and white women are told not to go ? Its local university with high security cameras? Have you ever worked with a traumatised fgm victim? have you ever seen child protection issues related to extremism? Have you ever been at the coal face of such issues. Have you ever seen elders asking to ‘ leave it to us ‘ ( wrong just as it would be in any other cultural context)i have in my profession.
I am not saying white men do not abuse in any way - but any extreme culture that regards women or girls in this way is wrong.
I do not want the numbers of any extreme culture in any way to grow.

Who actually cares?
It's what's in peoples' hearts and souls that matters, not their skin colour.

For every girl living in the UK this happens to, there should be at least one adult in prison.

My house is a 'real life multicultural area.' It's an incredibly happy place of joy, laughter, diversity- hell, just a normal happy family who love each other beyond measure and also sometimes annoy the fuck out of each other. Unlike the OP with her racist, weird race theory nonsense, we couldn't care less about skin colour except when racists like her bring it up.
If the OP is so obsessed with 'British culture' dying out, well they seemed to have died out a long time ago in her heart- notably the 'British' (I don't think we're the only country with a monopoly on this but anyway) values of tolerance and kindness.

I take it that you’ve also previously started threads about the massive abuse scandal in the Catholic Church, then, and raised the issue of bishops being forced to resign because of systematic abuse in the Anglican Church?

All the practices you have raised are wrong, of course. But why start a thread based on skin colour? That is the most racist you could possibly be. You have tried to say, many times here, that a ‘white majority’ needs to be maintained. Surely the issue here is about retaining the separation of faith and state, if you want to make your recent points the issue? In which case start at the top and get the Anglican bishops out of the Lords, and start a movement to remove the king as head of the Church of England.

If you are saying faith is the problem, that has nothing to do with skin colour. Making this thread about skin colour and eventually, when you don’t get support from most people, moving it to religion, just makes your initial racism even clearer.

As a feminist, you'll probably be aware that half of the immigrants to the UK are women? This tends to be overlooked with all the focus on 'the boats' which obviously is the route for men.
Women and girls who come to the UK as immigrants will often be safer and have greater protections here than they would have in their country of origin and have access to opportunities that would have otherwise been denied them. Which as a feminist, is surely important to you?
There is no evidence to suggest these women and girls pose any risk to the safety and wellbeing of UK citizens.
Yet the anti immigration rhetoric makes no distinction between men and women/girls, and in its enthusiasm to frame other ethnicities and cultures as a threat, throws countless innocent and vulnerable women under the bus alongside a few bad men. As a feminist, does this sit well with you?
Because typically feminists see crimes such as grooming, child SA, rape and MVAWG as being committed by perpetrators who's shared characteristic is their sex, not their race and ethnicity, and don't want to see women who are not white penalised under the guise of protecting women who are.

I completely agree. In an ideal world every perpetrator of VAWG would be in jail. In an ideal world we wouldn't need FGM clinics. Or rape crisis centres. Or any of the other forms of support aimed at the victims of VAWG.

But we don't live in an ideal world. So all that can be done is to prosecute as many perpetrators as possible and offer support to the victims.

I am also a feminist. And I dislike Islamic extremism as much as I dislike far right extremism. FGM is abhorrent. Threatening to behead an MP is abhorrent. My problem is that you have chosen to make this all about skin colour, and it isn't.

Do you not think that many POC find FGM as abhorrent as we do? Are you not aware of the many POC who are tirelessly campaigning against this practice?

And do you not think that we have massive problems with misogyny and VAWG in our own culture, notwithstanding the fact that it typically expressses itself in different ways? What exactly is it about people having more melanin in their skin that you think makes them a greater risk to your rights as a woman? Do you think that there aren't black and brown people who care about women's rights every bit as much as you do?

Likewise, if you want to have a discussion about violence and threats of violence in public life, then by all means, let's talk about that. But let's not only talk about the threats from black and brown people. What about the white supremacist who killed my old university friend, Jo Cox? What about the trans activists who regularly send rape and death threats to JKR and others who dare to express gender critical views? What about the appalling barrage of rape and death threats that are very regularly sent to MPs like Diane Abbott simply because they happen to be women of colour?

Nobody is denying that some black and brown people have committed truly horrific crimes. Nobody is denying that there are harmful cultural practices that need to be addressed. We should not shy away from talking about these things, and I don't think anyone is saying that we can't talk about them. Indeed, many people in those communities want to discuss and address the issues.

But if we only focus on the crimes and harms perpetrated by black and brown people, turn a blind eye to the crimes and harms commited by white people, and choose to frame the arguments as being all about skin colour, then that is a problem.

We can absolutely talk about issues such as FGM or Islamist threats against MPs etc, but we should do so with a clear understanding that the vast majority of black and brown people are no more responsible for those horrific crimes than you, as a white person, were responsible for the white supremacist that murdered Jo Cox. Quite the contrary, most will be horrified by them.

Do you not think that it would be utterly absurd for people to fear you, or impute certain values and attitudes to you, simply because you happen to share the same skin colour as Jo Cox's killer or as Andrew Mountbatten Windsor? Can you not see how deeply offensive it is to assume that people have certain values and attitudes on the basis of their skin colour alone?

You have posted on here worrying about white people becoming a minority in this country as if having a population with more black and brown people is suddenly going to turn the UK into some sort of barbaric society in which nobody cares about the rights of women or threats of beheading etc. Do you honestly not understand that the vast majority of black and brown people don't want to live in that kind of society either?

My DH is brown and my DD is brown. They will be part of the black and brown majority that you seem to fear so much. They represent no threat to you or your way of life at all.

@Thestarsmayalign if you had started a thread about FGM you would have had very different responses. Nobody on this thread thinks that’s ok. You didn’t. You started a thread about colour. Forgive me for being a little suspicious about your sudden pivot to FGM and Ypur personal experiences on page 40…

There are organisations that exist to lobby for votes for many causes.

You’re just picking in Muslims because they’re an easy target. How dare those brown skinned people get a vote, toght?

Spot on! My teachers trade union 'puts pressure on me' to vote Labour. Does that make my Labour vote any less democratic. What I do in the privacy of the ballot box is up to me, or on my postal vote. Anyone can vote for anyone for any reason.
The 'Muslim pressure vote' is just an old racist trope.

Thank you, thought I was going mad ❤️

Yes I wasn’t disagreeing with you but clarifying that it’s the dogs as pets that are the issue. Most British people have their dogs as pets so that would be a problem for those following the teachings on dogs.

On reflection, part of the problem with this seems to be the desperation of some to demonstrate their righteous and ‘inclusive’ credentials to the extent that if Muslims complain about the presence of dogs they will act.

It is the imposition of the wishes of an incoming minority on the majority that I see as a problem. The people doing this may have good motivations but the result is a curtailing of the freedoms of others in a way that can be unreasonable.

Even Islamic terrorists in prison get special exemptions from sniffer dog searches due to their religion, although as working dogs surely they should have no issue?

www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/treatment_of_muslim_prisoners_du/response/260776/attach/html/4/PSI%2068%202011.doc.html

You know that the Mayor of Tower Hamlets has already been convicted of exactly this, right?

The London Borough of Tower Hamlets is under the full political control of an exclusively Bangladeshi-Islamic male-only political party, called Aspire. Replacing Labour as the party in power in 2022, Aspire shocked the political establishment by winning the local elections with no mainstream support, sectarian campaigning, and a leader, Lutfur Rahman, previously banned from office due to electoral fraud and practicing undue spiritual influence.

thecritic.co.uk/political-islam-is-already-in-britain/

Sorry that’s not correct. The courts have found otherwise. This guy is currently Mayor of Tower Hamlets, the borough where a mosque recently banned women from a ‘Family’ Fun Run.

Replacing Labour as the party in power in 2022, Aspire shocked the political establishment by winning the local elections with no mainstream support, sectarian campaigning, and a leader, Lutfur Rahman, previously banned from office due to electoral fraud and practicing undue spiritual influence.

This is possible in areas where the religious leaders are powerful, where a high number of people can’t speak English and postal votes are ‘organised’. There have been allegations of voter fraud throughout the country.

thecritic.co.uk/political-islam-is-already-in-britain/

Allegations need to be substantiated before they mean anything. I mean, Trump is still alleging the 2020 elections were stolen, despite zero evidence to support this.

Aspire are horrific - but no more so than many other small ( and large) extremist movements.

There are up to 85 sharia courts in the UK.

Therefore sharia law is being practised in the UK.

He was convicted and banned from ejection for 5 years. Now he’s back.

Nobody is ONLY focused on the crimes of black or people but just want them to be subjected ti the same standards of justice and policing as the rest of us.

Exempting Islamic terrorist from sniffer dog searches in prison is not applying the same standards. Especially as you appear to argue it is superfluous as they all love dogs.

I do not generalise all Muslims, I recognise that some wish to assimilate and live by our rules and some don’t.

Quoting a fringe, right wing socially conservative magazine with an anti-Muslim and immigrant agenda isn't exactly evidence. It's just another journalist who shares your opinion.
Seems Chat got it right, as is often the case:

🧾 1) Are there “Muslim postal voter” fraud figures?
👉 No — the UK does not collect or publish electoral fraud data by religion or ethnicity.

• Police and the Electoral Commission record allegations and outcomes by type of offence (e.g. personation, postal vote fraud), not by voters’ religion or ethnicity.
• Voting is secret, and demographic data like religion is not linked to individual ballots.

👉 So there are no official statistics such as “fraud by Muslim voters.”
📊 2) What the evidence actually shows about postal vote fraud
Across UK elections:

• Since 1998, there have been only 9 convictions for postal vote fraud in total
• In recent years, very few cases lead to convictions
• Authorities repeatedly say there is “no evidence of large-scale electoral fraud”

Academic and official analyses conclude:

• Fraud exists but is rare and isolated
• Most allegations do not lead to action because evidence is lacking

👉 This applies to all voters, regardless of background.
⚠️ 3) Where claims about “Muslim postal vote fraud” come from
A) Historical cases (real but rare)
There have been a few high-profile fraud scandals, for example:

• Birmingham postal vote fraud (2005)
• Tower Hamlets mayoral case (2014), involving Lutfur Rahman

Some of these occurred in areas with large South Asian or Muslim populations.
👉 But these were:

• Localised
• Unusual
• Not representative of national voting

Experts stress these cases are exceptions, not typical
B) Stereotypes and rumours
Research shows that suspicions of fraud have often been linked to ethnicity, not evidence.
For example:

• A UK report noted “strongly held views” that fraud is more likely in areas with South Asian communities
• But these were perceptions and rumours, not proven patterns

👉 In other words, beliefs about fraud have sometimes reflected bias rather than data.
C) Political claims without evidence
During elections, some politicians or commentators have claimed:

• “vote harvesting”
• “community pressure”
• or bloc voting in Muslim communities

But:

• These claims are often not backed by evidence
• Fact-checks repeatedly find “little evidence” of postal vote fraud

D) Online misinformation
False claims often spread during elections, for example:

• Claims that unusually high postal votes indicate fraud
• Claims that a particular candidate got “all the postal votes”

In one 2024 example:

• Viral posts suggested fraud in Rochdale
• Fact-checkers found the claims were baseless and based on incorrect numbers

👉 These narratives are frequently used to question election results without proof.
⚖️ 4) Why these claims are often considered racist
Linking electoral fraud to a specific religious or ethnic group is widely criticised because:

1. There is no supporting data

• No official statistics show any group commits more fraud
• Fraud cases are too rare to generalise

2. It generalises from isolated cases

• A handful of local scandals are used to make claims about millions of voters

3. It echoes older “bloc voting” fears

• Minority communities are sometimes portrayed as:
• Voting as a single group
• Being influenced or controlled
• These ideas have a long history in UK politics and are often disputed by research

4. It can undermine trust in democracy

• Suggesting certain groups are “cheating” can:
• Reduce confidence in elections
• Increase social tension

🧠 5) What research says about Muslim voting behaviour
Academic work shows that:

• British Muslim voters are diverse in views and party support
• Their voting patterns change over time (e.g. issues like foreign policy, local concerns)

👉 There is no evidence of coordinated or fraudulent “bloc voting”.
🧾 Bottom line

• No data exists linking postal vote fraud to Muslims (or any religion)
• Proven fraud is extremely rare in UK elections
• Claims about “Muslim postal vote fraud” are usually:
• Based on isolated cases
• Driven by perception, politics, or misinformation
• Often criticised as unfounded or discriminatory

👉 The evidence shows fraud is not widespread and is not tied to any particular community.

JustSomeWaferThinHam
exactly my fear/ issue- I do not wish this to grow.

Sharia councils/courts have no legal or constitutional role in the UK, which I am sure you know.

Also, there are no official statistics on the number of Sharia councils/courts in the
United Kingdom.
The think tank Civitas identified 85 Sharia councils, including online
forums, but admitted that the number was “indeterminate”.

Don't want to see what grow?

Thankfully this thread

Is done. Until the next anti-Islam one comes along, sadly.