Sharia Alert from...Britain: "1,000 men living legally with multiple wives despite fears over exploitation," by Dominic Kennedy from the TimesOnline, with thanks to Andrew Bostom:
Polygamous marriage is flourishing as the Government admits for the first time that nearly a thousand men are living legally with multiple wives in Britain.Although the families are entitled to claim social security for each wife, no one has counted how many of them are on benefits.
Ministers appear to be ignoring the separate practice of unauthorised polygamy, which is said to have become commonplace in some Muslim communities. The Ministry of Justice admits that it has no estimates of numbers for these unions, which are often presided over by an Islamic cleric.
A senior Conservative MP and immigration expert called for action last night to end the scandal of women being pressured into entering unrecognised marriages with no rights.
"The Government has no grip on the situation," said Humphrey Malins, the former Shadow Home Affairs Minister and founder of the Immigration Advisory Service. "This is quite clearly exploitation of women."...
"It is estimated that there are fewer than 1,000 valid polygamous marriages in the UK, few of whom are claiming a state benefit," the Department for Work and Pensions said. "Because of the small numbers concerned, our IT systems do not specifically record such information."
Exploitation of women? Some of them may be unwilling parties to these relationships, but more likely they are "pious" Muslims submitting to Sharia and enjoying a far better standard of living than they would have known in their respective countries of origin, where polygamy is only for those men who can afford to have more than one concubine, er spouse.
No, if anyone is being exploited its taxpayers who are being compelled to support these parasites.
NO ONE REALLY KNOWS EXACT NUMBER-New Labour desperate to downplay their shortcomings as well
as numbers. Only a couple of years ago they were reassuring Brits-'there are only a tiny minority
of extremists,perhaps 200 at most' BLAH,BLAH...
Yeah,we heard it all before and it's called LYING.
How come British citizens are JAILED for Bigamy but not members of Mo's Stone Age Death Cult??
Which means Sharia Law is operating in the U.K
already.
Make it illegal and deport them...it is a good time to tighten the immigration laws and ban Muslim immigration...
Islam is a plague upon the earth...
"Make it illegal and deport them..."
Last time I checked polygamy in the UK IS illegal.
Hmmm, so this exploits women, at least some of whom enter willingly into these polygamous relationships.
What will the government and committee heads come up with as a solution? I know! They could make polygamy legal to protect the rights of these downtrodden women! And let's not forget the rights of their children!
But it should be legal only for those whose religion permits it, of course. They wouldn't want to get carried away or be accused of trying to change the fabric of society.
More here:
http://sheikyermami.com/2007/05/29/polygamy-thrives-in-britain-all-in-the-name-of-tolerance-diversity-of-course/
And OT but check out this great interview with Hirsi Ali. More on her visit to Australia at Sheik's site:
http://sheikyermami.com/2007/05/28/ayaan-hirsi-ali-in-australia-soldiers-of-allah-go-ballistic/
Here is the link to the interview video clip:
http://www.worldnewsaustralia.com.au/region.php?id=137357®ion=7
"Although the families are entitled to claim social security for each wife, no one has counted how many of them are on benefits."
They've got to be 'kidding' about this...literally.
If the Brits don't shut down these Mo'breeders soon, all will be lost.
Deport every one of these Mo'seeders and their multiple wives back to their countries of origin.
And, put the clerics who presided over these unauthorized ceremonies and their mosques out of business.
This could provide the Brits the perfect opportunity to clean house and take their country back before its too late.
The British welfare bureaucracy is full of leftists, multikultis and Muslims. They make the decisions, so of course welfare checks will be doled out to multiple wives & their broods and the number must be greater than 1,000. I think Israel was doing the same for Muslims within Israel proper. Supporting their huge polygamous broods via welfare
The IT system may not 'specifically' identify multiple wives but the information is there for anybody who would like to look at it. Nobody wants to look at it because, if one did, he would be in a position of either covering it up or doing something about it.
Covering things up may involve personal career risk; somebody may write you up or blame you on TV. Doing something about it would involve facing the problem, breaking up 'families', and sparking a dangerous situation. Maybe even lighting off the conflict.
So it is just easier to look the other way and keep the checks flowing. Polite society and the tax base are nothing to fear. Our governments have been paralyzed by political correctness in the face of the threat of violence.
1,000? Tens of thousands, rather.
dolphin,
CAGE co-founder.
http://www.acage.org/
mo womens... mo better...
Sometimes I think Mo got it right with the womens and the suckling in the workplace and all that. Nice touch with the 'give it to him even on the back of a camel if that's the way he likes it.' The tilth and plowing are good images too, but I wish he'd been looser on showing skin. I like skin, especially that mocha choka chocalata a.k.a. Lady Marmalade type sexy-nasty. :)
Mohammed picked the right Allah to back him up too. Good choice to keep that Ka'baa with the one allah stone and get rid of the other 359 idols. Notice that Allah backed up Mohammed in every sexual or marriage controversy the old boy had post-emigration? The allah stone seems to have been grateful.
"It is estimated that there are fewer than 1,000 valid polygamous marriages in the UK"
Polygamy is illegal in the UK, what has the fact that "there are fewer than 1000 polygamous marriages in the UK" got to do with anything? How many does the government have to "accept" before there are deemed to be "too many"? "Fewer than" 10,000? 50,000? 100,000?
What about marriage to children, practiced in many muslim countries' and set out in the example of mohammed? How many child brides would be considered enough?
Honour killings? Threats that "your 9/11 is on its way"? Murdering people for not being a muslim (see: Kris Donald et al) All of these are illegal in the UK but muslims ignore these and the government ignores them in the name of "multiculturalism".
When does "fewer than" become "too many"?
How many murders must we sweep under the carpet for fear of insulting someones beliefs or religion? Maybe someone could ask Kris Donalds parents, or the parents of all the other victims of the "religion of peace"?
From the Times article...
Muslims believe that the Prophet Muhammad practised polygamy. One of his motivations was thought to have been charity, taking on widows in time of war.
widows in time of war....widows that he caused
They weren't widows before Mohammad showed up...
And robbing others to support them isn't charitable.
From the Canadian Government's website:
One cannot enter into a valid polygamous marriage in England. Although there is no criminal offence of polygamy, bigamy is a criminal offence under the Offences Against the Person Act s. 57, which effectively makes it an offence to enter into a polygamous marriage in England. However, under the Matrimonial Causes Act, 1973, the United Kingdom considers marriages contracted on or after August 1, 1971 as being valid, if both parties had personal capacity under the law of their respective domiciles to enter into the marriage and if the marriage is valid in the country in which it took place. This allows for the legal recognition for certain family law purposes of polygamous marriages in England.
The United Kingdom has a policy of "prevent[ing] the formation of polygamous households" in the United Kingdom.12 This policy is achieved, in part, through s. 2 of the Immigration Act, 1988, which allows only one of the wives involved in a polygamous marriage to be sponsored by her husband to immigrate to the United Kingdom. In a debate over the enactment of that Act, then Home Secretary Douglas Hurd stated that the number of polygamous wives entering the United Kingdom was minimal, but that "polygamy is not an acceptable social custom in this country."13 Shah (2003: 392) argued that, while polygamy was originally prohibited in Britain because of arguments grounded on the Christian view of marriage in that country, those arguments have now "metamorphosed into the unacceptability of the custom on grounds of �community relations' or the norms of gender equality and human rights."
Although generally only one wife is permitted to enter England, the Immigration Act, 1988 provides for an exception in the case of a wife who entered the United Kingdom before August 1, 1988 and was admitted on the basis of her marriage. The Act also provides for an exception in the case of a woman who entered the United Kingdom after her marriage and while her husband was not living in the United Kingdom with a different wife. Shah (2003) noted that, under the Immigration Rules, a second wife could, in theory, also enter the United Kingdom as a visitor or a refugee, and observed that some multiple wives and their children may be living with their husbands in England illegally.
Under the Immigration Rules, para. 296 of HC 395, if a wife party to a polygamous marriage is denied entry, her children will be denied entry as well. Under certain extenuating circumstances, such as the death of their mother, those children may qualify for entry to live with their father.14 It is also noteworthy that, to avoid a potential claim of gender discrimination, para. 278-280 of HC 395 were amended to include polyandrous marriages (one wife and more than one husband), as well as polygynous marriages (one husband and more than one wife).15
Ongoing concern about the practice of polygamy in the United Kingdom is indicated by the recently enacted Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Act, 2004. Section 14 increases the powers of arrest of immigration officers to include a situation where the immigration officer has formed a reasonable suspicion that a person has committed or attempted to commit one of a number of crimes, including bigamy.
The British Human Rights Act 1998 came into force in October 2000, prompting media reports that the British policy of not permitting polygamous marriages might be vulnerable to a human rights challenge under the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Malik 2000). Article 12 of the Convention, which guarantees the right to marriage and to found a family, was incorporated into British law by the Human Rights Act 1998.16 However, while the Directive of the Council of the European Union (discussed above) to limit immigration by parties to polygamous marriages is not directly applicable to the United Kingdom, it may well be indicative of how the Convention will be interpreted, suggesting that the United Kingdom policy does not violate the Convention.17
******************
It seems Great Britain has been working towards the acceptance of polygamy by muslims for years. Never mind the poor women being victimized !
I'd be more concerned about the poor British taxpayers, myself.
Name another other time in world history where one demographic group has invited another into its home country and then taxed itself in order to sustain the well being of the foreign group. Historically the native group is supposed to exploit the new laborers. This time it's the other way around. Our current system is not in line with traditional human behavior.
We have now burnt through Orwell's "Problem of Overproduction" by redistributing income. The money is gone. The politicians have committed us to social programs that we can't afford. We are broke. Even USA Today ran an article today, it is on Drudge:
Taxpayers are now on the hook for a record $59.1 trillion in liabilities, a 2.3% increase from 2006. That amount is equal to $516,348 for every U.S. household. By comparison, U.S. households owe an average of $112,043 for mortgages, car loans, credit cards and all other debt combined.
...it can be misleading to focus on the government's unfunded liabilities because Medicare's financial problems overwhelm the analysis.
We'll get to see a different group dynamic when the checks stop showing up in the mail. Now how about that Lindsay Lohan?
The UK better decide quickly if its culture is superior than Islam because Islam thinks it is superior and there is no middle ground with Islam.
How about Imperial Rome around A.D. 150 to A.D. 400?
Bread and circuses... immigrants crowding cities ... migrations of large barbarian groups at the borders ... placate the people with diversions of bread and circuses...
We are living the Roman Decline today.
Any comment from the so-called feminists? Or is it "progressive" to exploit women in the name of multicultiralism?
OT
Some anti-dhimmitude
[-]
http://www.cphpost.dk/get/101838.html
Prosecutors will not bring charges of racism against twelve members of the Danish People?s Party before the district court
District prosecutors have decided not to bring racism charges against high-ranking members of the nationalist Danish People’s Party, including leader Pia Kjærsgaard.
Prosecutor Karsten Hjorth said last week that the evidence presented to him by 66 citizens, which consisted of numerous public comments made primarily against Muslims, was insufficient to support a charge of racism.
‘I have determined that the reported statements all fall within the acceptable boundaries of politicians’ freedom of speech,’ said Hjorth, who found that in all the cases he had reviewed, the comments were directly related to specific events or facts.
Besides Kjærsgaard, the most quoted members of the Danish People’s Party were MEP Mogens Camre, MP Søren Krarup and former party MPs Louise Frevert and Morten Messerschmidt. Among the comments included in the charges were that Muslims were invading Western countries with an eye to kill and that the men were out to rape Danish women.
Vagn Greve, law professor at the University of Copenhagen, agreed with some of Hjorth’s assessments, but not all.
‘I think the worst of the comments presented are at the same level as others that have previously led to guilty verdicts and fall within the categories of insult and degradation.’
The 66 citizens - which included a few well-known media personalities - indicated in their press release that the public prosecutor has made it ‘impossible for the courts to decide where the line between propaganda and actual political debate ought to be in relation to conventions and national laws’.
Kjærsgaard said that the charges were an example of how people misuse the anti-racism legislation.
‘I’m being reported for not disassociating myself from what I said. I think it’s worrying that politicians and the press use so much time on restricting free speech,’ she said.
The citizens group will now appeal the prosecutor’s decision to the district attorney’s office.
Two examples of the derogatory comments about Muslims included in the racism charges against the Danish People’s Party:
‘The idea of ‘rational Muslims’ supporting democracy and human rights is an illusion.’
Mogens Camre, MEP
‘No one in their wildest imaginations could have predicted that large areas of Copenhagen would be populated by people from a lesser civilisation, with their primitive and gruesome customs such as honour killings, forced marriages and blood revenge.’
Pia Kjærsgaard, party leader
Source: Politiken
The Copehagen Post
[-]
Rehabilitated terrorist / EU hostage extortionist is "very easy to deal with";
Tony Blair today kicked off his farewell tour of Africa by praising the Libyan dictator, Muammar Gadafy, as a man he found "very easy" to deal with and one who had always kept his word to him.
Speaking to reporters on the plane en route to Libya, the prime minister said they spoke several times a year, and had a "relationship of trust" on first-name terms.
That would have been "unthinkable" 10 years ago, he said, when relations between the two countries were at their lowest ebb following the murder of police constable Yvonne Fletcher outside the Libyan embassy in London in 1984, and the Lockerbie bomb in December 1988.
"He's very easy to deal with. To be fair to him there's nothing that I've ever agreed with him should be done that hasn't happened. That's important," Mr Blair said.
Only a 1000 you have to be joking!
It must be five years since an unpleasant sounding Muslim woman was interviewed on BBC Radio 4's "Today" telling the anchor man that Muslims "Had been supporting Labour for years and is about time they had some payback". That is pretty much a direct quote and I assumed the item was specifically included to "test the water".
About three years ago BBC Radio 4 devoted half an hour one afternoon midweek to the subject of polygamous marriages. This included interview with several men and women (including it has to be said some ethnic Englishwoman) who were in polygamous marriages with muslims. The whole tone of the programme was; "Gosh I didn't know polygamous marriages were so common!" I would have thought that if BBC Radio 4 said they were "common" it would suggest a great deal more than 1000. I thought the politicians were testing the water again.
In my experience of the poorer Asian communities it appeared normal for men in their Forties to divorce their first wife and bring in a young woman from Pakistan or Bangladesh and raise a second family. Wife number one generally lived close by on social security. The British film "East is East", about an Anglo Muslim family 30 years ago, was based on an actual family. Part of the story concerned the English second wife refusing to allow wife number one join them from Pakistan.
The more educated Muslims are much more open about it. Within the last three months the young British born and educated colleague of a family member married his 4th wife. He said he knew only one was legal but he didn't think it was a problem. I don't think it will be because Labour's first action on taking power was to pay off its Muslim voters by abolishing the last restrictions on overseas marriages. Consequently 60 per cent of all Muslims now bring in partners from the Indian sub-continent. It's therefore reasonable to assume that at least two of this young man's four wives have been brought in illegally.
Only a 1000 you have to be joking!
These people vote Labour and so the Labour government isn't going to do anything about it.
And they wonder why people are considering the BNP (whom I do not like before anyone starts).
The Labour party are the real racists.
Posted by: Elric66
Check this out... strong words from a woman on importing misogyny.
Exclusive: Importing Violence: The Danger of Immigration from Violent Cultures
Deborah Schurman-Kauflin, Ph.D.
Author: Deborah Schurman-Kauflin, Ph.D.
Source: The Family Security Foundation, Inc.
Date: May 29, 2007
sorry - link is:
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/challenges.php?id=1011612
"The Government has no grip on the situation,"
Alas, I fear this is the case throughout the civilized world.
Apparently, none of our Western leaders appear to have a grip.
Pathetic...
Apparently, none of them appear to have a grip.
Pathetic...
Those Mormons practicing polygamy here in the States ought to pack up and head for the UK. Maybe they can get more benefits, wonder what the UK would do with them that they won't do with the Muslims
they already can get the benefits here.
just divorce the 1st, and she can collect (since married couples get zilch).
so, if you have 4-5 wives you can get 3-4 of them collecting and you're legally only married to 1!
piece o'cake.
for islam, they just are married to 1 in the uk but the others in foreign countries.
that's their method.
"Mr Malins asked the Government three years ago to reveal how many unregistered polygamous weddings took place in Britain, but he did not receive an answer. Now officials admit that they do not know.
The practice is said to have become commonplace, at least among Kashmiris, a group that accounts for most of the 747,000 Pakistanis in Britain.
=======================
The government doesn't know "how many" but it's commonplace among "most of the 747,00 Pakistanis in Britian."
Am I surprised?
Are you?
How many of them are on the public dole? If there are 1,000 men with 4 wives each and 2 children per wife, well do the math.
First, get them off the welfare roles.
Do not allow anyone with more than one wife to emigrate.
If they have more than one wife, arrest them and deport them and their families immediately.
The State could have no say in marraige laws each religion should have they own marriage laws. The law against have more than 1 wifes at the same time is unenfroceable due to many resean. First I thought some people next door to me when I was liveing in a house where than famility with than man have 6 wives none of my bussieness they where not mistreated and they where very happy women. 2) Many younger people see nothing wrong with polymane marriage.
"The State could have no say in marraige laws each religion should have they own marriage laws."
Posted by: DefenderofIslam
...would this be like the state should have no say in who visits its holy sites?.....
In western countries marriage IS the states business. The state enforces protection laws for wives and children. Family support, education, health, etc.
In countries where the state does not provide those things maybe the state does not care how many wives and children are in a marriage.
It IS the states business. The father of thirty children is most likely NOT supporting them on his own. Or paying for their education. And not contributing to the tax base of his state while using up taxpayer services. And when one group of people are excused from following the law of the land that makes the others angry. There is a RESAON that polygamy was outlawed. It makes the state more civilized.
It's funny that in the US it is strongly fought and the likes of Warren Jeffs are on the FBI's most wanted list (before his arrest) while you hear very little about the phenomenon in the muslim community, or if you do, it's hushed up numbers like the case listed above.
just for thought...
http://wizbangblog.com/2006/03/20/muslim-polygamy-in-america.php
Those Mormons practicing polygamy here in the States ought to pack up and head for the UK. Maybe they can get more benefits, wonder what the UK would do with them that they won't do with the Muslims
Posted by: TheRegulator [TypeKey Profile Page] at May 29, 2007 3:41 PM
Heck, Mormons had to move to Mexico to get freedom from persecution in the 1840's, it makes sense that the government's business is freedom of religion, for some.