I have wriiten, mentioned about mosques often times being a center for subversive and terrorist linked activities and teachings. This is actually quite common. It does not matter what country the mosque is located in. The evidence is quite clear that wherever islam springs up, muslims immigrate to, mosques are eventually established. Here is the United States mosques are treated like most other religion's buidlings, hands off. I really feel that this is a mistake as islam is an ideology, not a religion. It does not matter to me if there are one billion muslims, believers of this cult of violence and death. Mosques in this country must be under surveillence, raided if the evidence warrants this and shut down. It is not uncommon for a mosque to have two services. One as a show for us infidels using plenty of taqiyya to fool and tricl those who do not know islam or have not studied it. The other service is for those who believe in the ways and words of allah and his perverted 'prophet'mohammed.The qur'an and sharia law are what matter to this second group.
Enter Vijay Kumar in this next post. Vijay is running for the 5th district Congressional seat in Tennesse currently held by Jim Cooper. I wish we had Vijay running here in Oregon instead of the liberal carp's like Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley. Here is what Vijay has to say at his official website. Links for his site will be the end of the post. His article appeared in Polictical Islam which is a really fine site.If you are fortunate enough to live in the 5th district, please vote for Vijay Kumar.
From his official website:
I am Vijay Kumar, and I am running for the 5th District Congressional seat presently held by Jim Cooper. I am an immigrant from India who has lived in Nashville for twenty-one years, and when I ran in the last election, I was blessed with winning almost a third of the vote.
I am running again because Congress has failed to take leader- ship on the issues of illegal immigration, taxation, English as our official language, our economy, healthcare reform, abortion, and the War on Terror, and I hope you share my belief that it is time for new leadership.
As an immigrant, I know firsthand the value of coming to America lawfully. I am grateful for having been given the opportunity to live the American dream.
Today, the fabric of that dream is being torn apart by multiculturalism, “political correctness,” illegal immigration, and radical Islamic terrorism. While many immigrants come here legally, eager to assimilate into American culture, others come with the purpose of replacing the American way of life. They seek to function as a state-within-a-state, with laws based upon the culture of their homeland that would destroy U.S. constitutional law. This cannot be allowed for any reason.
For illegal immigrants there should be no amnesty, and all the immigration laws must be rigorously enforced as a national security issue.We must grant citizenship only to those who vow to embrace and defend American values and culture.
We must affirm English as our official language. Linguistic divisions among people are as destructive as racial and religious divisions.
To save our economy we must adopt the Fair Tax plan. It abolishes the IRS, and casts off the heavy chains of federal personal and corporate income taxes, inheritance taxes, social security taxes, and a host of others, replacing them with one simple federal retail sales tax. Families would be taxed only on what they spend, not on what they earn, save, and wish to leave to their children. Americans spend more than $150 billion dollars annually for the preparation of taxes. What a waste!
It’s estimated that a staggering $20 trillion sits parked outside the United States in tax havens. The Fair Tax will bring that money home to rebuild domestic industry and jobs.
Our health care delivery system is broken, and a bandage won’t fix it. The quality of healthcare delivery deteriorates in every country where universal healthcare exists. Consumer-based health care is the answer, not employer-based, not government-based.
I am pro-life, unwaveringly and without compromise. Adoption and education are the solutions. The two-parent, father-mother family is the framework upon which our values are built. Anyone who seeks to destroy the family seeks to destroy the nation.
Congress’s strategy for fighting the global war on terror is a failure. I maintain that this war can be won :
•within five years, and
•for less than a billion dollars, and
•without the loss of further American life.
It must be waged on multiple fronts: ideological, financial, and military.
We must openly declare an ideological war on militant Jihadists, the real source of terrorism. We must stop all forms of aid to terrorist-supporting nations such as Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the Palestinian territories, regardless of any short-term gain we derive from supporting them. Meanwhile, we must strengthen our ties with neighboring democratic nations and support their efforts to fight our common enemy, Universal Jihad.
We must create a coalition of democracies that have been targets of International Jihad, including the United States, Britain, Western Europe, India, South Africa, Israel, Russia, and Japan so that all may join to stop global terrorism, and together we must establish and maintain a strong, lasting military presence in the Middle East.
In the end, I can only be your representative in Congress if I am accessible to all of you, my constituents. You have my promise that your concerns and interests will always be heard.
My family and I thank you for your support in my run for the 5th District Congressional seat. We ask your prayers for almighty God to bless us in this cause. Only by His aid and assistance can we succeed.
THE MUSLIM MOSQUE: A STATE WITHIN A STATE
By Vijay Kumar
THE KABAH IN MECCA WAS NOT BUILT AS AN ISLAMIC MOSQUE. It was an ancient temple that had been shared by polytheists, Christians, Jews, and Hindus, honoring 360 different deities. In 630 A.D. the Kabah was captured by Islam in its military invasion and conquest of Mecca.
On the day of its capture, Mohammed delivered an address at the Kabah in military dress and helmet, according to Ayatullah Ja’far Subhani in his book, “The Message”:
“Bear in mind that every claim of privilege, whether that of blood or property is abolished . . . I reject all claims relating to life and property and all imaginary honors of the past, and declare them to be baseless . . . A Muslim is the brother of another Muslim and all the Muslims are brothers of one another and constitute one hand as against the non-Muslims. The blood of every one of them is equal to that of others and even the smallest among them can make a promise on behalf of others.” —Mohammed
Mohammed’s address at the Kabah overthrew the Meccan government and declared all of Islam, anywhere in the world, to be a political and military state against all non-Muslims, regardless of the non-Muslims’ political, geographical, or national origins.
“If anyone desires a religion other than Islam (submission to Allah), never will it be accepted of him.” —Koran 3:85
Although the rightful owners of the Kabah are the many religions that shared it before the Islamic military conquest of Mecca, according to Subhani the Kabah today is under the control of a hereditary regime going back to Mohammed: “currently the 12th Imam from the direct descent of the Prophet of Islam is the real protector, its custodian and guardian.”
All Islamic mosques everywhere in the world are required to have a clear visible indication pointing in the direction of Mecca and the Kabah, where the international political and military state of Islam was founded. In most mosques there is a niche in the wall—the mihrab—that points toward the seat of Islamic power. Each mosque, like the Kabah, is governed by an Imam in compliance with the political documents of Islam.
Mosques and the Political Documents of Islam
The Koran is the supreme political document of Islam—its political manifesto and political constitution. It is the only constitution of the nation-state Saudi Arabia, which is the home of Mecca and the Kabah, where all mosques point, and is the birthplace of Islam.
The Koran is a totalitarian constitution. It demands submission by anyone within its jurisdiction. The Koran governs all mosques everywhere in the world. As a political document, the Koran asserts that everyone in the world is within its jurisdiction. So far, Islam has not been able to enforce that totalitarian claim on the entire world, but has managed to do so through threat, infiltration, violence, terrorism, and coercion on roughly 20% of the world. It is engaged in a 1400-year-long Universal Jihad to dominate the rest of the world. All mosques are its outpost headquarters.
Central to the Koran’s political mandates is prohibition of religious freedom and religious tolerance, along with denouncements of religions such as Christianity and Judaism.
“O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them.” —Koran 5:51
“Fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war)” —Koran 9:5
All mosque leaders must be loyal to and supportive of these political and militaristic mandates.
The Koran as a political document also forbids separation of church and state. That is why every Islamic nation, where Islamic leaders have managed to gain power, is a theocracy, ruled by the Koran and Islamic Sharia law.
The Hadith (reported sayings and acts of Mohammed) and the Sira (the official biographies of Mohammed) are the other political documents that, along with the Koran, constitute the basis for Islam’s Sharia law. “There is only one law which ought to be followed, and that is the Sharia.” —Syed Qutb
Sharia law is administered by Islamic Imams who interpret the law and hand down rulings in their sole discretion. Sharia law does not allow trial by jury. Sharia law also mandates a double standard of laws for Muslims (believers) and infidels (non-believers). Sharia law mandates a discriminatory tax, called jizya, on non-Islamic religions and nations:
“Fight those who believe not in Allah...until they pay the jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” —Koran 9:29
Sharia law also mandates discrimination toward women, and forbids any criticism of Islam or its founder, stifling freedom of speech. Sharia law also mandates that all men are slaves with no right to freedom of religion:
“Allah’s right on His slaves is that they should worship Him (Alone) and should not worship any besides Him.” —Mohammed, Sahih Bukhari 4:52:108, Narrated Mu’adh
Sharia law does not allow for separation of church and state. Sharia regards church and state as one inseparable entity governing every aspect of individual and social life, both spiritual and secular. That is why all Islamic nations are theocracies. In short, Sharia law stands in direct opposition to the American Constitution and Bill of Rights. The implementation of Sharia law demands the overthrow of the American Constitution and our form of government and system of laws. Mosque leaders, in every nation in the world, are loyal to the Koran, the Hadith, the Sira, and consider them divine law, and therefore supreme over all manmade laws.
Other political and military documents of Islam include treaties of Mohammed, which are held in reverence by Islam as models of conduct in relations between nations.
“Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah [Mohammed] a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for anyone whose hope is in Allah.” —Koran 33:21
“War is deceit.” —Mohammed, Sahih Bukhari 4:52:268, Narrated Abu Hurarira
In one treaty proposal, to Jaifer and Abd, Mohammed wrote: “If you two accept Islam, your country will, as usual, remain with you. But if you refuse or object, it is a perishable thing.” —Mohammed
In another, to the Chiefs of Aqaba, he wrote:
“It is better for you either to accept Islam or agree to pay Jizya and consent to remain obedient to Allah . . . If you do not accept these terms . . . I shall have to wage war (to bring peace and security).” —Mohammed
These same patterns and political mandates have been used over and over by Muslims since 610 A.D. to invade and conquer many civilizations and nations throughout the world, and to eradicate human rights and freedoms in those lands. Iran once was called Persia and was Zorastrian. Egypt was Christian. What was once a Hindu civilization was conquered and made into Pakistan, which is now part of the Axis of Jihad, along with Iran and Saudi Arabia. Afghanistan was Buddhist for thousands of years. Now its chief exports are heroin and Islamic terrorism.
“When We decide to destroy a population, We (first) send a definite order to those among them who are given the good things of this life and yet transgress; so that the word is proved true against them: then (it is) We destroy them utterly.” —Koran 17:16
In every instance where Islam has conquered and “destroyed utterly” a nation or civilization, the key to the conquest was the establishment of mosques, which are political and military command and control centers for Islam, and which all point toward the seat of Islamic power: the Kabah.
Mosques and the Fallacy of the “Moderate Muslim”
The majority of Germans during World War II were not active members of the Nazi party, were not waging war, and were not involved in the holocaust. The leaders, though, were active members of the Nazi party, were waging war, and were involved in the holocaust.
The majority of Russians and eastern Europeans under the rule of the U.S.S.R. were not trying to spread Communism throughout the world, and were not threatening and waging war and revolution, but were going about their daily lives trying to survive. The leaders, though, were doing everything they could to spread Communism throughout the world, and were threatening and waging war and revolution.
Throughout history, since 610 A.D., the leaders of Islam have been waging Universal Jihad around the world for the purpose of Islamic totalitarian domination of the world. It has never mattered what percentage of the Muslim population was “peaceful” or “moderate.” Peace and moderation are not relevant to the totalitarian mandates of Islam’s political documents, and Islam’s leaders always follow the totalitarian mandates of Universal Jihad contained in them.
There are post-Nazi democracies. There are post-Communist democracies. There are no post-Islamic democracies. Literal Islam, as contained in its political documents, is the consummate totalitarianism. Neither Nazism or Communism had a metaphysical factor, as does Islam. Islam uses its metaphysics as a wedge to drive in its totalitarian political doctrines.
Once Islam has established itself sufficiently in any nation, it seeks to overthrow any existing regime or constitution or law, and replace it with Islamic theocracy. Even the most “moderate” Muslim is bound to obey Islamic law, and so is bound to fight if ordered to fight:
“When you are called (by the Muslim ruler) for fighting, go forth immediately.” —Hadith Sahih Bukhari 4:52:79:Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas
All Islamic mosques have Islamic leaders (rulers) who can call Muslims for fighting, and as such are satellite headquarters for spreading Literal Islam’s political doctrine of world domination and totalitarianism—no matter how many “moderate Muslims” they serve.
Mosques and the Worldwide Islamic State
Islam is a de facto political state wherever it exists anywhere in the world. The Koran is its constitution. The Kabah is its seat of power, still in the control of the regime that occupied it in 630 A.D. All Muslims in the world, regardless of nationality, are required to travel to the Kabah at least once in their lifetime and pay homage to it.
The fact that nations and international political institutions in the world do not recognize Islam as a de jure state is irrelevant. Mohammed himself declared it as a state, and Islam’s own political documents declare it to be a state, and, ipso facto, it always is a state-within-a-state, governed by the Koran and Sharia law internally, anywhere that it has not yet gained full power and control.
“The Believers are but a single brotherhood.” —Koran 49:10
“A Muslim has no nationality except his belief.” —Syed Qutb
“Islam wishes to destroy all states and governments anywhere on the face of the earth which are opposed to the ideology and program of Islam regardless of the country or the nation which rules it. The purpose of Islam is to set up a State on the basis of its own ideology and program.” — Syed Abul A’ala Maudud
i
Just as our Constitution of the United States binds and identifies us as a single political and legal union of non-contiguous states, territories, political groups, and people, so the Koran binds and identifies all Islamic nations and all Muslims as a single political and legal union of non-contiguous nations, territories, political groups and people, regardless of geographic boundaries, whose seat of power is the occupied Kabah. All Islamic Imams, in every mosque everywhere in the world, are bound to the Koran as supreme law.
As we have seen, Islamic law gives Islamic Imams the power to order Muslims to fighting. The German Max Weber, who had considerable influence on international law and politics, defined “state” as that entity that has a “monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory.”
Islam declares that the Koran and Sharia law are divine, and, as such, are the only “legitimate” law in the world. In that way, Islam “self-legitimizes” its right to use physical force anywhere in the world, and the right of every Imam in every mosque in the world to call for physical force and violence at any time. This makes every Imam in every mosque a military leader. Islam is a state by every definition and theory, and is a state hostile to and at war with the United States of America and its Constitution.
Mosques and Treason and Sedition Against the U.S. Islam’s political documents and law call for the overthrow of our Constitution and our man-made laws, and therefore for the overthrow of our government, which by definition constitutes sedition and treason. The Islamic documents call for the overthrow of our government—a protector of religious freedom and human rights—through violence:
“I was ordered to fight all men until they say ‘there is no god but Allah.’” —Mohammed’s farewell address, 632
“I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.’” —Hadith Sahih Bukhari 4:52:196 Narrated Abu Huraira
“He who fights so that Allah’s Word (Islam) should be superior, then he fights in Allah’s cause.” —Hadith Sahih Bukhari 1:3:125 Narrated Abu Musa
“I asked the Prophet [Mohammed], ‘What is the best deed?’ He replied, ‘To believe in Allah and to fight for His Cause.’” —Hadith Sahih Bukhari 3:46:694 Narrated Abu Dhar
“And fight them till there is no more affliction (i.e. no more worshiping of others along with Allah)”. —Hadith Sahih Bukhari 6:60:40 Narrated Nafi’ “Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers.” —Koran 3.151
“I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them.” —Koran 8:12
“Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know.” —Koran 8:60
The Koran, as the constitution of Islam and Muslims, is diametrically opposite to the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights. According to Islam and Muslims, the Koran is divine law, uncorrupted and incorruptible, whereas the United States Constitution is man-made and is not infallible, and therefore is corrupt. The U.S. Constitution is the antithesis of the Koran; therefore Muslims have no obligation to obey it.
A mosque in the United States is a command and control center of a foreign political and military state that seeks the overthrow of our government, and an Imam in a mosque is a political and military representative of a foreign state that calls for the overthrow of the United States. The laws of the United States provide specific criminal penalties for sedition and treason. These laws are not only applicable to those advocating and calling for the overthrow of our Constitution and our government; they are applicable to anyone who gives “aid or comfort” to such declared enemies of the United States, or who “organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons” so engaged. The terms “organizes” and “organize” extend to “the recruiting of new members, the forming of new units, and the regrouping or expansion of existing clubs, classes, and other units of such society, group, or assembly of persons.”
Mosques are just such units.
______________________
Vijay Kumar is a Republican candidate for U.S. Congress from Tennessee's 5th District. A native of Hyderabad, India, Mr. Kumar lived in Iran during the 1979 Islamic Revolution, when he came to the United States. A naturalized American citizen, Mr. Kumar has lived in Nashville, Tennessee for 24 years. He has been married to his wife, Robin, a native of Bowling Green, Kentucky, for 27 years, and they have three children, two of whom are adopted.
Vijay Kumar's official site for U.S. Congress 5th District Tennesse
Original article in Poltical islam can be found here.
Showing posts with label Battling Islam and Jihad inside England. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Battling Islam and Jihad inside England. Show all posts
The Mosque: state within a state, Vijay Kumar
Posted by
PatriotUSA
at
1:55 AM
Labels:
Battling Islam and Jihad inside America,
Battling Islam and Jihad inside England,
Europe,
Islamic Global Subversion.,
Islamic infiltration,
Vijay Kumar: THE MUSLIM MOSQUE: A STATE WITHIN A STATE
British Man Left With 68 Stitches in Face After Muslim Gang Attack

Cross posted from Holger Awakens
The stories from Britain continue to flood in about just how dangerous it is on the streets of Britain for normal citizens as they run into the intimidation and violence of the islamic horde of gangs.
This story comes from The Opinionator and I cannot excerpt it totally below due to length but I encourage you to read the entire piece at their site.
Here's what happened to this young British father out for a stroll with his girlfriend and young son:
Now we have "Reece Johnson, 23, who was left with a six-inch laceration that needed 68 stitches after being attacked by a mob of 20 Asian 'youths'. Medics told him that the blade had stopped just short of his jugular vein and that he could have bled to death......He was then set upon and punched before one of the gang cut open his left cheek with a Stanley knife....Mr Johnson was taken to a specialist facial unit at the Royal Blackburn Hospital on Saturday night. He was given 20 stitches inside his face and another 48 on the outside."
Now, from the same article, I want to show you a list of headlines in Britain about the violence and terror being inflicted upon the British population by the islamic gangs (these are actual links to stories but I will not activate the links here):
Muslim Gang Rapes Man in Manchester CentreThis is what awaits America, people. This is what happens when muslim immigrants are appeased and allowed the status inherent from a successful campaign of "islamophobia" - the strategy of soft jihad is very simple - the political correctness of islamophobia is put in place in society, the islamic population is thus protected by "special rights", the threat of hate crime punishment against muslims is so severe that no one will dare strike back against the invaders and then, with sharia law in place, the citizenry is helpless against the then violent intimidation of the islamists.
Muslim gang robs & forces 3 teen boys to "Lick our boots"
MUSLIM GANG USES IRON PIPES AND CLUBS TO BLUDGEON 14 YR OLD ENGLISH BOY
GANG OF 15 BASEBALL BAT WIELDING MUSLIMS ATTACK BRITISH MAN
TEENAGER BEATEN IN PARK ATTACK
Son Brutally Murdered By "Asians" Yet Grieving British Mum Worries About Safety of Local Muslims
RACIST MUSLIM GANGS ATTACK & RAPE BRITISH WOMEN
POLICE HUNT THUGS IN FAITH HATE ATTACK AGAINST CLERGYMAN
2nd LONDON EAST END PRIEST ATTACKED & BEATEN BY MUSLIMS
MUSLIM THUGS CONTINUE TO TAKE OVER EAST END LONDON
DISABLED ELDERLY MAN LATEST VICTIM OF BRITAIN'S "STREET JIHAD"
12 & 13 YR. OLD PAPERBOY BROTHERS ATTACKED & BEATEN BY MUSLIM GANG
MUSLIM STREET JIHAD LEAVES BRITISH MAN BRAIN DAMAGED
These are British headlines above ... at what point will those headlines be appearing in Columbus, Ohio or in Little Rock, Arkansas or in Jacksonsville, Florida?
British Man left with 68 stitches in his face after brutal muslim gang slash attack
Now we have "Reece Johnson, 23, who was left with a six-inch laceration that needed 68 stitches after being attacked by a mob of 20 Asian 'youths'. Medics told him that the blade had stopped just short of his jugular vein and that he could have bled to death......He was then set upon and punched before one of the gang cut open his left cheek with a Stanley knife....Mr Johnson was taken to a specialist facial unit at the Royal Blackburn Hospital on Saturday night. He was given 20 stitches inside his face and another 48 on the outside." See article below
Young Mr Johnson will be left with a gigantic scar across his face and his 5 year old son, Tyrel, is traumatised from watching his father being brutally attacked and slashed.
So what was the supposed motive for this heinous violent attack? The excuse - and you know that law enforcement and judges will always give muslims an "excuse"for criminal behaviours, was revenge for a 2007 attack by 2 white teens that resulted in a death of a muslim man. Both assailants are now serving time for the crime.
Mr Johnson had nothing to do with that incident.
A clear sign of the cowardly nature of these racist, Kuffarophobic muslim thugs is they only attack is when they are in much greater numbers than the victims. This muslim gang proceeded to exact their racist, vigilante wrath onto the innocent Reece Johnson.
"They were saying "your lot killed one of ours" meaning white people killed an Asian lad.
'One of the guys was acting aggressively and the group was swearing and hurling racist abuse. They were very racist.
'I saw one of them in front of me with a small hand knife and I was watching him. But then another lad came at the side of me and punched me and that's when I was slashed." See article below
Reece Johnson - left with a large, highly visible facial scar covering the once gaping wound - worries:
"I'm scarred for life now and people might look at me and think I'm a violent thug.'
So the innocent victim will bear the mark of a 'violent thug'.
There is also eerie similarity to THE most despicable race hate crime in Scotland/Britain - the horrific murder of 15 year old schoolboy, Kriss Donald - who was tortured and killed by muslim gang/men for no other reason than the young lad was white.
as well as Rob Hughes, who was left with the imprint of a trainer on his forehead and nose following a vicious muslim gang attack.
AND brothers Thomas and David Barry, had their bodies pummelled and their faces smashed when they were set upon by a gang of up to 30 "youths" armed with hammers. The brothers had gone outside the pub to go to the aid of Thomas's son and his 16 yr. old girlfriend who the muslim gang had already attacked.
So far what is the sum total result of the police investigation into the muslim slasher-gang attack on Mr. Johnson?
Shariah law councils In England: Truly a bad idea
Posted by
PatriotUSA
at
1:27 PM
Labels:
Battling Islam and Jihad inside England,
Islam and shariah law,
Islamic shariah law councils,
Islamic subversion in England
Shariah law is acclaimed by Muslims to be one of the parts that completes Islam. Shariah law helps protect the family, individual and all who practice Islam and follow the teachings of Mohammad. It promotes peace and a just system to solve all differences that might arise between individuals. Any of you who have been reading here know how I feel about shariah law and the ideology of Islam. Here is a report from England on how well the shariah law councils that England has allowed are working. As with Islam in general, great if you are a man, not so great if you are a woman.
Sharia Councils ‘undermine social cohesion’
Mark Pritchard
Since the 1996 Arbitration Act, Government ministers have allowed Islamic tribunals around Britain to rule on a range of financial disputes, provided both parties agree to accept the court’s decision. But in recent years, these tribunals have developed into fully fledged Sharia Councils – allowed to settle new disputes, such as divorce, family law, and faith issues. These powers go well beyond the letter and spirit of the original legislation and whilst they provide new ways of dispensing cheap justice they do not always dispense fair justice.
By expanding the powers of Sharia Councils, ministers have set the scene for a breaking narrative which is fractious, discriminates against women, and, incrementally, is establishing a parallel legal system.
As Sharia Councils expand their powers and reach, ministers have unwittingly rolled the dice over a type of cultural snakes and ladders, all in the hope that such initiatives will increase inclusiveness and marginalise Islamic radicals. But all the evidence contradicts ministers’ stated aims. Sharia rulings are more likely to create legal ghettos – undermining rather than improving social cohesion. And in so doing, ministers are found guilty of piecemeal legal vandalism and managing the gradual decline of English jurisprudence.
The replacement of legal precedence and common law with Islamic codification is also a gift to some extremist parties who have seized on the increasing numbers of Sharia Councils as more evidence of the demotion of hard fought for British cultural freedoms and laws. And despite the protestations of senior government ministers over recent BNP advances, ministerial alarm calls will ring deep and hollow as long the same ministers continue to advocate two Britains.
The views of the BNP are repugnant, but it should not take BNP electoral gains for ministers to wake up to the fact that social cohesion cannot be predicated on the reality, or the perception, of one rule for one community and a different set of rules for everyone else. Allowing different groups to apply different standards at variants with existing common and statute law is a recipe for resentment and suspicion. This legal dualism also strikes at the very heart the great British virtue of fair play – and all British subjects being united – under one nation.
And as ministers sleepwalk into further fragmenting communities, they still decline to answer the fundamental question: do Muslim women enjoy the same rights under Sharia jurisprudence as under English law? Ministers should not be allowed to obviate when challenged about Islamic teaching on the role, rights, and responsibilities, of women in society. Ministers may choose to evade this issue, but Sharia principles and practices are unlikely to progress the much needed emancipation of Britain’s Muslim women.
Sharia Councils shine an embarrassing light on how ministers have increasingly relegated and downgraded thousands of Muslim women to de facto second class British citizens, perversely, in the name of tolerance and understanding.
The response of Government proponents of Sharia Councils say those who choose to come before councils do so on a voluntarily basis and that, according to the 1996 Act, parties are free to agree upon how their disputes are resolved. In reality, some Muslim women feel pressured into accepting the rulings of male-dominated Sharia Councils – mostly through fear of retribution and being ostracised – sometimes by their own families.
Women are also losing out in rulings over child custody disputes, which more often rule in favour of men. It is not unimaginable that, in the near future, people from other faiths – and no faith at all – will nominally or genuinely convert to Islam in the hope of begetting a sympathetic custody hearing and paternal settlement compared to the maternal bias of some English family courts.
Speaking at a justice conference last October, Justice Secretary, Jack Straw, commented: “There is nothing whatever in English law that prevents people abiding by Sharia principles if they wish to, provided they do not come into conflict with English law”.
Such conflicts occur throughout Britain every week, and with it, the shunning of basic rights for thousands of British Muslim women.
With Britain’s growing Muslim population, the sphere of Sharia Councils is likely to increase still further. This is something that must be resisted by those who believe in tolerance and mutual respect, and by those, including progressives in the Muslim community, who seek to champion the rights of all – including the equal rights of Britain’s female Muslims.
Mark Pritchard, Conservative MP for The Wrekin since 2005 and a member of the Conservative Party Human Rights Commission.
Hat tip: Jihad Watch
Sharia Councils ‘undermine social cohesion’
Mark Pritchard
Since the 1996 Arbitration Act, Government ministers have allowed Islamic tribunals around Britain to rule on a range of financial disputes, provided both parties agree to accept the court’s decision. But in recent years, these tribunals have developed into fully fledged Sharia Councils – allowed to settle new disputes, such as divorce, family law, and faith issues. These powers go well beyond the letter and spirit of the original legislation and whilst they provide new ways of dispensing cheap justice they do not always dispense fair justice.
By expanding the powers of Sharia Councils, ministers have set the scene for a breaking narrative which is fractious, discriminates against women, and, incrementally, is establishing a parallel legal system.
As Sharia Councils expand their powers and reach, ministers have unwittingly rolled the dice over a type of cultural snakes and ladders, all in the hope that such initiatives will increase inclusiveness and marginalise Islamic radicals. But all the evidence contradicts ministers’ stated aims. Sharia rulings are more likely to create legal ghettos – undermining rather than improving social cohesion. And in so doing, ministers are found guilty of piecemeal legal vandalism and managing the gradual decline of English jurisprudence.
The replacement of legal precedence and common law with Islamic codification is also a gift to some extremist parties who have seized on the increasing numbers of Sharia Councils as more evidence of the demotion of hard fought for British cultural freedoms and laws. And despite the protestations of senior government ministers over recent BNP advances, ministerial alarm calls will ring deep and hollow as long the same ministers continue to advocate two Britains.
The views of the BNP are repugnant, but it should not take BNP electoral gains for ministers to wake up to the fact that social cohesion cannot be predicated on the reality, or the perception, of one rule for one community and a different set of rules for everyone else. Allowing different groups to apply different standards at variants with existing common and statute law is a recipe for resentment and suspicion. This legal dualism also strikes at the very heart the great British virtue of fair play – and all British subjects being united – under one nation.
And as ministers sleepwalk into further fragmenting communities, they still decline to answer the fundamental question: do Muslim women enjoy the same rights under Sharia jurisprudence as under English law? Ministers should not be allowed to obviate when challenged about Islamic teaching on the role, rights, and responsibilities, of women in society. Ministers may choose to evade this issue, but Sharia principles and practices are unlikely to progress the much needed emancipation of Britain’s Muslim women.
Sharia Councils shine an embarrassing light on how ministers have increasingly relegated and downgraded thousands of Muslim women to de facto second class British citizens, perversely, in the name of tolerance and understanding.
The response of Government proponents of Sharia Councils say those who choose to come before councils do so on a voluntarily basis and that, according to the 1996 Act, parties are free to agree upon how their disputes are resolved. In reality, some Muslim women feel pressured into accepting the rulings of male-dominated Sharia Councils – mostly through fear of retribution and being ostracised – sometimes by their own families.
Women are also losing out in rulings over child custody disputes, which more often rule in favour of men. It is not unimaginable that, in the near future, people from other faiths – and no faith at all – will nominally or genuinely convert to Islam in the hope of begetting a sympathetic custody hearing and paternal settlement compared to the maternal bias of some English family courts.
Speaking at a justice conference last October, Justice Secretary, Jack Straw, commented: “There is nothing whatever in English law that prevents people abiding by Sharia principles if they wish to, provided they do not come into conflict with English law”.
Such conflicts occur throughout Britain every week, and with it, the shunning of basic rights for thousands of British Muslim women.
With Britain’s growing Muslim population, the sphere of Sharia Councils is likely to increase still further. This is something that must be resisted by those who believe in tolerance and mutual respect, and by those, including progressives in the Muslim community, who seek to champion the rights of all – including the equal rights of Britain’s female Muslims.
Mark Pritchard, Conservative MP for The Wrekin since 2005 and a member of the Conservative Party Human Rights Commission.
Hat tip: Jihad Watch
EDL to protest mega mosque In Dudley on April 3rd
Posted by
PatriotUSA
at
9:38 AM
Labels:
Battling Islam and Jihad inside England,
Dudley mega mosque protest,
EDL,
Islam
The EDL(English Defence League) will be in Dudely on Arpil 3 to protest a huge mega-mosque that has already been denied by the planning council, most likely on planning or blueprint guidlines rather than the dangers of what actually takes place inside most mosques. As this post mentions, the role of a church and a mosque are quite different. As often happens some dingbat in the government overturned the council's wise decision and has allowed the mosque project to continue. Reminds me of what Obama and the demosocialistacrats have done with Obamacare and many other key issues.
The EDL demonstration in Dudley promises to be a well attended demonstration that will be of historic importance. By attending, people have the opportunity to be part of the nation’s long and illustrious story. This is a critical time for England as it struggles with the legacy of misrule and incompetent leadership. Only the British people can now save Great Britain from its decline by standing up and being counted at this important juncture. When people ask where were you on 3 April 2010, what will you say? Be there or be irrelevant!
Who wants any size mosque built in their town? I do not want any more mosques built in my town or country. Islam, thereligion ideology of of trouble, persecution and violence
Support the EDL in their battle against Islam, shariah law and jihad in England.
.
The English Defence League Will Join Hands With The People of Dudley And Oppose Sharia In The Town on 3 April 2010
Aeneas
Proposed Dudley mega-mosque
Liberties Alliance, The English Defence League (EDL) Dudley demonstration is fast approaching and there is nothing that the pro Islamist toadies in the establishment can do about it! It seems that they may finally have to accept public opinion or risk losing their own political influence. The people of Dudley have a unique opportunity to join with like minded people from around the country and indeed from across Europe to stand up and say with a single voice ‘enough is enough’! In doing so those who do decide to join this important demonstration will be part of a multinational, multiracial, trans-social coalition of people who are joining together to oppose the tyranny and iniquity of sharia. It is an opportunity for people to thumb their noses at the political class who claim to know what is best for people and what is best for society. Any rational assessment that involves even a modicum of common sense would reveal such establishment proclivities toward the socially destructive and divisive to be the nonsense that we all know they are.
One of the key issues with regard to Dudley is the mega mosque project there. Due to public pressure, the Council effectively told the proponents of the structure to stick it by denying planning permission. I am sure they did it on justified planning grounds rather than by assessing the role of mosques in Islam, which perhaps should have been part of their deliberations, and indeed all deliberations with regard to the construction of mosques. However, it would appear that what in the opinion of some is a pro Government lackey overrode the decision of the democratic representatives of the people and reversed the Council decision – so much for local democracy and accountability!
Policy makers are probably already aware, though choose to negligently ignore, the publication entitled ‘The Mosque Exposed’ by S Solomon and E Almaqdis which outlines the role of the mosque in society and demonstrates quite clearly that its role is not identical to that of a Christian Church as many people erroneously believe. A mosque is not just a place of worship and spiritual reflection. Those who are interested in learning about the role of a mosque in society, be they ordinary members of the public or policy makers who have been entrusted as the custodians of national well-being, should certainly set time aside to read this excellent and informative little book – it is a real eye-opener.
Continue reading
The EDL demonstration in Dudley promises to be a well attended demonstration that will be of historic importance. By attending, people have the opportunity to be part of the nation’s long and illustrious story. This is a critical time for England as it struggles with the legacy of misrule and incompetent leadership. Only the British people can now save Great Britain from its decline by standing up and being counted at this important juncture. When people ask where were you on 3 April 2010, what will you say? Be there or be irrelevant!
Who wants any size mosque built in their town? I do not want any more mosques built in my town or country. Islam, the
Support the EDL in their battle against Islam, shariah law and jihad in England.
.
The English Defence League Will Join Hands With The People of Dudley And Oppose Sharia In The Town on 3 April 2010
Aeneas
Proposed Dudley mega-mosque
Liberties Alliance, The English Defence League (EDL) Dudley demonstration is fast approaching and there is nothing that the pro Islamist toadies in the establishment can do about it! It seems that they may finally have to accept public opinion or risk losing their own political influence. The people of Dudley have a unique opportunity to join with like minded people from around the country and indeed from across Europe to stand up and say with a single voice ‘enough is enough’! In doing so those who do decide to join this important demonstration will be part of a multinational, multiracial, trans-social coalition of people who are joining together to oppose the tyranny and iniquity of sharia. It is an opportunity for people to thumb their noses at the political class who claim to know what is best for people and what is best for society. Any rational assessment that involves even a modicum of common sense would reveal such establishment proclivities toward the socially destructive and divisive to be the nonsense that we all know they are.
One of the key issues with regard to Dudley is the mega mosque project there. Due to public pressure, the Council effectively told the proponents of the structure to stick it by denying planning permission. I am sure they did it on justified planning grounds rather than by assessing the role of mosques in Islam, which perhaps should have been part of their deliberations, and indeed all deliberations with regard to the construction of mosques. However, it would appear that what in the opinion of some is a pro Government lackey overrode the decision of the democratic representatives of the people and reversed the Council decision – so much for local democracy and accountability!
Policy makers are probably already aware, though choose to negligently ignore, the publication entitled ‘The Mosque Exposed’ by S Solomon and E Almaqdis which outlines the role of the mosque in society and demonstrates quite clearly that its role is not identical to that of a Christian Church as many people erroneously believe. A mosque is not just a place of worship and spiritual reflection. Those who are interested in learning about the role of a mosque in society, be they ordinary members of the public or policy makers who have been entrusted as the custodians of national well-being, should certainly set time aside to read this excellent and informative little book – it is a real eye-opener.
Continue reading
Battle with crybaby Muslim forces British couple to auction hotel.
Posted by
PatriotUSA
at
9:57 PM
Labels:
Battling Islam and Jihad inside England,
Global Islamic Subversion,
Stealth Jihad.
I remember when this spat blew up last year and reading about it at Jihad Watch, if my memory is correct. At any rate, a Muslim guest sued them for insulting Islam and the pervert Mohammad. Ben and Sharon Vogelenzang prevailed in court but their business has tanked thanks to a smear by a this nasty Muslim who bad mouthed the couple and their hotel to her doctors, who used the hotel to stay at for nearby conferences. This is a typical reaction, non-violent assault of Jihad. One could call it stealth Jihad. Jihad is Jihad as I have said many times before. It varies in the approach, method and tactics but the end result is always the same. Cry baby Muslims make me sick!
We're selling our hotel, say Christian couple in row with Muslim guest
Jonathan Petre
Daily Mail U.K., The two Christian hoteliers cleared last year of insulting a Muslim guest are being forced to sell up because their business has collapsed. Ben and Sharon Vogelenzang are putting their nine-bedroom hotel up for auction in May because they can no longer pay the mortgage. Despite donations sent to them by Christian supporters from around the world, they still have debts of well over £400,000.
Ben and Sharon Vogelenzang
They are also considering a civil action against the police who brought the prosecution. Mrs Vogelenzang, 54, said last night it was 'devastating' that they could be left with nothing as the result of a case that should never have come to court. 'Where do we go from here?' she said. 'How do we start all over again?' The couple saw their Liverpool business brought to its knees after an investigation into what was deemed a religiously aggravated hate crime against Ericka Tazi. The 60-year-old white British convert complained that the couple had called the prophet Mohammed a 'warlord' and told her that Muslim women were oppressed.
They were just telling the truth about Mohammad and Muslim women.
The case against them was thrown out after a judge at Liverpool magistrates' court said it flew in the face of their right to freedom of religious expression. After the victory, the couple hoped they would be able to revive the Bounty House Hotel near Aintree racecourse, which they had built up over ten years.
Four months later, however, they have failed to attract enough customers and are losing about £8,000 a month. One of their main sources of income before the case was the National Health Service, which used Bounty House for doctors attending conferences and groups of patients on pain-relief courses at the Walton Centre, part of Aintree Hospital. But the centre stopped sending guests to the hotel after the complaint by Mrs Tazi, one of its patients. 'Before the complaint, we were their first choice,' said Mrs Vogelenzang. 'But they seem to have lost interest in us. Despite the excellent feedback we received at the end of every course, our reputation hasn't counted for anything. That is upsetting.'
The couple remain furious with the police for the way the case was handled and are consulting The Christian Institute, the independent pressure group that paid for their defence, about launching a civil action.
Lawyers believe they might be able to claim they were discriminated against because of their Christian background. Mrs Vogelenzang added: 'Many people thought that when we won in court, everything would be OK. In reality, it has brought us to the brink of destruction, so it has not been a victory at all.'
Hat tip: Vlad Tepes
We're selling our hotel, say Christian couple in row with Muslim guest
Jonathan Petre
Daily Mail U.K., The two Christian hoteliers cleared last year of insulting a Muslim guest are being forced to sell up because their business has collapsed. Ben and Sharon Vogelenzang are putting their nine-bedroom hotel up for auction in May because they can no longer pay the mortgage. Despite donations sent to them by Christian supporters from around the world, they still have debts of well over £400,000.
Ben and Sharon Vogelenzang
They are also considering a civil action against the police who brought the prosecution. Mrs Vogelenzang, 54, said last night it was 'devastating' that they could be left with nothing as the result of a case that should never have come to court. 'Where do we go from here?' she said. 'How do we start all over again?' The couple saw their Liverpool business brought to its knees after an investigation into what was deemed a religiously aggravated hate crime against Ericka Tazi. The 60-year-old white British convert complained that the couple had called the prophet Mohammed a 'warlord' and told her that Muslim women were oppressed.
They were just telling the truth about Mohammad and Muslim women.
The case against them was thrown out after a judge at Liverpool magistrates' court said it flew in the face of their right to freedom of religious expression. After the victory, the couple hoped they would be able to revive the Bounty House Hotel near Aintree racecourse, which they had built up over ten years.
Four months later, however, they have failed to attract enough customers and are losing about £8,000 a month. One of their main sources of income before the case was the National Health Service, which used Bounty House for doctors attending conferences and groups of patients on pain-relief courses at the Walton Centre, part of Aintree Hospital. But the centre stopped sending guests to the hotel after the complaint by Mrs Tazi, one of its patients. 'Before the complaint, we were their first choice,' said Mrs Vogelenzang. 'But they seem to have lost interest in us. Despite the excellent feedback we received at the end of every course, our reputation hasn't counted for anything. That is upsetting.'
The couple remain furious with the police for the way the case was handled and are consulting The Christian Institute, the independent pressure group that paid for their defence, about launching a civil action.
Lawyers believe they might be able to claim they were discriminated against because of their Christian background. Mrs Vogelenzang added: 'Many people thought that when we won in court, everything would be OK. In reality, it has brought us to the brink of destruction, so it has not been a victory at all.'
Hat tip: Vlad Tepes
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)