I believe the same practice occurs here. Somalis in Massachusetts and Maine brag about their 4 wives and 20 children (all of which, certainly, receive generous benefits).

Posted by: sonomaca at April 18, 2007 12:26 AM

Because my friends, Britain like America has allowed immigrants who really owe no allegiance to their new country, to get jobs in the government where they give special favors to their friends, family members, and to their former countrymen.

You can see it here all the time. At the DMV, at hospitals.

Before you were taught everyone was equal, no favoritisms; and now, oh I know you, your from my home town (spoken in another language) and then I let you go to the head of the line. Looking for a job? Speak my language, I'll hire you first.

Wake up America & Britain!!! That is how you are losing your countries.

Posted by: Mekoots at April 18, 2007 12:45 AM

You mean pigmagilist boyfriends? ya, they never seemed to act like they would make a good husband! How they can afford all that child support. For real though-I can't believe the British would go with this and they get more $.?!
It has to be that weird thinking interbreeding po' lame of an excuse to do as you please. A power over people and it all comes down to a weird sexual ideology! Gradification-ego narcist-
Strange though the Queen seems to be the one in control. Ummm,,..how backwards they still live in the times too! Yes, like culturelism-islamisim!
It sucks what ever I am trying to say!

Posted by: MZ at April 18, 2007 12:56 AM

And I try to claim my cats on tax forms

Posted by: KAOSKTRL at April 18, 2007 1:13 AM

Can a schizophrenic Muslim have 8 "wives"?

Posted by: profitsbeard at April 18, 2007 1:23 AM

Opposition MPs are demanding an urgent change in the law, claiming that the Government is recognising and rewarding a custom which has no legal status and which is "alien" to this country's cultural traditions.

So sorry. It's just a bit too late Now.

We never learn. Damn fools that we are.

Posted by: Lace and hand grenades at April 18, 2007 1:30 AM

Goats and camels and etcetera and etcetera and so on and the like and what have you.

Posted by: Brenda S. at April 18, 2007 1:33 AM

I's been going on for decades - I'm surprised they are suddenly making a fuss. Men with more than one wife should not be allowed to settle in this country, men who marry an extra wife abroad should lose their citizenship, and if they lie (as they do - usually by calling the new spouse a dependant sister-in-law) it should be treated as not just an imprisonable, but a deportable, offence. At the moment it is neither, unless they fraudulently claim benefit, and there a few enough checks about their status for that.
Polygamy was rather frowned on, despite Islamic sanction, in the Bengali culture which the Bangladeshi immigrants to the UK brought with them. Unfortunately, the disparity in wealth between the two countries means that a man with any sort of an income here can buy in a wife 10, 20 even 30 years his junior should the idea take his fancy. The corrupting effect of this and the Wahhabisation of their religion means it is probably more common among them now, than ever.

Posted by: wallyUK at April 18, 2007 2:04 AM

Just how silly can we get. Why can't any of these officials be firm? The way we carry on is like some macabre circus.

"Islamic law allows a man to take up to four wives, providing he can provide for them fairly and equally." So even in their own terms this is wrong because claiming benefits is not the same as providing for them fairly.

It's just another way for this alien culture to pump this country full of poison and discord.

Posted by: Malta_1565 at April 18, 2007 2:28 AM

Then:

A quote for which Napier is famous involves a delegation of Hindu locals approaching him and complaining about prohibition of Sati, often referred to at the time as suttee, by British authorities. This was the custom of burning widows alive on the funeral pyres of their husbands. The exact wording of his response varies somewhat in different reports, but the following version captures its essence:

"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."

Now:

"People who come to this country must be prepared to abide by our laws and rules. Polygamy is completely alien to our cultural and legal tradition, and it's disgraceful that our benefits system is recognising and rewarding it.

"People arriving from another country should conform to our laws rather than the other way around."

Pretty please!

Posted by: PRCS at April 18, 2007 2:40 AM

Just how do these people get into the country without jobs anyway? It should be the first rule of entry to the country. Why are we so stupid? I suppose they have a network of relatives who'll vouch for them and say they have job in the local curry house or taxi business. The enemy is within the city walls alright.

Posted by: Malta_1565 at April 18, 2007 2:44 AM

Since when was it a good idea to import welfare dependents. You don't work and you don't earn enough to support you and pay the tax for the government services you use. Then you aren't needed, please return to sender.

Posted by: senor doeboy at April 18, 2007 3:04 AM

This is part of labours grand alliance with islam.
If you live in the UK contact me, we need to bring this sort of thing to the attention of all before it is too late.
We need a UK specific anti islamic organisation.
Contact me: apostate_islam@hotmail.com

Remember this:

Labour and British Muslims:
Can we dream the same dream?
by Mike O`Brien MP
Are some Muslims about to vote against the best friend they have ever had in government? Can people really claim that the Labour Government is a friend of Muslims after Iraq? The answer may surprise you.

Understandably, many Muslims are very angry about the war. Traditionally they have supported Labour but some are now switching to the Liberal Democrats, Respect or even the Tories. But the real question is whether there is a danger that anger may be causing Muslims to vote against their own long-term interests?

Putting a cross on a ballot paper is much more than just about expressing anger; a General Election is not some kind of referendum on the Governments` record on one issue. It is about making a balanced political judgment between political parties and deciding which of them should have a majority in a Parliament. It is about the kind of country you want to live in. It is about considering what a Labour Government rather than a Conservative Government has done and will do in the future for Muslims. I suggest that a vote, which weighs in the balance the long-term implications for Muslims, is the right approach.

We all know the importance of Iraq. Indeed, some people will try to convince you that it is the only issue that matters. Most however, will look beyond Iraq to also consider other issues such as the fate of the Palestinians. Despite the many setbacks over the last few years, the creation of a Palestinian state is a cause that the Prime Minister has repeatedly raised with great conviction and never abandoned. He has even declared it to be his personal priority. It is the key to peace in the Middle East. He has long advocated a two state solution, Palestine and Israel, side by side, both at peace. The reality is that the only way a Palestinian state will be created is if Israel is prepared to concede land it currently occupies on the West Bank and Gaza. Whether we in Britain like it or not, the reality of the modern world is that only the Americans can influence Israel. And it seems only Tony Blair has any influence with the Americans. Can anyone seriously imagine that Michael Howard or Charles Kennedy would be able to significantly influence George W. Bush? If they do, then they need to join the real world. The Prime Minister who has the most political clout to help the Palestinians is Tony Blair.

No one claims that the creation of a Palestinian state is going to be an easy ride for Tony Blair or for the Labour government but we are willing to stay the distance, no matter how difficult it gets. The Labour government and the Prime Minister have a record of arguing strongly that the creation of a Palestinian state is essential to peace and justice, and that any settlement must be based upon land being given for peace in line with UN Resolution 242. When the Americans and Israelis refused to negotiate with Yasser Arafat, Tony Blair promptly sent myself as the Foreign Office Minister, to visit Yasser Arafat in the Muquata in Ramallah to convey the message that we had not abandoned him. Tony Blair’s message was clear: we will work with the elected leader of the Palestinians, even if the Americans will not. On the issue of the assassination of the leaders of Hamas, Jack Straw as the Foreign Secretary was the first Western politician to condemn Israel’s actions.

Soon after the recent US elections, Tony Blair travelled to Washington to make it very clear that he wanted to see the road map to a Palestinian state opened up. If we are to have a Palestinian state in the next five years, then a key player in creating it will be the British Prime Minister, who will need to have world influence. In practice, only Tony Blair has the required credentials and track record. The reality remains that with George W. Bush in the White House, neither Charles Kennedy nor Michael Howard has the clout to deliver.

Are you still unconvinced that the Muslims need or should want a Labour Prime Minister in Downing Street? Well, let‚s compare Tony Blair with previous Prime Ministers. He is the first Prime Minister to have ever read the Qur‚an, to quote from it and to talk about it. Can anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher or John Major doing the same? Whilst in opposition, Tony Blair had developed a genuine dialogue and relationship with a number of Muslims and Islamic organisations, based not just on getting votes but also on his interest in assisting Muslims achieve their rightful place in British life.

After 1997 Muslim groups were welcomed into the Home Office, the Foreign Office and 10 Downing Street. For the first time ever, four Muslim peers were appointed to the Lords and the first Muslim Labour MPs were elected. Even today, no other Party has a Muslim in the Commons. Labour is also the Party that has the largest number of Muslim councillors. We are proud of this achievement, but we have not yet finished. If you ask who are the only Party running Muslims in seriously winnable seats for the next election, the only answer is Labour.

The Muslim Council of Britain has been at the forefront of lobbying the Government on issues to help Muslims. Recently Iqbal Sacranie, the General Secretary of the Council, asked Tony Blair to declare that the Government would introduce a new law banning religious discrimination. Two weeks later, in the middle of his speech to the Labour Party Conference, Tony Blair promised that the next Labour Government would ban religious discrimination. It was a major victory for the Muslim community in Britain.

But this is not the first and only time that Labour Party has delivered for Muslims. When I was a Home Office Minister in 1997, the MCB lobbied me to introduce not only a new law which would increase sentences for racial violence and harassment but also to recognise the particular problems faced by Muslims. As a result we were able to amend the law to make religion a factor in any violence and harassment. Today, new Crime Bill, announced in the Queens Speech is coming before Parliament to toughen the laws on incitement to religious hatred. This has upset some M.P.`s such as Evan Harris MP, the Liberal Democrat spokesman, who has said he will oppose it because it is unnecessary!

Within weeks of coming to power, people will remember that Labour also repealed the appalling Primary Purpose Rule that discriminated against people coming to join their families in Britain, from Pakistan, Bangladesh and from other Muslim countries. This law introduced by the Conservatives caused a great deal of anguish and had broken up families. Labour promised to repeal it and promptly delivered after the election.

The new Labour Government was the first British government to give state recognition and funding to Muslim schools. Previously only Christian and Jewish schools had been allowed this opportunity. The Liberal Democrats opposed Muslim schools and Labour had to push legislation through the Commons against their strong opposition. At the same time the Foreign Office adopted a new policy to provide support for the Hajj delegation, sending doctors and administrators to Saudi Arabia to help British Hajjis. We are the only Western government to do so. Thousands of Muslims who travelled to Mecca have benefited from the change. And each year in the Commons there is now an Eid celebration, often attended by the PM, as he did this year.

I also remember when the issue arose about Muslims being included in the Remembrance Day ceremonies. Tony Blair was appalled that Muslims were being excluded and changed the protocol. He insisted that at all future civic ceremonies, including for example the commemoration of September 11 at St Paul’s Cathedral, Muslims would have a prominent role.

And across a whole range of social issues, on creating jobs, reducing poverty, on welfare reform and housing policy, Muslims have benefited from Labour government policies. Take for example the Sure Start initiative, which financed the new crèche opened at the London Muslim Centre in East London. It provides childcare facilities for the predominantly Muslim women in the whole area, in a place in which they have confidence in leaving their children.

In 2000 I took through the Commons the first Race Relations laws in a quarter of a century. Labour wanted to ensure that all public services had an obligation to promote good community relations. The impact of the law will be wide ranging.

Some might say these changes are all the result of pressure from within the Labour Party rather than the personal influence of Tony Blair himself. It is certainly true that it is the Labour Party as a whole which has had the support of Muslims; it is the Party that has supported migrant communities and the Welfare State. But Tony Blair’s keen interest in Muslim issues has been a key driver of progress through the last seven years. He was keen to ensure the interests of Muslims were considered and protected when Labour introduced the Minimum Wage, the Working Families Tax Credit and community development strategies.

It was also the PM who was personally committed to the intervention in Kosovo to help the Muslims who were being murdered by the Serbs. This was an intervention entirely for humanitarian reasons, opposed by many on the liberal Left of British politics like George Galloway. Many Muslims in Kosovo owe their lives to British intervention. Likewise, British funding of the reconstruction of Bosnia has helped Bosnian Muslims slowly re-build a future. It is Tony Blair who has personally championed the entry of Turkey- a Muslim country into the EU and he has taken a personal interest in dealing with the humanitarian crisis in Darfur. One of the key policies promoted by the Chancellor, Gordon Brown has been development aid, with 33 of the countries receiving British foreign aid being Muslim. Since 1997, the British aid assistance to Bangladesh alone has doubled.

You will have noticed I have left out the anti-terrorism legislation out of this balance sheet. There is no denying that this is a difficult issue; so let me tackle it head on. After the Madrid bombing, no one seriously doubts that we face concerns about terrorism but many have concerns about the ways in which anti-terrorism laws are being implemented.

I come from an Irish Catholic family brought up in the West Midlands. I remember the aftermath of the Birmingham pub bombings, with the introduction of anti-terrorism laws and internment. The 1970s were a time when understandably fear and anger went through the Irish Catholic community in Britain. Remember the Birmingham Six and the Guildford Four who were Convicted and later acquitted? Yet, despite the fact that problems arose in implementation of these laws we realise now that the anti terrorist laws were always targeted at terrorists and not at all Irish Catholics. So too today, the legislation is targeted at terrorists, not at all Muslims. Today, Ministers are doing the best they can to ensure that the laws are not wrongly used and have publicly reject the notion that these are anti-Muslim laws. Tony Blair has personally and repeatedly made this clear.

So, I ask Muslims to look at the balance sheet on the Labour government and Blair as a whole. The balance sheet shows show both positives and negatives. No one is suggesting we can possibly measure the suffering of Iraqi’s since the war, any more than we can forget the countless Iraqis that Saddam himself killed during his long tyranny.

It is true that the Prime Minister has disagreed openly with Muslims on removing Saddam and some Muslim may feel betrayed, but, across a range of other vital issues from Kosovo to policies in Britain, the Labour government are trying to deliver an agenda that has shown consideration and respect for Muslims.

And it is also important to reflect on the fact that in some seats a vote for the Liberal Democrats or Respect may be an outlet for anger over Iraq, but, in a House of over 600 MPs, it is unlikely to elect more than a handful of the minority party. The real question is who is in Government? What a protest vote could do across the country is to switch votes away from the Labour column and allow the Party that is in second place in most seats to gain a considerable numbers of M.P.`s. That Party is the Conservative Party, not the Liberal Democrats, nor Respect. The truth is that, if you vote Lib Dem or Respect, then you could end up with a Conservative MP and Conservative Government. That is the mathematics of our system of voting, whether people want it or not. Ask yourself what will Michael Howard do for British Muslims? Will his foreign policy aim to help Palestine? Will he promote legislation to protect you from religious hatred and discrimination? Will he create more jobs or support greater equality? Will he give you the choice of sending your children to a faith school? Will he stand up for the right of Muslim women to wear the hijab? Will he really fight for Turkey, a Muslim country, to join the EU? These are not academic questions. Remember, the last thing we want is to vote in anger and repent at leisure as Michael Howard, with a big smile on his face, walks through the door of Number Ten.

Tony Blair’s record on Iraq may anger many Muslims but his record is about more than one issue. But the issue is about who rules Britain and across a range of issues the Labour Government has delivered again and again for British Muslims. Labour values equality, compassion and a multi-religious Britain and so in that sense we share the dream of most British Muslims. To create that kind of society, we still have a lot to do if we are given the chance.

Mike O‘Brien is the Minister for Energy in the DTI, he is the Labour MP for North Warwickshire.

Posted by: apostate_islam at April 18, 2007 3:05 AM

And what about non-muslims who are in alternate polyamoras living arrangements?

Can they also claim the extra allowance?

Posted by: Voltaire at April 18, 2007 3:19 AM

As a yank, seems most above are from my UK brothers.

So...No offense to the rest of you.

apostate_islam:

You are a horse's ass.

You're 'thinking' (should you presume to that) is muddled.

Posted by: turn at April 18, 2007 3:32 AM

"As a yank, seems most above are from my UK brothers.

So...No offense to the rest of you.

apostate_islam:

You are a horse's ass.

You're 'thinking' (should you presume to that) is muddled."

Turn,

What is so muddled about my thinking ?
Yes most of the posts are from the UK, however that does not mean that many people in the UK are aware of how labour has coddled up to the islamists in exchange for votes.
I am afraid that yo are the "horse's ass !
Explain your comments, what exactly do you know about how far our politicians will go for a moslem vote, what do you know about labour and the islamists ?
And yes I do presume to think, obviously more than you before you made your comments, infact your reply to to my comments was so quick you could not have thought that long or to much.
So please explain.

Posted by: apostate_islam at April 18, 2007 3:53 AM

It's a-ok for polygamy so long as you're a Moslem. Up here in Minnesota, the social worker crowd know its going on, and, frankly, as fervent Multiculturalists, promote it.

Ain't no checks and balances to stop the subsidized criminal behavior, or equality before the law, cuz their ideological brethern in the newspapers and at the local TV stations also want Moslem polygamy.

And that's a good thing. More social worker jobs at the schools, the Welfare, the Medicaid, the free housing office, the SBA office, you name it.

* 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 *

I've noticed young Somali families driving shiny new $40,000 cars. Apparently all those freebies combined with several gubmint checks every month really add up.

But, who am I to complain? This is America, the Land of Opportunity. And these Moslems have come here, worked really hard, and have made it.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at April 18, 2007 4:16 AM

If they break the UK (US etc) laws on bigamy they should be deported to where polygamy is legal.

Posted by: highbg at April 18, 2007 4:30 AM

....time to change the welfare and other support laws....benefits for only one wife and her natural children....the rest of the family will receive benefits only from the husband....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at April 18, 2007 5:49 AM

What a mess, both in the UK and the US. The only way it will change, if ever, is through welfare benefits, tied in with work/educational requirements. The checks should stop coming to the husband, after a 90 days warning to get a job. The multiple wives must work or go to school in order to receive a check. Being in a work situation or in an educational institution won't help every woman, but it might help enough to get a revolution started, inside of Muslim households, where it needs to take place.

Posted by: maryrose at April 18, 2007 6:37 AM

"Islamic law allows a man to take up to four wives, providing he can provide for them fairly and equally."

Hmmm, but this article is about welfare benefits, and clearly those on welfare cannot support multiple wives. Set wives 2, 3, & 4 free!

Posted by: Tziona at April 18, 2007 6:40 AM

This is part of labours grand alliance with islam.
If you live in the UK contact me, we need to bring this sort of thing to the attention of all before it is too late.
We need a UK specific anti islamic organisation.
Contact me: apostate_islam@hotmail.com

The BNP are doing a pretty good job right now of raising the issue of Islam & jihad, any British posters here with even a sliver of patriotism left should be putting their vote next to the BNP candidates in the upcomming May elections, if there are no BNP candidates just write BNP on your ballot paper. All the other parties have sold out to multiculturalism and Saudi back handers.

Posted by: km at April 18, 2007 6:50 AM

Excuuuuuuse me, but if we're all hell-for-leather out to legalize homosexual marriage, what is wrong with multiple marriage or bestiality? If whatever is is right, why not encourage pedophilia as well? This sudden prudishness about monogamy on the part of those who have been blessing the sexual revolution for forty years is a little like a crowd of rioters who, after smashing windows and furniture, honor a "keep off the grass" sign.

Posted by: Kepha at April 18, 2007 6:52 AM

"Islamic law allows a man to take up to four wives, providing he can provide for them fairly and equally."

Hmmm, but this article is about welfare benefits, and clearly those on welfare cannot support multiple wives. Set wives 2, 3, & 4 free!

Posted by: Tziona ""

....that is exactly correct!......unfortunately the Muslims in foreign lands abuse the laws the host country to get free money and to make the lives of the host countrys population miserable......call it slow Jihad....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at April 18, 2007 6:56 AM

This sudden prudishness about monogamy on the part of those who have been blessing the sexual revolution for forty years is a little like a crowd of rioters who, after smashing windows and furniture, honor a "keep off the grass" sign.
Posted by: Kepha [TypeKey Profile Page] at April 18, 2007 06:52 AM

Good point Kepha, but we should keep in mind that it is the cultural Marxists who have pushed the agenda of family degeneration for the past 40 years and it is these people who are marching in lock step with the Islamists to destroy Western Christian cultural values.

Posted by: km at April 18, 2007 7:04 AM

My Gawd! You have the wind, apostate_islam.

Posted by: turn at April 18, 2007 7:58 AM

AFP,

Do you make your concerns know to the likes of Katherine Kersten?

I sent her an email about this yesterday, suggesting that it might be a good storyline.

Posted by: PRCS at April 18, 2007 8:19 AM

Kepha- The homosexuals don't have their hands in your wallet.

apostate_islam--Mike O'Brien's letter should be printed out and placed at every gathering place possible.

Posted by: Borg at April 18, 2007 8:41 AM

And what about non-muslims who are in alternate polyamoras living arrangements?

Can they also claim the extra allowance?

Posted by: Voltaire at April 18, 2007 03:19 AM

There's a polygamy-practing Mormon sect who live in and around Bountiful BC (Canada)who have also been very resourceful when it comes to claiming social benefits for multiple wives. This group has a connection to another group in Utah. Not sure if Utah has been as screwed up about this as BC or not.

Posted by: waterdragon52 at April 18, 2007 8:46 AM

Bigamy is illegal in Western countries. Bigamists are de facto criminals. Moslem residents in the West must either abide by the same law enforced upon the general public or pay the same consequences that others violating the law must pay.

Issues of morality aside, what sense is there in an individual claiming extra spousal benefits at the expense of the law-abiding taxpayer, benefits for housing and job seeking, particularly when the extra spouses are imported into the country? This is like an infestation of cuckoos, devouring the resources laid up by productive citizens and then pushing them aside, "out of the nest" as it were.

Any insinuation of Moslem mores into Western society must be carefully observed and, more often than not, blocked.

Posted by: Chatillon at April 18, 2007 8:54 AM

The Right Wing Crazies are loose again. It was the coumtion in America law that each state regocite marriage and other legal action as legal in they state. Since my ex-wife was deny amnaly for falsely accured me of breaten her up very day the court hearing her case in NY state divorse court, this mean she cannot go to than other state to get amnaly
from me. The dumd right wing crazies so worry about same sex marriage decide to end all states homour each other legal ruling which can cause more problem
than the same sex marriage will ever cause. Most muslim see nothing wrong with homosexual marriable it that will make then happy just wait untril the first same sex divorsed take place.

Posted by: DefenderofIslam at April 18, 2007 9:10 AM

UK and USA just need to legalise Polygamous marriage end of plobren.

Posted by: DefenderofIslam at April 18, 2007 9:13 AM

Gee: This article is so true only second to the Holy Quran...wow! impressed by the level of high standard journalism coming from the evening standard

A jewish paper!!!

Posted by: Abdullah at April 18, 2007 9:18 AM

"just wait untril the first same sex divorsed take place.

Posted by: DefenderofIslam "

...it has already happened several times, here is the earliest:

"In June of 2005, two women who were married in Parksville, B.C. were granted a divorce by a B.C. Supreme Court judge in Nanaimo.

Madam Justice Laura Gerow agreed the divorce law discriminated against gays and lesbians; and with the stroke of a pen, she granted the divorce and changed the law to define a married couple as any two persons.

As a result of these Court decisions some courts in Canada changed the divorce forms to make them gender neutral.

"Gays and lesbians in British Columbia now have exactly the same rights and obligations towards one another as straight people do. Exactly the same. Full stop."

Posted by: exsgtbrown at April 18, 2007 9:30 AM

UK and USA just need to legalise Polygamous marriage end of plobren.
Posted by: DefenderofIslam [TypeKey Profile Page] at April 18, 2007 09:13 AM

What that should say is:

UK and USA just need to criminalize Islam end of problem

And cant you use a spell checker.

Posted by: km at April 18, 2007 9:34 AM

Britain Is For Lovers.

Posted by: TheOmegaMan at April 18, 2007 9:44 AM

DefenderofIslam

What?!?

A chimp could have commented with more clarity than you.

(Folks--this is why islam is doomed to the ash heap of history.)

signed,
dumd right wing crazies

Posted by: turn at April 18, 2007 9:47 AM

The Evening Standard is not a Jewish paper (no, supporting Israel does not make one a Jew), and even if it was, that factoid would be completely irrevelant. Not that I expected facts to stop Abdullah.

Why does Abdullah remind me so much of Borat? I'm talking about the scene in the movie where Borat and his friend Azamat stay in a bed-and-breakfast inn, only to be terrified when they discover that the couple owning the place is Jewish. Later, at night, they see a pair of cockroaches and scream "The Jews have changed their form!" Borat and Azamat give the cockroaches all their money and run out screaming.

Of course, this irrational fear of Jews is funny when Sacha Ben Cohen is doing it - in Abdullah's case it's just pathetic.

Posted by: Audacity at April 18, 2007 9:47 AM

Hopefully I will not be shattering any illusions here. But, biologically speaking, the anus is an exit, not an entrance.

Do get a clue. Hell-ooooh?

Posted by: Aussiegirl at April 18, 2007 9:56 AM

But, what the hell do I know? Do tell. What if anything would be wrong with a brother and sister marrying? How 'bout mum and son? Dad and daughter?

Enlighten me.

Posted by: Aussiegirl at April 18, 2007 9:58 AM

apostate_islam:

I most heartily apologise for my earlier 'horse's ass' comment. I didn't realise that you were reposting O'Brien's letter and thought that the post was entirely from you.

Sincerely and humbly,

turn

Posted by: turn at April 18, 2007 10:02 AM

I'll catch any enlightening comments later. I am off to work now.

Posted by: Aussiegirl at April 18, 2007 10:02 AM

"Islamic law allows a man to take up to four wives, providing he can provide for them fairly and equally."
-- from a poster's comment above

That surely would cover all of the cases where the wives are being paid for by the Infidel taxpayers of the Infidel nation-state. The receipt of generous welfare benefits, should not be considered by Muslims as "providing" for his wives "fairly and equally." It is not "providing" for them at all. The argument of Muslism would be, of course, that taking advantage of everything (and then some) that an Infidel state provides is a kind of Muslim "providing" and that the real duty is to "provide for them fairly and equally." The emphasis is on treating the various wives "equally" and no time is wasted on the definition, the Western and sensible definition, of "providing." For Muslims, whether it is the Muslim state that used to survive on the Jizyah of its non-Muslims. And now that there are so few non-Muslims left, Muslim states that do not have oil rely instead on the disguised Jizyah of Western foreign aid. Within Western lands, wherever Muslims live, they will take full advantage of whatever they can get, through Infidel-financed government generosity, or often through stealing from Infidels -- why not? It is a kind of informal Jizyah, until such time as Muslims dominate and can then enforce the real Jizyah, the formal system of economic and other onerous disabilities on non-Muslims that are set out in the Shari'a, with no ambiguity about them, in a completely systematic attempt to humiliate and degrade and render physically insecure, all non-Muslims -- which, over time, guarantees that in the landsconquered by a handful of Muslims (as happened in the Middle East and North Africa and in Persia, Hindustan and the East Indies)the islamization of the populace will, over time, be subject to widespread islamization (as people try to escape the status of being a dhimmi by "reverting" to Islam), and the concomitant process of arabization.

Posted by: Hugh at April 18, 2007 10:14 AM

Borg,

you are right the letter does need to be up on boards everywhere, will you help me ?
Contact me and I will e mail it to you, I have sent a couple of thousand out.
All we need is a few good, dedicated men (or women).
The problem with Jihadwatch is we can just be preaching to the converted.
This is Information warfare, islams inherant inhumanity is its weakness, just think of all those people who have so much to gain from islam and sharia.
women, gays, hindus, sikhs, buddhists, alcohol drinkers. everyone of them needs to be informed of how islam will make them suffer.
As I said all we need is a few good men.

Truth, apology accepted.

Regards

AI

Posted by: apostate_islam at April 18, 2007 10:15 AM

"Islamic law allows a man to take up to four wives, providing he can provide for them fairly and equally."
-- from a poster's comment above

[...]

Posted by: Hugh at April 18, 2007 10:14 AM

Actually, Hugh, it's from the thread. Apparently, the extremely dhimmified source and, apparently the British Dept. of Works and Pensions cannot make the distinction between a man providing for additional wives and the public purse providing Muslim bigamists with a harem. Of course, the UK not being a hotbed of Mormon immigration, it's hard to say whether they would accommodate them as well.

Posted by: waterdragon52 at April 18, 2007 10:39 AM

KM,

The BNP are scum always have been always will be.
nick griffin is a holocaust denier, I beleive one of his favorite lines is "I smoke more than a chimeney at Auscwitz"

http://www.stopthebnp.org.uk/campainging/NickGriffin.htm

Infact he is so twisted he travelled to libya to get money for his war against Jews.

http://www.hopenothate.org.uk/index.php?getPage=link5i

Anyone who would consider an alliance with a moslem is not to be trusted.
You may choose to kiss a turd thats your business, I choose humanity.

Regards

AI

Posted by: apostate_islam at April 18, 2007 11:24 AM

These muslim men marry so many tent wearing muslim women and produce so many children i.e future terrorists which become a burden on infidel lands.They produce so many children so that they can become a majority in infidel lands and extract benefits from government.In india muslims have the world's second largest population of about 200m in a country of about 1.15bn.Draconian sharia laws which are applicable to india's muslims by our leftwing government allow them to marry as many women as they like.The population of muslims in india is increasing so rapidly that india will be the largest muslim nation in a matter of few years leaving behind indonesia.Our leftwing government still treat them as the minority although there are about 15% muslims in a largely divided society where the hindus are divided into different groups:uppercaste and lowercaste.If we treat these groups as different then they are in minority and muslims are in majority.Muslims are given reservations in education as well as government jobs as they are minority in view of leftwing government.The real minorities such as christians,jews,sikhs,buddhists,zorastrians are being neglected in favor of muslims.Their immigration to infidel lands should be stopped as they colloborate with leftists,liberals and marxists to demand affirmative action and slowly overshadow the infidels until they become a majority and destroy their culture.

Posted by: anti islamocommunist at April 18, 2007 11:50 AM

"Recently Iqbal Sacranie, the General Secretary of the Council, asked Tony Blair to introduce a new law banning religious discrimination. Two weeks later, Tony Blair promised that the next Labour Government would ban religious discrimination. It was a major victory for the Muslim community in Britain."
Mike O'Brien MP.

And those triumphant words come not from some hatemongering imam, celebrating yet another victory over the filthy Infidels, but from a British Government Minister.

When the British Government trumpets its own craven surrender to Islamic demands, then we know that we really are in trouble. Besides the weasel words reproduced above, who can forget these other gems of dhimmitude:

"[Muslims] are our modern heroes: standing for the highest ideals, bearing burdens, and bringing hope to Britain."

Gordon Brown, Chancellor of the Exchequer and probable future PM.

"I believe that the republication of these cartoons has been unnecessary, it has been insensitive, it has been disrespectful and it has been wrong...We have to be very careful about showing the proper respect in this situation."

Jack Straw, then Foreign Secretary, apologising after an Islamic hate mob marched through London calling for mass murder over the Danish cartoon affair.

"To me, the most remarkable thing about the Koran is how progressive it is... The Koran is inclusive... It is practical and far ahead of its time in attitudes toward marriage, women, and governance."

Tony Blair, alleged by some to be the British Prime Minister.

Forget Stockholm, or Copenhagen, or even Paris - it is London that is the Dhimmi capital of Europe. Anyone know how I can emigrate to the US? (aside from sneaking across the Rio Grande some moonless night, I mean.)

Posted by: Matamoros at April 18, 2007 12:45 PM

From a post above:

"It is Tony Blair who has personally championed the entry of Turkey- a Muslim country into the EU"

He and Bush. Complete numbskulls.

Do NOT vote Labour if you are anti-jihad!!!

Posted by: Allahfanculo at April 18, 2007 12:48 PM

From a post above:

"It is Tony Blair who has personally championed the entry of Turkey- a Muslim country into the EU"

He and Bush. Complete numbskulls.

Do NOT vote Labour if you are anti-jihad!!!

Posted by: Allahfanculo at April 18, 2007 12:53 PM

From a post above:

"It is Tony Blair who has personally championed the entry of Turkey- a Muslim country into the EU"

He and Bush. Complete numbskulls.

Do NOT vote Labour if you are anti-jihad!!!

Posted by: Allahfanculo at April 18, 2007 12:53 PM

From a post above:

"It is Tony Blair who has personally championed the entry of Turkey- a Muslim country into the EU"

He and Bush. Complete numbskulls.

Do NOT vote Labour if you are anti-jihad!!!

Posted by: Allahfanculo at April 18, 2007 12:53 PM

apostate_islam

I am short on time so I have to make this brief, there is ample evidence that the BNP has reformed as a party and has moved away from its more sketchy past. Remember the labour party was communist at its outset and I am sure I dont have to remind you of the blood on that particular ideologies hands.

StoptheBNP and hopenothate are both Marxist organizations so I put little credence into their invective against the BNP. Nationalism has been a dirty word since WWII, but you tell me what other political groups/institutions are prepared to stand up and challenge the Islamic infestation that is occuring across Europe. I dont see any I am afraid and neither do increasing numbers of ordinary Europeans.

Heres an interesting article on BNP reform, well worth reading.

http://www.think-israel.org/locke.bnp.html

One final thing, we are involved in zerosum game with Islam and this war is already very advanced, the BNP are just a tool to use to make sure our side wins nothing more nothing less. Thankfully you/we live in a democracy so you can place your vote where you think it will work best. I and I am sure many others who even a few years ago would never entertain the prospect of voting for BNP/nationalist politics now see it as probably the only option. The BNP doesnt need to gain overall power, seats as opposition MPs will probably (I hope) reverse the situation.

Posted by: km at April 18, 2007 12:53 PM

Matamoros,

Do you remember that when the new law was being debated a delegation from the MCB & MAB asked for an early Sunday morning meeting (so that they were not noticed) with the Home Office, they had a simple request, that the new law against incitement would specifically exclude islam.
Now what the hell made them so confident they actually had the nerve to ask ?
Rod Liddle wrote about it in the Sunday Times.
Its like asking for a date, you have to be reasonably convinced in your own mind that the answer will be yes.

Also do you remember the huge demo out side Parliament, against the bill ? They were African Christians, raving racists the lot of them !

If you are in the UK please contact me:
apostate_islam@hotmail.com

Regards

AI

Posted by: apostate_islam at April 18, 2007 12:56 PM

Will we ever see an end to suicidal Western idiocy in this century? No matter what country one lives in there are either stupid laws or crazy loopholes and like moths to flames they always attract the "peaceful ones". I have to hand it to them-they learn to exploit such things very quickly.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at April 18, 2007 1:33 PM

O.T.

There have been various articles on the web about how to engage a mohammedan in debate and/or how to reply to appologists' arguements about islam. Can someone help me find a link? Thank you. the poetess

Posted by: the poetess at April 18, 2007 2:02 PM

"I have to hand it to them-they learn to exploit such things very quickly.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS "

....If you are referring to the Muslims....the Muslims have been warming up to this Crusade for 1400 years....The Muslim Crusade is getting underway....

....One of the best ways to defeat an enemy is to get the enemy to beat himself....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at April 18, 2007 2:04 PM

"....One of the best ways to defeat an enemy is to get the enemy to beat himself...."

...HA!...that does not sound right...but you know what I mean......

Posted by: exsgtbrown at April 18, 2007 2:52 PM

Abdullah,

As the Koran was just an easy way for Mohammed the "profit" to get to do what he wanted, I don't see any truth to the book. Even the precious Aisha made sarcastic comments regarding Mohammed's needs being fulfilled.

Please change to a religion of peace.

Karl

Posted by: schwaben at April 18, 2007 3:19 PM

"Islamic law allows a man to take up to four wives, providing he can provide for them fairly and equally."

don't forget beat them all equally

Posted by: FedUpagain at April 18, 2007 3:41 PM

A DWP official insisted the rules did not "reward" polygamy, as second wives receive less in benefits than single women. A single person can claim just under £60 per week in jobseeker's allowance, while couples receive up to £92.80, but each 'additional spouse' in a polygamous marriage receives an extra £33.65.

According to these numbers, a second wife gets less than a single person "living in sin" with the man. But she gets MORE than the first wife, by £0.85. In any case, if the fellow is living in sin, the £60 goes to his wife, whereas if he marries two wives he gets his own £60 plus an additional 32.80+33.65 = £66.45. Yes, less than if they all lived separately, but more for the guy, which is, after all, the determining factor it seems, for these folks.

Are all these ladies staying at homes to incubate babies, or are they "jobseeking"? Who verifies their eligibility for payments?

Posted by: Archimedes2 at April 18, 2007 3:43 PM

Poetess

You could start with the FAQ in FaithFreedom.org - that one addresses a whole host of assertions made by Muslims about Islam, Quran, Infidels, et al. Also, in Islam-Watch, there is a collection of articles written by 3 of us - Caroline, Archimedez and me - addressing some of the apologist points made about Islam. It's not remotely complete, but you could try that - starting here, so that you don't get lost looking at the topic list.

There's also Greg's Islam 101 that's there on the menu bar of this site.

Hope this helps.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at April 18, 2007 4:39 PM

"Islamic law allows a man to take up to four wives, providing he can provide for them fairly and equally."

This would appear on the face of it to prevent Muslim males in the UK claiming benefits for additional wives under Islamic law, despite the likely spin that Hugh suggests would be put on it - that whether the man or the state is doing the providing is less important than the "fairly and equally" part. And if the claiming were invalid under Islamic law then that would invalidate it also under UK law.

But surely the key question is whether a high-level fatwa is shortly forthcoming on the subject?

Is any authoritative Muslim voice or organisation going to give an opinion on this, to go on the record, or will they all be hiding behind rocks and trees?

Posted by: MBR at April 18, 2007 7:24 PM

HA HA HA HAHAHAHAH !!!!! bloody hell, you made your beds no go lie in them. fellow brits, if you are happy about getting screwed by immigrants then good luck to you. bloody hell what a joke! why dont you all protest or do something?

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at April 18, 2007 8:23 PM

Here's a little scam that's popular in Australia, particularly amongst Lebanese Muslim immigrants. Muslim man with two wives and multiple children emigrates to Australia with one of those wives and all of the children. After settling in for a brief period, he legally divorces the wife, who then collects a supporting mothers' pension, which is based upon the number of children being supported. Meanwhile, (ex-)hubby returns to country of origin for a "holiday", "remarries", then returns to Australia with his new "bride". More welfare benefits ensue, and everyone lives happily ever after under the one roof, because Heaven forbid that a government department might run a very simple check on whether a supporting mother is living with the father of her children, particularly when she's not complaining about him being a deadbeat dad.

And before anyone berates me for giving the game away, let me point out that my local municipal council - which has strong ties to the Muslim community in my area - recently ran a "how to get the best out of the welfare system" seminar for members of the Muslim community at ratepayers' expense. It sparked a little outrage on the letters page of the local newspaper, but at the end of the day, no-one wants their garbage (trash) going uncollected on the roadside, so it went no further.

Posted by: artdeceaux at April 19, 2007 12:04 AM

leonthepigfarmer

"if you are happy about getting screwed by immigrants then good luck to you"

Is that a general tirade against all immigrants ?
Don't forget that most Americans, Aussies, Kiwis, white South Africans/Zimbabweans and Canadians are Immigrants or decended from immigrants.

Don't turn this website into a general anti immigrant forum. The threat is islamic.
My parents were immigrants from India, never claimed a penny in benefits.

There is nothing wrong with immigration, there is everything wrong with "Ummahgration"

Not all immigrants are fraudsters.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/04/19/nscam19.xml

Do not give those who label any criticism of islam "Racist" ammunition.

Regards

AI

Posted by: apostate_islam at April 19, 2007 3:02 AM

apostate_islam

I'd be interested in gathering together a "few good men" and women,of course.

In my view it's all about lobbying which the MCB et el have down to a fine art.
We need to find ways to inform the people of influence on the left.I believe this to be the tipping point.
Convincing the marxists is the only way to progress.

I shall write you an email soon

regards

Posted by: ovinesongs at April 19, 2007 1:01 PM

apostate_islam

What you say is quite true but it is also the traditional liberal response to all Islamic and immigrant fraud.

What gives minorities and Muslims in particular a considerable advantage is that they do not recognise the British/European system of surnames and forenames - forenames used to be Christian names but let it pass. Believe it or not there is no legal requirement in Britain to keep the same family name it is simply established custom. You can change your name as often as you like and do not even have to go through a legal process. Not only do immigrants not have to use a traceable system of names, critically there is no standard English spelling of many their names. I would remind you that one of the “asylum seekers” currently on trial for the attempted tube bombing in London was reported to be collecting six benefits in five different names.

This problem was acknowledged more than 30 years ago. Then it was suggested that Britain adopt the system used in India where individuals are identified not just by their own names but must also give the names of their parents and grandparents. But nothing has ever been done because I suppose we don't want to be discriminatory.

This not only involves Muslims. It was not widely reported in Britain, but there was a case 10 years ago which caused great amusement on the national news in Ireland. Then a “refugee” from Zaire who was actually resident in Belgium, commuted to London every month by Eurostar train to collect his welfare benefits from the British taxpayer.

I can assure you that those working in the welfare system are absolutely terrified of being called racists and can give one example of the difference in approach when dealing with minorities.

An inspector thought a claim by a member of the majority population was technically invalid and noted it on the claimant’s file. As a result it was refused by a very junior administrator. The same inspector thought a claim by a Muslim was almost certainly fraudulent but knowing how “sensitive” these things are, he first made an oral report to his department manager. The manager just looked embarrassed said “These things are difficult to prove” and the claim went through to the tune of £20,000.

Back on topic. Last month I was told on the best authority of an educated young British Asian who took a week off to marry his 4th wife. He was quite open about it to his colleagues saying that he knew only one was legal, but what the hell! The very first thing our Labour government did on taking Office in 1997 was to abolish the last restrictions on immigrants (in point of fact Muslims) bringing in wives. Consequently 60 per cent of all British resident Muslims now bring in partners from their “home” countries. On this basis we can assume that two of this young man's four wives have benefited from our governments understanding of the Muslim point of view.

Posted by: Fred at April 19, 2007 1:38 PM

Case in point:

My father a white anglo saxon native having spent 40 years paying into a welfare system on average to the tune of several plus thousand pounds a year was refused benefit after he'd had 3 strokes and a heart attack.
Compare that with a system that has designated teams of multilingual specialists.They will work to claim every single last penny in welfare to a recently arrived immigrant who has or never will make any contribution to the welfare system.
If I chose to emmigrate I have to attend to my financial and healthcare needs via third party insurance policies.

The U.K. is not called "treasure island" for fun.
Why do immigrants risk life and limb to enter illegally when they get to northern france?
Our welfare system is being systematically abused by racist interlopers who see white anglo saxons as a meal ticket.
It kind of sticks in the throat.

As apostate_islam did say his parents came and never claimed a penny and no doubt contributed to the system with their hard earned taxes.
This is admirable and I welcome anyone with that pioneering spirit and always will.
Others,especially those from the ummah have a vastly different outlook and see the U.K. as a big scam/fraud/theatre of the economic jihad.
See here:
http://tinyurl.com/2f6akn

The political will to change the welfare and immigration system is lacking but I can forsee a cut off point soon.

Posted by: ovinesongs at April 19, 2007 2:12 PM

Slighty off topic but I urge everyone to watch a documentary on NPD called egomania.

From previous comments Frank i'm sure it will interest you as I can tell we have a similar interest in the comparison between islam and mental illness.

This is only an intro as alas it's still only on the channel4 website
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRaIaYrFcVo

The channel4 site is here.
http://www.channel4.com/health/microsites/0-9/4health/mind/wwr_manic.html

If you follow links to the 4OD page you may be able to access the whole film.
Alas im a mac user and have been stumped again

regards

Posted by: ovinesongs at April 19, 2007 3:35 PM

AI

again i repeat, if you are happy about getting screwed by immigrants (white or brown) then good luck to ya!

really i dont give a toss if mr patel brings over his entire relatives as long as mr patel and his family are good people and respect my culture, my history and my heritage. at the moment we in the west are getting screwed by all and sundry, to either get free housing, free NHS free this and free that. a family load of czech gypseys "asylum seekers" lived near my mother in plumstead, they were given a free house etc yet still begged on the morning train (well they made their children beg). plus the czech republic is a democracy and yet they were granted refugee status??????????????????????

you get my point yet? my rant was and is about immigrants milking the system, whether its mr smith from australia or mrs abdullah from algeria.

what kind of message does this send to the british people when its so easy to get free stuff from the british government then maybe britain isnt so great anymore. But this is precisely what the marxist elite want.

oh and did you know that now eastern europeans living in the UK can now vote in british elections. how quaint.

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at April 19, 2007 5:03 PM

Fred,

One of the problems is the use of this word "Asian" it is a code for moslem.
The reason these things are allowed to happen is Political correctness, and various absurd Human Rights acts.

I can assure you that I am no liberal, there is no need to be insulting.

Regarding the asylum seeker using different ids, the problem is a lack of common sense legislation.

"Last month I was told on the best authority of an educated young British Asian who took a week off to marry his 4th wife"
Was he Chinese or Japanese ? of course not he was a moslem.

I many years ago worked in the welfare system and I do agree with your point about people being terrified of being called racists.

The story about the "asian gang" http://tinyurl.com/2f6akn

is a good example of PC they were a moslem gang and this system is used to fund terrorism.
Fraud is carried out by people who see a weakness in a system and find a way to exploit it.
The Conrad Black and Enron stories are cases in point.

Labour is a despicable party they allow this to happen because they want the votes of the moslems.
If there are any Conservatives on this forum may I suggest that you form an alliance with those "Immigrants or decendents of immigrants" that will tell you in no uncertain terms what islam is and it will be difficult to accuse of racism ie. Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and Pakistani/African Christians.

Recently a cousin of mine visited the UK, he is an Indian Army officer,anyway we were sitting in Henrys at Richmond riverside having a few pints (being a Sikh, he drank beer and whiskey !).
The discussion turned to the tube bombings, he leaned forward and said to me
"why don't you just kill a few thousand of the buggers, why do you "all" tolerate them, send "your" police to kashmir, we will show them how to do it"

Until people stop seeing all "asians" and "blacks" as one block then islam will gain in the UK.
The Mike O'brien story I have shown to Indians and they have been livid.
This is something the conservatives need to latch onto.
We can all post stories about immigrants defrauding welfare, the problem is our enemies the left/liberals will then just dismiss this site as racist.
That is the last taboo that they have to protect islam from criticism.
Go to a Sikh/Hindu temple and you will hear no politically correct references to islam.
Also I suggest you read/research the vies of VS Naipaul no PC their either.

Regards

AI

Posted by: apostate_islam at April 19, 2007 5:11 PM

AI
"We can all post stories about immigrants defrauding welfare, the problem is our enemies the left/liberals will then just dismiss this site as racist.
That is the last taboo that they have to protect islam from criticism."

This has been my point all along..the leftist apologist is the weak link in Islam's armour in the west.
The leftist/islamist alliance needs to be broken.
These people need to be approached but sadly you have to use baby talk with them otherwise they do scream.."racist"..I've even been called a racist by an Iranian girlfriend I had.A woman who's atheist family escaped Iran when she was 10.now there's a weird psychological minefield for you.
You just can't win with a Gaurdian reader.

With the apoplogist/dhimmi/liberal You have to use words they understand like "apartheid" and "homophobia" and "oppression"
Pointing out that Islam is an apartheid system designed to opress and subjugate others has worked for me and I've seen a big seachange in lefty friends who were once total moonbats.

I've had a lot of personal experience with living in different areas around the U.K. and it's really only the most stupid of chavs that don't know the difference between a hindu,sikh and a muslim.WE KNOW and were not happy about it.
I've lived in Southall..mostly sikh..and a nice time I had there.
I've lived in the Hindu/Sikh area of Leicester..very nice too.
I now live in the mostly muslim part of Derby and It's HOSTILE to say the least.
I'm sure this is what Hugh means when he mentions the "atmospherics of Islam"
It was ultimately what lead me down the road to discovery many years ago.

AI...I would love to hear what the folks say at my local Gudjwara it's just not easy for big bad whitey to walk in and start throwing anti-islamic vitriol around and a temple just ain't the place.
Maybe you could point me in the right direction.

Posted by: ovinesongs at April 19, 2007 6:24 PM

ovinesongs

hate to tell you this but even the name of this site, "jihadwatch" had my liberal friend's eyes rolling!

however we denounce islam, even if we use your powerful words such as "apartheid" and "homophobia" and "oppression" we will still be seen as racists, islamophobists, right wing nazis etc. the only way to end this will be to change the marxists monopoly over access to the press.

i am agaisnt immigrants of all colours and races and nationalities "milking" the system and damaging the british people's fragile culture. i am now part of the british resistance, a peaceful, democratic movement.

odd how british liberals scramble all over each other to save a foreign tribe in a remote part of the amazon rainforest from "damaging" outside influences. yet they dont give a toss about their own people in the UK and dont even try and stop the influx of nations into the uk that are hellbent on ethnic cleansing.

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at April 19, 2007 7:23 PM

leonthepigfarmer

You don't have to tell me I know too well and have lost friends and opportunites because of my views.
I personally believe in order to collect any form of state assistance be it welfare,healthcare,education etc you need to have been resident for 5 years or so.
In the mean time you must have some form of health insurance and employment.
That's how it works if I want to go and live elsewhere.
The main problem as I see it is mass immigration from countries that have Sharia as a legal system.These should be halted at once and an inquiry set.

As for the "british resistance" you mention I'd be interested to know who and where they are?
I'm not being sarcastic either.
If it's something like "The School of Night" meeting in smoky back street taverns then count me in.

regards

Posted by: ovinesongs at April 19, 2007 9:11 PM

The best way to deal with liberals/lefties is to approach the entire issue from a human rights angle.

These are the web sites that I normally bring to people attention.
As I said earlier islams weakness is its inherant inhumanity.

www.homa.org

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070320/wl_nm/sudan_rights_dc_1

http://www.apostatesofislam.com/media/stoning.htm#video

http://www.galha.org/briefing/qaradawi.html
THe fact is you can't have your queers and your koran.
Slavery is another dood example.

Regards

AI

Posted by: apostate_islam at April 20, 2007 2:55 AM