Islamophobia was all that Theresa May could not say. Until now. If only she and the rest of her party — including a certain former prime minister-cum-pig farmer — had listened to a woman who has spent much time with her finger on the pulse, as opposed to, you know, to posing for the glossies in expensive leather trousers, things may have been different. Sadly, they are not. Baroness Warsi’s repeated warnings to the Tory party, of which she remains a member, to revise its dealings with Britain’s Muslim community went unheeded for years. Time after time did she stress the nexus between rampant Islamophobia and the rise of the far-right. Following the recent ISIS-claimed hits on Manchester and London and the ‘revenge’ attack on the Finsbury Park Mosque — May has nowhere to hide. It may be too late for the Prime Minister who from all accounts is nothing more than a dead woman walking in political terms. But with the bookies taking bets for another general election this autumn — there are prudent lessons to be learned for each of the three main parties. The time has come for the political establishment to do away with its wilful myopia and look at the larger picture. The white man responsible for targeting the north London mosque may have been acting alone, technically a lone wolf. Yet his actions were fuelled by the convergence of Islamophobia preached by far-right groups and perpetuated by a state apparatus that insists on looking at extremism exclusively through the lens of Islamism, all the while reinforced by a compliant and mainstream media. The culmination of which has led to political outfits such as the odious English Defence League and the equally odious British National Party sharing the same overriding goal as ISIS: overthrowing the state in its current electoral guise. Both appear to be doing their utmost to manipulate the outcome of the expected October election. What is, therefore, to be done? In the first instance, the state must come up with a definition of extremism extending above and beyond the usual suspects. Secondly, the state must also appoint a regulator to watch the media and act against the rampant incitement to hatred that has been accepted as the norm until now by many quarters. This should include, if we may be so bold, editors keeping a check on the ‘here’ and ‘there’ narrative disconnect. Meaning no more repeating unquestioningly the government’s manufactured rhetoric that juxtaposes, for example, one of the recent extremist attacks as being the deadliest since 7/7 — while at the same time giving little, if any, coverage to the thousands who have died and continue to die every day at the hands of the British state’s military misadventurism in this part of the world; in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in Yemen, in Libya, in Syria. For being part of society’s fourth pillar brings with it responsibility. And this includes righting the wrongs of deadly sensationalism. *