“The Law Society has withdrawn controversial guidelines for solicitors on how to compile ‘Sharia compliant’ wills amid complaints that they encouraged discrimination against women and non-Muslims.” There is no doubt that when the Law Society adopted these guidelines, it had no idea that Sharia discriminated against women and non-Muslims; and if Law Society members had given the matter a moment’s thought, they doubtless assumed that only “Islamophobes” thought such things. Such is the intoxicating effect of the fog of nonsense that currently envelops Britain.
A small speed bump on the road down which Britain is galloping toward surrender and Sharia: “Sharia law guidelines abandoned as Law Society apologises,” by John Bingham, the Telegraph, November 24, 2014 (thanks to all who sent this in):
The Law Society has withdrawn controversial guidelines for solicitors on how to compile “Sharia compliant” wills amid complaints that they encouraged discrimination against women and non-Muslims.
Andrew Caplen, president of the society, apologised and said the criticism had been taken on board.
It follows a storm of protest after The Telegraph disclosed in March that the society had issued a practice note to solicitors effectively enshrining aspects of Islamic law in the British legal system.
The guidelines advised High Street solicitors on how to write Islamic wills in a way that would be recognised by courts in England and Wales.
They set out principles which meant that women could be denied an equal share of inheritances while unbelievers could be excluded altogether.
The document also detailed how children born out of wedlock might not be counted as legitimate heirs.
Mr Caplen’s predecessor as president, Nicholas Fluck, strongly resisted criticism of the guidelines when details were published in March.
But in a short statement the society said it now had decided to withdraw them in light of “feedback” from the public and lawyers themselves.
“Our practice note was intended to support members to better serve their clients as far as is allowed by the law of England and Wales,” said Mr Caplen.
“We reviewed the note in the light of criticism.
“We have withdrawn the note and we are sorry.”
Keith Porteous Wood, executive director of the National Secular Society, who campaigned for the guidelines to be withdrawn, said: “This is an important reverse for what had seemed to be the relentless march of sharia to becoming de facto British law.
“Until now, politicians and the legal establishment either encouraged this process or spinelessly recoiled from acknowledging what was happening.
“I congratulate the Law Society for heeding the objections we and others made.
“This is particularly good news for women who fare so badly under sharia law, which is non-democratically determined, non-human rights compliant and discriminatory code.”…
cs says
Halel Yah, there is hope.
richard sherman says
Once in awhile the good guys, non Muslims, win.
Darren says
Victories are few and far between for our side, it’s nice to finally get one though. I feel like I’m a Detriot football fan, or a pirates fan, though they did have two winning seasons.
Petey says
Whats victory feel like in detroit? Im a Leafs fan!!! lol
Darren says
My Penguins are doing good, though with the stacked team they have, they should have won more than one cup. Great in the regular season but keep choking in the play offs. I did forget Detroit does have a good hockey team, too bad the rest of the city looks like Dresdan after it just got bombed by the allies in WW2. I’m actually starting to like hockey more than football, don’t ask me why, the game is faster paced I guess. Anyway nice talking to another sports fan. The subject matter is so dark and depressing on this site, it’s nice to talk about something else for a change. Though I know it provides a good service to the wider infidel world, trying to wake people up. It’s the 1930s all over again. We have someone worse than Chamberlain since at least despite his flaws and mistakes was still a patriot. We have the Joker from batman, but instead of holding a gun or a bomb he has golf clubs watching as the world burns.
Darren says
I don’t know, I see through my government pretty well. We have two rival gangs similar to the crips and bloods going at it to see who can gain the power to loot the treasury and give favors to the special interest groups that helped put them in power. When election time comes around they come out like the groundhog Phill to manipulate to peasants and lie to them, promising them candy and unicorns. They also play upon their hopes, their dreams, their fears and their emotions like any good sociopath will do when manipulating someone. After the peasants serve their purpose, it’s back to business as usual.
When people get upset after election time, the elected prostitutes will pay lip service to the rabble just to mend fences and keep the herd believing that their unicorns and candy are indeed in the mail. The monied interests who are the real power brokers behind the two gangs will win either way, there are just different flavors of ice cream. It’s still ice cream, but the dems have their special interests, and the republicans have theirs. Of course some special interests support both sides, they figure it’s so cheap to bribe them, that you mise will bribe both gangs.
When it’s election time again the process is repeated again and the same tried and true methods of manipulating the herd are used and quite successfully. The Dems and Republicans are the Crips and the Bloods and the rest of the nation is collateral damage. I see through all of them when they get up on their soap boxes and wear their paper thin masks. The are the Hollow men T.S Elliot referred to. A bunch of sociopaths, but utterly hollow. Since people are easily lead by their emotions and are herd animals their obvious methods continue to work. Those in power have manipulating the masses down to a science and turned it into an art form. You try telling the obvious to most people they either don’t care, go all RA RA RA my team all the way, or consider you odd that you would by simple observation spell out what a joke our two party system is and how compromised it really is. So I simply sit here and watch groundhog day over and over again. Those who know history and who lack the skills to manipulate the masses or lack the money to pay someone to manipulate the masses for them are doomed to watch others repeat history while sitting by helplessly.
Crusader Prime says
It’s bloody Communism, you twats!!!
Dalone Ranger says
The push back has had a trickle of fuel added. Better late than never.
pumbar says
Craven, cowardly perfidious Albion gives in again, oh hang on…
sidney penny says
Hip Hip Hooray
sidney penny says
There is no place for Sharia “Law” anywhere in the world let alone,western democratic countries or non Islamic countries.
sidney penny says
Newsflash:
Robert Spencer to give a seminar in Britain to UK lawyers on Islam, Jihad and Sharia law.
Kiwikaffir says
If only that was possible. I would dearly love to see Mr Spencer come to New Zealand and educate some of the pointy heads here!
Babs says
Let’s hope that the NZ government wouldn’t act like Theresa May (UK Home Secretary) who, terrified that Robert’s and Pamela Geller’s plain speaking would upset the poor ‘ickle oversensitive followers of the religion of permanent offence, and banned Robert and Pamela Geller from the UK!
Now, of course, when the very real dangers from her and previous governments’ having cosied up to Islam in the UK, in the vain hope that by doing that, these “people” could be induced to behave like real human beings, are proven to have been wrong, Theresa May is coming the toughie.
Too late! The Islamic barbarians are inside the gates, and her government ignoring them has put the population in danger.
Jayell says
Hello, Robert. Let me know when you’re coming, mate!!I (There’s some good vernacular UK English for you!)
gravenimage says
UK Law Society apologizes and withdraws Sharia guidelines
…………………………..
They got a clue after receiving a “storm of protest”—they even apologized.
Things aren’t entirely hopeless in Britain after all.
Kudos to all those who made their voices heard!
Shapleigh says
Mr. Caplen says,
“We have withdrawn the note and we are sorry. ” They’ll try harder next time to enable creeping sharia into the legal system without drawing attention.
Sharia discriminates against women but feminists are too busy with other important matters, like banning words they deem offensive
Salah says
” There is no doubt that when the Law Society adopted these guidelines, it had no idea that Sharia discriminated against women and non-Muslims…blah…blah…blah…”
Really? it’s all over the net. Do your homework!
Sharia Law vs English Law (pdf)
http://crossmuslims.blogspot.com/2011/01/sharia-law-vs-english-law-pdf.html
gravenimage says
Here was the Telegraph, advising against this madness back in March:
“The Law Society should withdraw its guidance on sharia law
Parallel legal systems should be prohibited”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/letters/10725370/The-Law-Society-should-withdraw-its-guidance-on-sharia-law.html
Buraq says
As regards Shariah and secular law, it’s simple. Where there is total compatibility between secular law and Shariah, Shariah is redundant. Where there is not, Shariah is illegal.
Every lawyer should be taught that on their first day at Law School!
Clowns!
steakman says
Very well said..!!
Islam has zero place in Western society..it is my view and I will defend said view if necessary, with my life.
On another note..I wonder how Anjem Choudary is doing ….eh..on this lovely bit of news..?? That this Agitating Extremist SubHumanPOS still wallks the streets in the UK completely blows my mind.
Don McKellar says
This shows the pattern we see again and again and again!
The powers that be ASSUME that Islam is “equivalent” to the modern, civilized world’s standards of ethics and morality. They ASSUME that sharia law is fair and just. They ASSUME the best from Islam and moslems. So they just GO WITH IT and sweep any objections under the rug with their fingers in their ears.
And then they are ALWAYS wrong! Often it is after many suffer, some die, and damage is done which cannot be truly fixed. In this case, it was stopped JUST IN TIME!
DEAR UK LAW SOCIETY: IS THIS HOW YOU CONDUCT YOURSELVES ON LEGAL MATTERS? ARE YOU REALLY THIS BLIND? WHAT OTHER IDIOTIC BLUNDERS HAVE YOU SCREWED UP? AND NOW, MOST IMPORTANTLY, WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT THIS EPIPHANY? ARE YOU GOING TO TAKE A PUBLIC HAMMER TO THE FOOL YOU HAVE FOR A P.M. WHO CLEARLY HASN”T FIGURED OUT WHAT YOU HAVE EDUCATED YOURSELVES ABOUT (better late than never)? WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT CAMERON? YOU CAN ATONE FOR THIS BY SETTING HIM STRAIGHT IN A VERY PUBLIC MANNER.
ECAW says
I was delighted to find out about the existence of the Lawyers’ Secular Society some time ago. They had a big hand in this, presumably risking adverse consequences by going against their seniors:
https://lawyerssecularsociety.wordpress.com/
One of their number is the redoubtable Anne-Marie Waters who runs Shariawatch:
http://www.shariawatch.org.uk/
So it’s not all one way in Britain.
Lawyers, politicians and journalists – that’s who we need on our side. Unfortunately most politicians are venal traitors and most journalists are the prisoners of the left wing National Union of Journalists but there are positive signs led, obviously not by the qualities, but by the Guardian tendency’s favourite hate rag the Daily Mail which sometimes dares to call a spade a spade.
Darren says
We need to find renegades within the left, think Bill Mahr, who have a following and if we could get some of them to our side, and if these people simply started stating the factual evidence regarding islam. maybe it might be a ripple in a pond and create many more. When people on our side point out the obvious we are simply lumped into the extremist category and ignored, but when one of their own do it, even if they disagree or react the usual way with their emotions some of them sit up and take notice. This is why I am hoping Bill Mahr can do some good, as much as I detest the man. He is the type who thinks he is the smartest man in the room, when the room he is in is populated by single celled organisms. Of course you are the smartest man in that room supposedly, but look who is in the room with you. If you would go to the room next door you would quickly be shut down. I agree though with your idea.
Darren says
You being Bill Mahr not you ECAW, I’ve read many of your posts you are a smart individual unlike Bill Mahr.
ECAW says
It might only be a speed bump on the road to perdition for Robert Spencer but for those of us with a more optimistic outlook it could be another crack in the dam. Each time someone says “No, I’m not putting up with this bollocks” and the roof doesn’t fall in it (hopefully) encourages others.
ECAW says
Moving from the optimistic to the downright Pollyannaish, I’d like to suggest that this is the best of all possible outcomes. If the guidelines had been accepted and used for a couple of years it would have been the devil’s own job to extricate them. If they had never been put forward, sharia would nevertheless have continued creeping into the cracks of our society. But to adopt them, then for a rational debate to take place resulting in the rejection of sharia values at the heart of the establishment is just perfect.
Next stop halal, sharia courts, the easy ride for zakat etc.
Darren says
Maybe someday once the civil war happens in Eurostan you guys can have an organization like the Wolverines. Remember that movie when the Communists invade the U.S. I almost feel like that now, the people who actually understand and get islam, and want to try doing something anything about it are few in number and are on the fringes of media and academia, not to mention political power. Anyway Wolverines!
Mark says
Just one point – illegitimate children are not recognised as hiers automatically in British law either.
sidney penny says
The law applies to all including Muslims.
and if it is an unfair law it is not because of religion.
Boo says
And once again us “islamophobes” were proven to be right. Hey, you never know, maybe soon they’ll start listening. Might be a bit hard without a head, though.
thomas pellow says
Supplementary.
Press release –
” Women’s rights campaigners welcome withdrawal of the Law Society’s sharia wills practice note.”
http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/press-release-%E2%80%93-women%E2%80%99s-rights-campaigners-welcome-withdrawal-of-the-law-society%E2%80%99s-sharia-wills-practice-note/
ECAW says
“The organisers of the campaign also obtained legal advice from Karon Monaghan QC of Matrix Chambers, which stated that the Practice Note was unlawful as it provided guidance to solicitors that promotes an interpretation of Sharia that is discriminatory on the grounds of gender, religion and ethnicity and thus gave rise to the possibility of direct discrimination by solicitors.”
If this is unlawful why isn’t this?
http://www.muslimlawyer.co.uk/sharia-islamic-law/
dr d p rebentisch says
well done Robert Spencer Sir
sidney penny says
You would think that lawyers everywhere would need to understand the law that they are recommending to their clients and the effect of what they are recommending.
How does this start off in the first place
Mirren10 says
This is excellent news. I’m beginning to be (cautiously) hopeful. I was one of the members of the public who wrote to the Law Society. I included in my letter the relevant quotes from the koran, outlining what sharia would mean for women, children, and non-muslims. And clearly, I wasn’t the only one.
Calooh, calay !
Darren says
Every time our side wins a victory we need to start shouting Wolverines, like in that movie when the Communists invade America and a resistance movement is formed. I sure feel as out numbered and out gunned as they did that’s for sure. Well done though for doing something other than post on blogs.
Mirren10 says
”Well done though for doing something other than post on blogs”.
**Everyone** can do something other than just posting on blogs. Write, pester, pester, to everyone in a position of power you can think of. Boycott any mohammedan businesses. Whenever there is any kind of opportunity, educate people on what the koran says, the character of mohammed.
Support Israel. Wear the Star of David. Go to Israeli T Shirts.com, and buy a T shirt in support of Israel, and **wear** it. Be ready to state, without fear or favour, what islam is actually all about, and what mohammedans eventually want for **all** of us. Sign petitions against halal, and mosques. Support Gavin Boby. Seek out, wherever you can, those who oppose islam and mohammedans, and **support** them, with letters, and if you can afford it, donations.
Write letters to your local newspapers, TV stations, post on other blogs, not just this one. Be bloody pro-active. And **vote**, and contact anyone in a position of influence/power who looks as if they are even the tiniest bit aware of the danger of islam amd mohammedans.
Be prepared to stand up for what you believe, in the face of intimidation. Never, ever, give in.
Crixus says
eat pork
buy a dog
dance and listen to music
patronise art
fanatically share links from: discrimination sites (women, gays, non-muslims, apostates)
western cultural events: concerts, operas, rock concerts, art exhibitions, dance, debates etc. this re enforces what we have to lose in people’s minds
If you live in Europe then consider purchasing a pre 2000 diesel car with a Bosch fuel pump that will run on vegetable oil and not petrol or fuel oil. Models include: (some versions of: Citroen: BX, XM, ZX, Xantia (must have a Bosch Fuel Pump and not a Lucas one) Pugeot: 406, 405, 306,205 – again with bosch pump), Mercedes Diesel engines prior to 1997 (not common rail engines).
Or buy bio diesel for your car or make it at home if you have a modern diesel car.
Boycott Saudi
Join and share human rights issues across the muslim world
Don’t eat Halal food
gravenimage says
Bravo, Mirren!
Dave Sharp says
I find it reprehensible that sharia law was even a reasonable thought and was given consideration by the law society. What did Britain fight all those wars for? What did those unions fight all those civil battles for if not to enshrine those very hard won tenets of civilized society beaten out of the hands of the aristocracy. This say something quite unsettling about the state of social affairs in the upper echelon of British society and just how far the lower level has fallen in cultural expectations and definition of freedom. The west really has so lost its way and seditious evidence such as this confirms to me everyday that Russia really did win the cold war. Sorry President Reagan, you’ve been outmaneuvered by time and stupidity.
Darren says
I still don’t think the fire that forged western civilization is out. It is dulled but it still burns hot. Maybe once the real trial by fire comes and it will come in forms other than just islam we can regain some of what made us so great. Right now western civilization reminds me of the old empire in the Foundation series. Old and decaying stale and stagnant. It might take a trial by fire to reforge the great civilization and countries that sprung from western civilization. That is my hope anyway, since having a trial by fire doesn’t guarentee you will come out stronger or better, the hope is there though. Western civilization is still populated by some amazing talented, and brilliant people, and many people still have that spark that made us great inside them. That’s my hope anyway as dark and cynical as I am at times, there is still greatness in our civilization. I’m an American but Europe was the birthplace of western civilization so we are brothers in that regard.
Darren says
Instead of being taught how evil western civilization is, our children need to be taught how great western civilization actually is. Liberals for some reason are consumed with self hatred and shame, I don’t understand that mentality. I am proud what those who came before us forged. You can single out any civilization or country for the evils they did, but no country or civilization is unique. All nations and civilizations were founded on blood and conquest. Is this the right way? No, but it is what it is, but you can’t focus on just the bad, western civilization invented the modern world.
DiMu says
The scandal is that the Law Society is so stupid that they professed not to know the contents of Sharia Law in the first place!
clifford hall says
I note the comment of Buraq above. As I understand the ‘guidelines’, which I read, his assessment, viz (a) where there is compatibility a will will be given effect but (b) if not English law prevails accurately reflects what the guidelines were saying. What the guidelines were mainly concerned with was the extent to which wills made abroad in accordance with the provisions of a foreign legal system could be given effect in England. This is a general question which cuts across the legal spectrum and is known as ‘Conflicts of Law’ or ‘Private International Law’. It is not in itself sinister.
However, to check my understanding was correct I telephoned the Law Society – and got no-where. The only telephone number on their website is their ‘find a solicitor’ service. Seemingly their ‘big boys’ are too elite to be approached.
What a pity that the successful public outcry about what the guidelines are supposed to have said cannot be used to further the interests of free speech in other areas. I am thinking of the way Britain First is now being treated by media, public authority and police – where the standard line seems now to be ‘If you do what we’ve agreed you can do other people will cause trouble so we’re not going to let you do it’.
gravenimage says
Clifford Hall wrote:
What the guidelines were mainly concerned with was the extent to which wills made abroad in accordance with the provisions of a foreign legal system could be given effect in England.
……………………………….
Enforcing wills made abroad was *not* the main focus of these now thankfully defunct guidelines—it was to coach barristers *in Britain* in drawing up wills using Shari’ah guidelines.
Crixus says
Hats off to all the campaigners who put the Law Society under pressure on this one. Especially lawyer Anne-Marie Waters of shariawatch.co.uk who , as a left wing politician, is frequently subjected to the most vile abuse and accusations of racism by her fellow lefties but soldiers on nevertheless. Also to the National Secular Society and to
Sadikur Rahman a leading member of the Lawyers’ Secular Society, ” Sadikur was on the Law Society like a terrier the moment they introduced this advice and as the telegraph says:
“who was among the first to raise concerns about the practice note, praised the Law Society as a rare example of a major organisation publicly changing its mind.
“The language that they have chosen to use today is quite astonishing for an organisation that only a few months ago was resistant to change at all,” he said.
He added that it was a vindication for those who were accused of racism or being anti-Muslim for questioning the wisdom of original practice note.
“You should be able to criticise an ideology, that should not be taken as racism,” he said”
THIS is how the adgenda of islam will be defeated in the western democracies, one battle at a time with the mobilisation and unity of ALL spectrums of opposition, both faith and secular, feminist and right, socialist and tory, ANYONE who values their right to free speech and nationality as a Briton over the mumbo-jumbo of Islam and it’s ideology.
The learning from this is that rather than attack Islam as a religion, they attacked Islam as an ideology. This means that they can say: “look, if they want to follow their religion, in a free society that is their right BUT the moment that religion spills into ideology and politics then it is open to inspection under the microscope of analyses as an ideology impacts all of us. THIS is the way to attack as there is no come back on it and it clearly removes the principle objection, criticism of religion and distills it to criticism of the spread of an alien and incompatible ideology.
In Britain, the biggest battle we fight is the ignorance about WHAT Islam is and how it makes ideological demands on it’s adherents that are incompatible with our society. Once you explain this and illustrate it to others, they understand. The problem with living in a democracy is that people’s default reaction is one of compromise, that’s how democracies work, by compromise. The only problem is that this assumes that those you are dealing with share your basic values, ie democracy, equality, freedom etc. Once people realise that the issue here is that Islam simply DOES NOT SHARE those values its interesting to see how quickly they realise what is going on and do something about it.
People like Anne-Marie and Shadikur are in the front line of this battle and it is imperative that we all support them as much as possible by sharing links to their articles. shariawatch has huge support from organisations like Southwark Black Sisters, a high profile womans group that is highly anti Sharia, honour killing etc. This is a highly left wing organisation but leading the charge with groups like SBS means that the ‘racisim’ slur just doesn’t stick. It distills it to the violence and abuse that is the issue.
well done everyone!
clifford hall says
Crixus
If you are right that all across the spectrum of faith and politics should come together – which sounds good – does that mean we lend support to Britain First’s attempts to DO and not merely to SAY?
ECAW says
I’ll answer that with a resounding no. If people disapprove of the EDL here they surely should doubly disapprove of Britain First. The people who set it up were kicked out of the EDL, as I understand it, for financial shenanigans and their real far-right agenda. Since then there have been allegations of further financial problems and paying for likes on Facebook in order to create a false impression of popularity. I do not say they are true but if you are intersted in them I suggest you investigate.
On the other hand, if you approve of mosque invasions and stunts like driving around in a DIY armoured car, then Britain First might be for you.
Mirren10 says
”I’ll answer that with a resounding no. If people disapprove of the EDL here they surely should doubly disapprove of Britain First. The people who set it up were kicked out of the EDL, as I understand it, for financial shenanigans and their real far-right agenda.”
I’m not so sure I agree with you, ECAW.
I certainly support the EDL, and Paul Weston of LibertyGB also clearly does.
As far as Britain First goes, I wonder whether we should be so eager to dismiss one of the alas, very few, groups/parties in Britain who are prepared to do something about the mohammedan threat.
I bow to your greater knowledge of Britain First, but at least they are coming out and being counted on this issue; for example, they are campaigning against the building of the mega mosque in Rochester, which the council has **approved**, even though the majority of the *British* in Rochester have made clear they don’t want it.
UKIP has not made a clear stand on islam. I shall vote UKIP this time around, simply for the pragmatic reason we need to get out of the EU, and I don’t think LibertyGB. *or* Britain First, is in a realistic position to win a General Election at this stage.
ECAW says
Mirren10 – I’ve just checked and found that I was wrong. The top guy or guys of BF were never in the EDL. Their attempt to join (from the BNP I believe) was rejected. I won’t say too much more except the magic word “allegedly”.
I didn’t know about the Rochester mosque but I know if I lived in Rochester I’d be calling Gavin Boby not BF. Just looking at them and their antics they seem counter-productive to me, just the target for Guardian readers to pour their bile onto. That’s quite handy for EDL (IMHO) because there’s now someone else even worse!
Now that EDL have toned down their, er, enthusiasm I hope to see them attract the decent left, middle class nancy boys as Paul Weston referred to himself at the Luton demo last Saturday and even some Guardian readers and become a broad based, clearly peaceful group that make it difficult for the MSM to demonize them.
Maybe I’ve got it all wrong but it seems to me there’s a line with EDL and Lberty GB on one side and BF and BNP on the other.
Crixus says
Britain First have on the face of it, policies that I am attracted to. What I am not attracted to is the quasi military stomping behaviour. It’s not British and looks a bit daft and Mosleyesque to me.
Having said that I see no issue with evangelising to the heathen saracen.
EDL sadly, although a very different organisation are a tainted brand.
Politically, putting pressure on backbench mainstream politicians is a good tactic, most are wellaware of the issues but won;t put their head over the parapet until they think its not going to get shot off, which is sort of understandable.
Liberty GB is fine but only a pressure group – I would be surprised if they ever won a seat. However, Paul does valuable work especially by pulling stunts like getting arrested for quoting Churchill.
The way things work in the UK requires very much the intellectual and acceptable. By far in the way the most efficiant way to stop Islam and Sharia is by working with groups like Southall Black Sisters and those organisations against honour killing. I never thought I would be campaigning alongside Peter Tatchall. However, the dhimmis can’t dismiss these people, especially former muslims and women who have been abused and discriminated against by sharia and their families and society. Invariably when you force these stories into the public eye, like Rotherham, then people sit up and start to take notice. This is how we will stop this dark age bollocks in its tracks.
I do not share these people’s politics however, I my reasons for fighting Islam are their reasons. freedom of speech, of thought, of sexuality, of religion and freedom to be offended and to offend. THESE are fundamental rights worth dying for NOT some hocus pocus heebie jeebie witccraft from some smelly unwashed, goat shagging beardie paedophile and his moon god cult.
The significance of this is lost on Robert but that is because Robert fundementally misunderstands how politics works over here. We have no mainstream right at the moment – what we have is two center populist parties and the problem with populist parties is they have no gumption and blow in the wind. The problem they have is that they have not adapted to the new world of 24/7 social media when people are actually looking for leadership. This is why folk tie their standards to the Scottish Nats or UKIP, because they feel completely let down by Westminster and not only on the Islam.issue.
Darren says
We aren’t much different in the states. We have two gangs similar to the Crips and the Bloods vying for power and loot from the treasury, the rest of the nation is collateral damage sadly.
Mirren10 says
” … didn’t know about the Rochester mosque but I know if I lived in Rochester I’d be calling Gavin Boby not BF.”
ECAW, I agree, and have contacted Britain First, and suggested they do just that.
I don’t disagree with your strictures on Britain First. It’s just that I don’t think we’re in the position to disregard **any** group which is prepared to stand against the threat of islam. God knows they are few and far between.
Mirren10 says
”Just looking at them and their antics they seem counter-productive to me, just the target for Guardian readers to pour their bile onto.”
ECAW, I don’t think we should concern ourselves with moronic guardianistas. They are fools, and as such, we should ignore them. They are not interested in truth, facts, or anything but their own liberal delusions.
If we succeed in exploding the myth of a benignant islam, they will be the first who will cram our barricades, whining and slobbering that they were on the side of freedom, all along. We shouldn’t give them a forum.
Mirren10 says
”EDL sadly, although a very different organisation are a tainted brand.”
Crixus, people like you who so glibly dismiss the EDL mega piss me off.
The EDL started off as a grass roots **working class** movement, and that’s really what you don’t like about them. The EDL have marched, they have put themselves out in the public arena, standing for British values and culture.
For you to dismiss them as ‘tainted’, makes me wonder what, exactly, **you** have done. Do tell.
I myself have consistently supported the EDL, with donations; I have posted on the forum, I have gone on demos, and written to people in government supporting them. If it wasn’t for the EDL, I question whether the whole problem of islam and mohammedans would have garnered the publicity it has. Give some honour where it’s bloody well due.
Crixus says
Mirren – wind your neck in. You are taking my comment totally out of context.
The context of this discussion was around the effectiveness of resistance to islamification.
I am also a ‘member’ of the EDL(as they do not have formal membership per se this is a moot point for all of us) and have done a great deal in the cause including contributions to Shariawatch and editing on wikkiislam . I have campaigned on their behalf as well.
I am not here to discuss the history of the EDL, we are all agreed here that the EDL was set up with the best intentions and has some very reasonable and intelligent members. However, again the context is NOT what the ELD are like but the perception of their brand.
Brand has NOTHING to do with fact and EVERYTHING to do with perception. Now the perception of the EDL Brand in the UK is tainted. It is tainted in the public eye because of the attempted hijacking of the organisation by some of the far right groups who use any form of legitimate public protest as a vehicle for a scrap (just as the far left ones do as well). The EDL are written off as fascists and racists on a daily basis by people who have not read their manifesto, mainstream politicians and mainstream media.
THAT is why the EDL is a tainted brand. You would have to spend literally tens of millions on a charm offensive to revese the perception of the EDL.
IMHO the EDL is not the vehicle for leading the fight against islam because the brand has been too badly damaged by years of misinformed and vindictive abuse, not to mention the internal battles for control.
The discussion was about the most efficient and effective way of getting our message over. BF, EDL and even Liberty GB (of which I am am member) all have this issue, it doesn’t matter what your manifesto reads, it is the perception people have of you.
Getting our message across by allying with those who deal with the actual physical and social consequences of the spread of islam is a far more efficient method and one we need to be pursuing. Why? Because the dhimmis and their masters cannot claim the so called ‘moral high ground’ against battered ex muslim women etc whereas you or I are an easy target to manipulate no matter how much we state our peaceful and inclusive manifesto.
You are having a pop at the wrong bloke.
Darren says
The people who are anti jihad should form some kind of resistance movement and wage a social media war or something. We could even coordinate our movements and pool our intel together. I won’t advocate anything illegal despite my personal feelings about all is fair in love and war, but waking people up and challenging the stealth jihadists and liberal dhimmi’s that infest social media might over a long enough time open a few peoples eyes. Despite what the dhimmi left think, after reading many of the comments here by other posts, we have some really intelligent people on our side, who would eviscerate people in debates. All we need to do is simply speak the truth and present the facts, they speak for themselves. Any other ideas are welcome too, I just think we need to take a more aggressive approach with these people. We can do it legally as well, though I personally think recruiting hackers and going after terror organizations operating freely and openly is a worthy idea, I understand if it might backfire on us, and I’d hate to see people wind up in legal trouble. I just wish I could do more, but being a meaningless nobody, it seems like all I can do is sit by helplessly and watch.
Dave says
It’s not just a matter of responding to the threat. We must accentuate the positive nature of what we actually believe. References to ‘Western Civilisation’ above do not start with the widespread national and individual belief in Jesus Christ as the basis for the civilisation that flowed from that. How did Britain respond to being physically bombed by nazis? The king called for a national day of prayer. And then we really went to war. For our own reason; for our civilisation as we understood it to be, and for its future.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/britain_wwtwo/earlyyears_01.shtml
clifford hall says
So there you are then. Britain First or not? You can’t reject the one outfit that’s actually doing something. Liberty GB is, as someone said, a little splinter group not even mentioned by UKIP as taboo for membership. Someone mentioned the para-military aspect of BF and I agree it’s a turn off and like another blogger I have written to them to that effect. (They didn’t answer) They also come over as rather silly kids especially at the failed march at Rochester. So what to do? Yes I agree that to harness left wing support (the Southall Black Sisters) might be a way forward but then what have you unleashed? UKIP is pussyfooting on the issue and Gerard Batten has been marginalized by the leadership. Where is Enoch?
onisac says
A hat tip to the UK Law Society. It took 1400 years for this, and parliament, the U.S. congress, churches, law enforcement still doesn’t get it.
I fear by the time parliament and the U.S.. congress gets it, it will be too late., for effective action.
These things happen when a counties leaders no longer share life styles with one another. If people know longer have the same life styles, they don’t live in the same issues, concerns, entertainment, or habitat.
Any questions?
clifford hall says
Gravenimage
Yes in respect of property situated abroad NOT where the lex situs of the property was in England…viz a Conflicts problem as I said. The will would still have to be formally valid under English law. A shariah will executed in the UK could not possibly override English provisions where the property is situated in England.
Vivienne Leijonhufvud (goldie) says
Can’t quite get your drift could be due to spelling errors. Having said this, there is only one law in Sharia worth adopting in the UK and that is one of capital punishment. I personally feel all muslims raping children women and depriving non-muslim wives of property brought to an illegal marriage (under sharia) capital punishment needs to be applied to all criminal muslims. Further the UK needs to deal with the muslim problem severely. Just yesterday on video a bunch of muslims were indirectly threatening the Royal Family i.e. either they convert or leave the UK. If the UK government do not take these people seriously there will be a monumental crisis in England. We don’t have the likes of Henry V or Maggie Thatcher.
clifford hall says
Goldie
The bottom line is this – there was NO Shariah law which would replace English law in the sense suggested. Note the comment of the Law Society printed above to this effect. The Guidelines related to wills containing a foreign element, eg where the subject of a disposition was land and situated abroad. In that case the law of the place where the land was situate would govern the transaction. Substantive English law would still govern the formal validity of a will made in England under the Wills Act.
A similar issue (but in reverse) relates to the circumstances when an English Court would recognise a marriage celebrated abroad in accordance with Islamic law or native law and custom or a divorce after talaq times three.
Shariah is no different in these respects from the application of civil law (eg French law) in the same circumstances.
When I first heard (on a blog) of the original Telegraph report like everyone else I was horrified. It was that which caused me to look up the Guidelines, and I can well understand why they should have caused consternation even though in substance not sinister at all but simply reflective of the ordinary rules relating to foreign elements in transactions generally and otherwise governed by English law. Nevertheless the publication of the standard ‘foreign element’ rules specifically relating to Shariah was undoubtedly a considerable error of judgement.
On Maggie YES…and Enoch…..and maybe, just maybe, Gerard Batten.
aussieharleychick says
We are more equal if they make women less equal? For us to be better i must be less free? Well they can go and get f#cked, glad I live in Oz.