Don't you wonder why this should even come up in a free country? This should never be a problem.

I guess it was never 'splained well enough to the immigrants/illegals, that just because it was legal back home, doesn't make it legal here.

Same goes with polygamy and honor killing. You people (islamists) tend to forget that the girls are free now they are in a free country.

This is why all immigrants/illegals should be closely watched for the first few years. They, men/women/children, should be made to assimilate. They should be made to attend classes in the host country's history and culture. There should be massive invasion by social services people for a few years after entry in a country to make sure that women and children aren't being treated like they would have been back home. If they are found to be slipping back into their old ways.....out they go. Back to the home country.

Posted by: freewoman at July 24, 2006 8:33 AM

Everyone, please connect the dots.

In Britain, forced marriages are legal, polygamy is accepted for taxation purposes by the taxation office, a $3 million mosque was built in a jail housing muslim terrorists, etc etc.

The British establishment are traitors to their country. Britain has been turned. It will only get worse.

Posted by: Voltaire at July 24, 2006 9:39 AM

The reason given by the government is that there were existing laws to cover the abuse, things like kidnapping, threats to kill etc.
The silly thing is that there were, are, plenty of laws to cover terroritst activity; we don't really need some of the recent acts, they are just to sound good, what we actually need is the political will to use the perfectly good laws we already had.
In this situation of forced marriage, when a new law would, as stated above, give victims the power to say to their family, ‘You can’t do this to me. It’s against the law.’ and be useful they stick with the status quo.

At least if the police and prosecution realise the scope of this crime, and retain their will to prosecute, then in practical terms that is the most important.

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at July 24, 2006 9:40 AM

Huge civil penalties against all who participate in forced marriages would be a start.

Posted by: moderationist at July 24, 2006 10:17 AM

Where is Cherie Blair now?

Can you here me Mrs Blair high up there in your Ivory Tower? how come you haven't got your encyclopedia of human rights out on this one?

No one's listening I guess but I suppose that depends on who's doing the shouting down below!!

Posted by: snowman at July 24, 2006 11:42 AM

Nirvana Asian Women’s Project, which helps victims,

Now, there are men of all ethnicities, races and religions who batter women. But by ignoring the structure by which Islam quietly systemizes all of this - from Islamic strictures on women - these women's groups guarantee that they'd never get to the 'root-cause' of these problems, which they assume is exclusively gender based, with no other variables thrown in.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at July 24, 2006 11:58 AM

The Muslim Council of Britain gave a warning that such a law might become “another way to stigmatise our communities”. When Baroness Scotland, the Home Office Minister, announced the Government’s reversal, she said that most of those consulted “felt that the disadvantages of creating new legislation would outweigh the advantages”.

This issue should not be negotiable. Rather than this being a case of political correctness it is actually the opposite. It is effectively abandoning women and girls of a certain "faith" and/or from a certain country. They remain, due to expediency, (respect for religious or cultural values) the chattel of their menfolk, property to be traded and their rights are of no value - we should not interfere. This is an outrage.

But hey! We are talking about muslim votes here......

Posted by: Turbinehead at July 24, 2006 12:15 PM

which they assume is exclusively gender based

I was trying to find a website for the Nirvana Group earlier but didn't have time for a thorough search. The group I did find, Refuge, has a section for "South Asian Women" and lists sisters and mothers-in-law quite prominently in the list of relatives who might be putting the woman in fear. That's the first time I have ever seen that. OT I have come across more than one domestic violence case where the woman was doing the battering on her husband.

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at July 24, 2006 12:34 PM

Not outlawing forced marriages is an embarrasment for a nation that has always been one of the pillars of Western Civilization. It's an abdication of the government's responsibility to protect it's female citizens, no matter what their ethnic background. And it's yet another disturbing sign of the islamization of the UK.

Posted by: Proud Infidel at July 24, 2006 12:48 PM

Gordon Brown wishes to turn Britain into the Islamic "piggy bank" (pun intended). Hence the government will do NOTHING to rock the boat with these people, that includes allowing them to murder British citizens in cold blood.

Posted by: DaveMate at July 24, 2006 12:56 PM

"They should be made to attend classes on the host country's history and culture."

freewoman-

Why not make it a requirement for any form of taxpayer related public aid? Certainly would have no effect, but wouldn't it be fun to just make them sit in a class on Saturdays in order to get those checks?

Posted by: We need G.C. Scott at July 24, 2006 2:32 PM

Fellow British Citizens

Fed up with this sort of nonsense from our Government? Then have a look here:

www.popularalliance.org

They are a new registered political party, and here's what they've got to say about Islam and Muslims in their immigration policy section. Please note that point d) relates specifically to this thread:

" a) We would take immediate action to arrest and bring to trial any preachers of hate and violence, like Abu Hamza. It was intolerable that he was allowed by the British government to openly preach his messages of hate on the streets of Britain until being arrested just before a General Election. A tolerant Britain should not tolerate intolerant preachers of hate and violence, whether Muslim or otherwise.

b) We would ban on all further Muslim immigration into Britain unless there are truly exceptional family or personal circumstances - until such time as the Muslim community is much better integrated into British society.

c) We would prosecute, under existing racial hatred laws, the owners of Islamic bookshops who stock books and pamphlets that promote a violent ‘jihad’ interpretation of The Koran, or incite racial hatred of Jews - and we would prosecute the authors and publishers of those books and pamphlets. We would not duck this issue as previous Labour and Conservative governments have done for years.

d) We would make procuring the forced marriage of any British citizen or any resident in Britain - still common within the Muslim community - a crime, punishable by imprisonment. Of course this would apply to anyone procuring a forced marriage, not just Muslims.

d) We would make membership of, or clear association with, extremist Muslim organisations like Hizb-ut-Tahrir illegal, as we have done for membership of the I.R.A. (we would also of course proscribe any organisation that advocated violence).

e) We would prosecution for treason British-born Muslims - or Muslims who have become British citizens - who take part (or can be proved to have intended to take part) in fighting against British forces. Again, of course, prosecutions for treason should take place if any British citizen, no matter what his skin colour or religion, actively plots against this country’s interests.

f) We would not authorise the immigration of any more imams, mullahs or ayatollahs into Britain."

Some more good news for Brits as well: it has been established that if current immigration trends continue, then by 2050, the largest minority group in Britain will be ...... Polish people! This is due to the fact that up to 500,000 Poles have come to Britain to look for work in the last 2 years. The last time I looked, the Poles don't believe in the Sharia, so Britain is saved from Dhimmitude!

God bless the Poles!

Posted by: Amicus at July 24, 2006 3:42 PM

This is why all immigrants/illegals should be closely watched for the first few years. They, men/women/children, should be made to assimilate. They should be made to attend classes in the host country's history and culture. There should be massive invasion by social services people for a few years after entry in a country to make sure that women and children aren't being treated like they would have been back home. If they are found to be slipping back into their old ways.....out they go. Back to the home country.

Posted by: freewoman at July 24, 2006 08:33 AM

.. but why let these backward, illitrate and uncouth animals in our advanced societies? Why? What can be gained by letting hordes who grew up on a sustained dose of vitriolic poison? What? Add to that the immutable instructions of never be-friend infidels, never even greeting infidels, smiting the necks of the unbelievers... Don't you see letting such brainwashed, illitrate,cult-worshippping animals is a disaster, like 9/11, 7/11, 77, waiting to happen?

Posted by: Alert at July 24, 2006 4:27 PM

Frorm the article: "His concern about the about-turn, which was partly prompted by fears that the new law would stigmatise Muslims ..."

Dammit, another dhimmi walking, they are already stigmatized. I have nothing nice to say, and my favorite Muslim slur will cause my posting to be removed. So, what's to say except #@$%$#@*^%&!

Posted by: Pelayo at July 24, 2006 5:08 PM

Alert, I'm all for immigration of the best and brightest, not the underclass. As we know, islam has none of the best and brightest. Just underclass and potential jihadists. I TRULY believe we have enough immigrants here to do the jobs we Americans won't do. Rapes, robbing, shootings, gang rapes, honor killing, terrorism and etc.

But since our government doesn't listen to the people who put them in office, this is the least they can do when they let in savages.

Posted by: freewoman at July 24, 2006 6:09 PM

It's the metropolitan police who pressurised the government into at least considering taking action on forced marriages - they're the ones who have to field emergency calls from teenage girls who've just undergone, or are about to undergo, the delights of marital rape ( a concept unknown to Islam)- with their parents as accessories to the crime.

Posted by: wallyUK at July 24, 2006 6:50 PM

I'm not sure I understand this. Apparently muslims have admitted that they engage in forced marriage, otherwise they wouldn't have objected to this law by saying it would "stigmatize" muslims. How can you be "stigmatized" by a reasonable law that protects all British citizens? No, they wouldn't be stigmatized by this law, they would be forced to change their inhuman practice of female slavery and male ownership of females.

Does this mean that it is legal in the U.K. for muslims, or anyone else, to force female family members into marriages they oppose? What happens if the poor bride flees? Is the ensuing honor killing also legal? The way I understand this, muslims are subject to a special law designed just for their "culture", making forced marriage legal just for them, or else they are exempt from a law that applies to everyone else.

This is a slippery slope. If the British government starts designing special laws to accomodate the cultural/religious traditions of muslims, where will it stop? They will have to write a separate set of laws for every cultural/ethnic/religious group in the country. This is surreal!

Posted by: Susanp at July 24, 2006 10:26 PM

freewoman, the better idea is to not let any of them in any more.

Posted by: learnmore at July 25, 2006 12:33 AM

Perhaps we should review the anti-paedophile laws we have in case it refelects badly on the islamic prophet mohammed.

Actually, in Iran a few years ago, an attempt to raise the age of consent (consent! pah! like the concept exists anyway) for girls in marriage was stopped by hardliners for that very reason who said it would reflect badly on mohammed.

Posted by: Celsius at July 25, 2006 10:54 AM

Celsius, that will happen. That will happen.

Posted by: Voltaire at July 25, 2006 5:23 PM

At least if the police and prosecution realise the scope of this crime, and retain their will to prosecute, then in practical terms that is the most important.

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at July 24, 2006 09:40 AM

Granny, you underestimate the dogged hard-headed determination of Muslims. They will break laws till the law suits them. Enter SHARIA, if you get the picture...........

Posted by: Alert at July 25, 2006 11:31 PM

Alert, exactly....it's like a ratchet effect. They might not succeed at the first demand, but they will try again or try with a different angle etc, until they get their way. Once the concession is in the bag, it will never be revoked so they move onto the next issue. All the while, their numbers growing bigger to back up their demands.

Posted by: Celsius at July 26, 2006 11:19 AM