The Duke of Marlborough was recently interviewed on English television, where he declared that decades ago, when he served time in prison — yes, even dukes go to prison, something to do with a cocaine and heroin habit, and burglaries to pay for it — he became a Muslim in order to obtain more food. Apparently he regarded the halal option as providing more food than regular prison food, and the Duke decided it was worth converting for this ampler meal. He said nothing about its being “better,” but perhaps he also meant that.
And he’s not alone. All over the Western world, there are prisoners who convert to Islam, sometimes out of belief, shallow or profound, and often, as with the decadent Duke, for what have been called “convenience conversions.” The most important consideration for those behind bars is, of course, security, and conversion to Islam allows one to be a member of what is now — given the high rates of Muslim criminality and incarceratiion in the Western world — the biggest and baddest gang of them all. A community of bruisers and bruvvers who in prison likely threatened you as an Infidel, but now, once you’ve converted, will stick up for you as a Muslim.
And still others do so because Muslims apparently get to spend more time out of their cells; presumably this has to do with being allowed to gather in a group with other Muslims to say the five daily prayers. But more about that in a minute.
What shall we say about the Duke’s public admission? First, we might ask the Duke if in the time since his incarceration, some decades ago, he has remained a Muslim. His story strongly suggests that he has not. And by announcing on national television that he had once converted to Islam, but that it was done only to improve his dining experience, this is a way of making light of the faith. It seems clear that he jettisoned Islam as soon as he left prison. As long as that remained unknown, he was safe. But now that he’s just announced it in as public a fashion as possible, that raises a new problem. For there may be some Muslims in the U.K. who, furious with his attitude, his revelation of his temporary and insincere embrace of Islam, and the alacrity with which he apostatized once he was out of jail, may take it upon themselves to make an example of him, meting out the justice he deserves as an apostate — that is, death. And why not make an example of him, to make sure people know that once they have accepted Islam, no matter what they claim is the reason, they are Muslims for life, and no exceptions are to be made, not even for the Duke of Marlborough?
As it turns out, prisoners need not convert to Islam to be able to chose the halal option. The Duke, whose mind is clearly not of the best, apparently was unaware of this at the time. Or perhaps at that time, some decades ago, you did have to be a Muslim to receive halal meals. Or there is still another possibility: perhaps Jamie Spencer-Churchill (he was not then the Duke) had another reason for converting to Islam, that is, the physical security it provides prisoners, but was embarrassed to admit that, and instead decided he would attribute his conversion not to physical fear of being beaten up, but to the desire for more, or tastier, food. Of course, such concern for his safety would have been perfectly understandable. Imagine all the people who would like to settle their scores with the aristos and the toffs by making life exceedingly unpleasant for any of them who happened to end up behind bars. He would have been a natural target for violence.
And now the Duke faces the prospect of a new worry, that he brought upon himself by the casual revelation of his most temporary conversion, the worry that someone, somewhere, may be getting ready to punish him as an apostate. Such a killing would remind all those who made “convenience conversions” behind bars and simply assumed they could drop Islam once they got out, that it isn’t possible.
Should we care about these conversions behind bars? Yes, I think we should. For even when people choose, out of concern for their physical safety, to become Muslims, they may then convince themselves that they really do believe in Islam, and that they converted because of that belief, not out of fear. Who wants to admit, even to himself, that he became a Muslim just because he was scared? You tell not just others, but yourself, that your conversion was prompted by honest belief.
And even just the desire for the halal food option, if accompanied by a public (though false) conversion, can become one more step on the road to real conversion. There’s the matter of pride: “I take my beliefs seriously “(the Duke being a devil-may-care exception to that rule). There’s the matter of making sure your fellow Muslims believe you have sincerely converted, lest they decide you have not, and punish you for it. And then there is the matter of avoiding the charge of apostasy. If you convert in jail, whatever the reason or reasons, you may be stuck. Surely, you think, Muslims won’t dare to start enforcing Sharia punishments in the West. But they already do. How many, originally “convenience converts,” will, once they are out of prison, continue to practice Islam because they are now fearful of leaving the faith? In prison, they may have become Muslims out of concern for their safety; out of prison, they remain Muslims out of concern for their safety. And psychologically, it’s easier for them, in or out of prison, if they convince themselves that they truly believe.
It would be far better if the prison authorities made sure that non-Muslim and Muslim prisoners received equal treatment. There’s not much that they can do to deal with the violence inside prisons and the perception that Muslims provide better security for fellow Muslims, save to constantly increase the security for all prisoners, coming down hard at the least sign of violence. But for other “convenience conversions,” something can be done. It should not be beyond the wit of the prison food services, recognizing that at present the halal food option is apparently deemed superior, to undo that advantage. I do not know if the halal option differs only in the meat that is offered, or if there are other differences in the two menus. But it should be easy to increase the portion size, or add spices to the non-halal meat, or in some other way make that non-halal meal as desirable as the halal option — perhaps provide beer with the non-halal dinners. How can Muslims object to this, when all you are doing is making the non-halal option as desirable as the halal option? And the proof that this policy is working will be the decline in the number of non-Muslims requesting the halal option.
We mentioned above that there is another problem, apparently, in the prisons, which is the perception, and I think the reality, that Muslims are allowed more time out of their cells than non-Muslims. I presume that is because Muslim prisoners are — according to an official document on the treatment of Muslim prisoners put out by the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime — to be allowed, whenever possible, to participate in group prayer. For example, the U.N document insists, “Each Friday, at noon prayer, Muslim prisoners should be allowed to listen to a Muslim religious preacher’s speech and have a group prayer.” The U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime’s report on the proper treatment of Muslim prisoners goes further than just that Friday noon khutba-cum-prayer, declaring that “Wherever the facilities and security permit, group or congregational prayer should be facilitated.”
Furthermore, “because the original language of the Koran is Arabic, where educational material is available, Muslim inmates who desire should be permitted to learn Arabic using either, if necessary, volunteer instructors and/or self-study material. Muslim prisoners should also be allowed to meet with Islamic religious leaders to facilitate their study of the religion.” Presumably they would meet those instructors, and with those Islamic religious leaders, either as a group, or individually, in both cases not in prison cells but in the prison library, or perhaps a meeting room made available for the instruction in both Arabic and in Islam. How much extra time out of cells will all that add up to? It seems that the Muslim prisoners are indeed favored. This is in addition to the extra time they might have out of their cells if the group prayer is approved for more than once a week at Friday noon. If they are allowed group prayer for every one of the five daily prayers, it would be an extra 75 minutes every day, except Friday, when the total time might be as much as 90-110 minutes (given the Friday sermon). And I haven’t added the time they might be out of their cells for instruction in Arabic or in Islam. There’s a whole lot of Islam going on in the prisons of the Western world. Certainly non-Muslim prisoners are right to think that Muslims are being allowed more time out of their cells.
Prison authorities can certainly grant an identical length of time out of their cells to non-Muslim prisoners. However much time the Muslim prisoners are granted out of their cells for group prayer and the Friday sermon, the same amount of time ought to be granted to non-Muslim prisoners. The non-Muslim prisoners could engage in playing cards or chess, or spending time on the library computers, or group Bible study (the reinforcement of Christian belief, as a counterweight to Da’wa, is surely to be encouraged. And Christian ministers ought to be as much in evidence as are the imams in our prisons), in the time allotted. Again, if Muslim prisoners complain about the “unfairness” of this, prison authorities can explain that there is nothing unfair about making sure that all the prisoners have available the same amount of time outside of their cells. This is just an attempt to remedy what has been an unequal situation.
This may seem like a trivial matter. But we all know that in the West many prisoners have been converting to Islam. Some do it out of conviction. Some do it out of fear. Some do it, as the deplorable Duke did years ago, to obtain more food, while still others may want as much time outside their cells as Muslim prisoners have been granted. Whatever the reasons, it’s important to make sure that prison life is not perceived as better for Muslim than for non-Muslim prisoners. Nothing should be done to make Islam a more attractive option. Since we are prevented from tilting it in our favor, at least let’s make sure to keep that playing field level. Right now, the Western world, in its inattention, is giving Islam an unfair advantage in its prisons. And not just in its prisons.
mortimer says
Discrimination IN FAVOR of one religion gives that religion PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT. Since we believe in equality… ALL PRISONERS of other faiths or free thinkers must have EQUAL PRIVILEGES to those enjoyed by Muslims. When all prisoners are treated equality, there will be no reason for them to join with the DEATH CULT, RAPE CULT of Islam.
Andy says
Problems with Muslim Communities in Britain
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbqqyBTIuOg
carol says
Thanks for a great video Andy. I particularly like where the speaker begins at 6:07:
“There is a distinct ‘in-group’/’out-group’ dichotomy amongst Muslims; they have terms for the UMMA and the KUFAR; these are TWO DISTINCT GROUPS WHO DESERVE DIFFERENT MORAL CONSIDERATION IN ISLAM. That makes Islam an INHERENTLY LESS MORAL stance/philosophy than something like Christianity. One of the key points of Christianity was to extend the moral franchise to ALL HUMAN BEINGS – this is why SLAVERY died off in the Middle Ages in Western Europe – because Christians weren’t supposed to own Christian slaves. It gave the slaves a good out, didn’t it?”
To my mind some things disgrace the name of God and religion. Whoever embraces Islam is probably being fooled by the real or imagined human warmth and brotherhood they perhaps find more easily there. Emotions must be buttressed by sound philosophy however, and Islam fails greatly and seems to prefer the sin of PRIDE.
carol says
SHARIA is inherently less moral. Robert Spencer discusses it in Episode 11(45:40 – 50:00). He concludes by describing how the Islamic Law of Retaliation exemplifies this UNjust bias.
The Basics of Islam w/ Robert Spencer Episode One
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kwzu6KfYAIg
Nigel lang says
A great video. I too have been wondering if all the gangs convicted of sex attacks have had their sentences increased due to racial element? I don’t think they have. It’s an aggravating factor that should attract a longer sentence.
The mainstream media produce articles that try to make people think the gangs are “mainly of Pakistani origin”. It’s a red herring to make the public think it’s an imported “cultural horror”. It’s not.
In my area, Bristol we’ve had the joy of at least 2 rape gangs from the Islamic community. It’s a mainly Somalia enclave. The thing is, these were youths who were born here of immigrant parents! What does that tell us? Well, the defendants gave both a defence and when found guilty, mitigation, that their religion allowed it. They told the kids they abused the same thing. My point is, they learned that at home, the mosque, the Islamic education centre and the Islamic community. It’s not just imported here, it’s propagated.
I’ll post a picture of a flyer of one of the reasons this is happening…
I’m not sure how to post photo. It’s a flyer for madrasas playgroups in my area…
gravenimage says
Hugh Fitzgerald: Convenience Conversions In Prison
……………………
And this is only true because British prisons *reward* Muslims with more perks–more and better food, and time off work for prayers.
Add to that that Muslims regularly threaten Infidels and that Islam is attractive to violent felons, and you see why prisons are such a fertile ground for conversion to Islam. Suicidal madness.
TheBuffster says
The government systems in the West are stupidly doing the job that the Dhimma contract is supposed to do after a region has been conquered by Muslim warriors. Except there hasn’t been any war conquest, only invasion by immigration.
Yesterday I read a news report of a proposed synagogue in a Jewish area in a Sydney suburb that has been turned down by the council, and one reason given is that the synagogue may be a target for terrorists, thus endangering those in the synagogue and the neighborhood.
http://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/news/bondi-synagogue-ban-over-terrorism-risk-leaves-jewish-community-shocked-and-furious/news-story/6ec6252d613583df7797c7cac2b25de4
In the Dhimma contract, Jews and Christians are not allowed to build any new houses of worship. While nobody’s signed a formal contract with the Muslim community (Sydney has the largest Muslim community in Australia), the fear of terrorism is enough to make the council and the court who decided the case behave as if they *have* signed on to the dhimma program.
What does this mean for other Jewish communities who want to build synagogues around Sydney? And what will they do in Canberra? Melbourne? Brisbane? Perth?
Will the council turn down a new mosque because it may be a breeding ground for terrorists? Or will they readily sign on for a mosque because they’re afraid that to refuse will make them or their town a terrorist target?
In prisons, if Muslims are getting a better deal then that gives Islam both the carrot and the stick to gain recruits. Once again, the authorities are allowing the principles of the dhimma system to have de facto rule right under their noses, and in fact facilitate it. Why? To avoid trouble, I reckon.
The whole point of the dhimma contract is to make non-Muslims humiliated enough, afraid enough, and inconvenienced enough to decide to convert to Islam, because Muslims have it better. Even though we in the West have more soldiers and more weapons, out leaders and a good portion of our fellow citizens don’t have the knowledge and understanding of how these things work to have the courage to stand firm and resist.
Or maybe they just don’t have the courage to look head on at what’s facing us.
Keep passing out all the red pills you can with as much finesse and persuasiveness as you’ve got.
jewdog says
Let’s not forget that non-Muslim prisoners will be confronted by enthusiastic and driven Muslims bent on Dawa to while away their hard time. And many hapless infidels will be as weak-minded as our Duke here and will convert out of naivete, or maybe from a desire to fit in. As for the food, man does not live by bread alone, but will often eagerly swallow baloney.
Yes, the authorities need to maintain equality in material matters, but if they were smart, they would segregate the Muslims – separate but equal – and put the kibosh on Dawa. Call it jihadi prevention.
Peterson says
Duke found that being Christian did not benefit him in any way. So choosing Islam did not mean anything to him. Just choose between two nonsenses. So he chose the convenient one. But he forgot that he was in a Christian civilization. So he enjoys the freedom. This freedom was not given free for him. His forefathers fought for it. Let people like him waste it away and the Britain become an Islamic land. Then he will know what struggle and sacrifices he has to endure to keep his freedom.
Laura says
I bet he was threatened and intimidated into ‘converting,’ he doesn’t look much like someone used to going eyeball to eyeball with an aggressor, does he?
wool says
Hold on,when he got charged of crime,he will be in prison again and will muslim.
TheBuffster says
I’ve thought that Muslims should be segregated from non-Muslims for a long time.
Then that leaves the Muslims in name only… We don’t want them to be radicalized either. So what do you do, there?
Carolyne says
Once when I was in England I read the Daily Mail which said that the NHS, contrary to their previous promise, had found it impossible to segregate the wards (Yes, they still have wards) by sex. I didn’t know why they couldn’t just one day say, “OK, males over here, females over there.” It is the same with Muslims. Just say “Muslims over here, non-Muslims over there.” Keeping non-Muslims away from barbarians in prison shouldn’t be that difficult. After all, they are incarcerated.
Brian Riley says
There should be separate prisons for Muslims with two kinds of Muslim prison. One for those convicted of ordinary crimes and sexual offences and the other for the much smaller number of Muslims with jihad convictions — in effect a UK Gitmo. No Halilal meat either ( It is banned in Switzerland ) If they wont eat meat obtained by humane slaughter methods let them be vegetarian .
Adam says
Theory, strength attracts and weakness repels.
Experiment, anyone in prison who claims to be a muslim shall be hanged from the neck until dead.
Results, I’ll get back to you with those new conversion numbers.
See kids, science can be fun.
Start by not excepting this claim that islam is a religion. Its a death cult. It loves death while we love life. In this one regard, we should be helpful.
Tjhawk says
The only option for halal wannabes should be the vegetarian option. All meat should be slaughtered according to Western standards.
SK says
A lot of good ideas here
Jack Diamond says
Love the hat. You just know he must have accidentally sat on it before going out.
Much as he did to his life.
TheBuffster says
LOL, Jack!
R Russell says
I wonder if this self-absorbed narcissist understands that when he returns to the general population and the end of his sentence, he will not be able to renege on his ‘conversion’ and its responsibilities?
Having said the shahada he is Muslim for life – on pain of ……..
Anne Smith says
Actually, looking at this picture of him one is tempted to surmise that he would have looked a lot better if he had opted for Jesus Christ’s Lenten diet. All that Halal food does not seem to have done him much good.
Carolyne says
He looks exactly like every Duke of Marlboro for the last 500 years, if one can judge by the paintings of them. English aristocracy has a habit of marrying relatives, too. The Queen and Prince Phillip are first cousin, twice removed.
Also the Earl Spencer looks like this man. they all look alike. The Earl’s father looked even more like this man.
Where in the bible does it list a “Lenten” diet or is that just something made up centuries later?
Will says
OINK-OINK-OINK ………..
Laura says
The solution is so simple that I’m almost most embarrassed to say it, ‘keep muslims in muslim only prisons, without access to imams, korans or halal food, let the bastards suffer.’
dumbledoresarmy says
Yep.
Muslim-only prisons, which obviates their ability to engage in ‘prison dawa’.
If non-Muslim prisoners have NO contact with muslims or with Muslim ‘chaplains’ then the likelihood of their being converted to Islam either by ‘stick’ (threats from Muslim prisoners) or ‘carrot’ (halal diet is perceived as superior; Muslims get more ‘time out’ of cell) would be obviated.
Kevin Dunn says
His close relative, Winston Churchill, wrote a famous and damning commentary on islam in his 1899 book, The River War.
Barguest says
And here in the UK you can be arrested for quoting that commentary in public (it happened to Paul Weston of Liberty GB and IIRC there’s video of the event on youtube). But you can walk down a major thoroughfare carrying a placard with the message “Behead those who insult islam” (plenty of pictures online of the weird-beards doing just that) and the police will leave you untouched. And I thought incitement to murder was against the law. Double standards much?
dumbledoresarmy says
Not only “The River War”! Look up an even earlier work, “The Story of the Malakand Field Force” and read the first chapter, an overview of the cultural/ historical situation on the (heavily-Islamised) North West Frontier of the Raj, entitled “The Theatre of War”. In that chapter Churchill calls Islam “the religion of blood and war” and makes some other very astute remarks about its devastating effects on human beings.
simpleton1 says
The conversion starts in jail, due to the negligence of the authorities
As we know “”apostasy”” occurs out of jail.
One can go and live and work where there is very little islam around.
The numbers and power of islam is increasing.
It will become harder to remain away from islamic power.
The authorities powers are being reduced and in many ways being replaced by muslims.
Next stage will be the follow up by islam on released prisoners by muslims.
The muslims will make them selves known to the family, wives, children of the prisoners.
Will you dare to not turn up to a mosque then, when they know where you live, wife works and children go to school.
Offers will be made that one can not refuse, to remain a true muslim and to remove any evidence of apostasy., and so then, all the family go to mosque. and will receive a great welcome, particularly the children to how they were always were a moslem.
A “”sweet”” reminder may happen now and again, but the majority will enjoy the ramadan food for afters.
Mohammad has his ideas to get his followers to attend to prayers too
So a muslim is guided to follow Mohammad’s example for any recalcitrant muslims.
The penalty of death is for another time, just to leave that hanging while mosque attendance and zakhat/ fees are paid to the imam/mosque..
Then another choice could be jizya, to be left alone, until the next installment.
Can we be sure this is not happening already?
The Rotherham girls took a long time become exposed, and was covered up for decades by authorities.
It does make me wonder if that could have been another form of extracting jizya? from recalcitrant parents. After all those muslims were just doing their duty in following their “perfect man” Mohammad.
John A. Marre says
If some Muslim, following the dictates of his faith, does to the Duke what the Koran says to do, will the media attribute the action to the faithful practice of Islam?
Voytek Gagalka says
Truly, there is only one solution for this problem for non-Muslims on individual level: STAY OUT OF PRISONS and thus any legal trouble (threatening putting you there) as much as possible! Then there will not be “conversion problem” anymore.
Rob says
I worked for over a decade in a state Department of Corrections within the U.S. In that period of time I watched the prison chaplaincy system entirely converted to Islam; Christian ministers who wished to participate in prison chaplaincy programs were usually rebuffed. Christian ministers tell me today that they are no longer allowed into state prisons and I’m sure that Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist and other religious leaders are similarly locked out. Given this situation, it is hardly surprising that prison conversions to Islam are exploding – powerless people want to be on the winning team.
dumbledoresarmy says
You write – “In that period of time [dates, please: which years??] I watched the prison chaplaincy system entirely converted to Islam;
“Christian ministers who wished to participate in prison chaplaincy programs were usually rebuffed.
“**Christian ministers tell me today that they are no longer allowed into state prisons** (???) and I’m sure that Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist and other religious leaders are similarly locked out. ”
Is that really so?
Is it REALLY the case that NO Christian priest, pastor or minister, whether Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant, is now allowed to enter a prison and minister to the ‘black sheep’ of their flocks, in prison? That sounds … highly suspect.
Does that mean that prisoners who enter prison having identified themselves as Christians (of whatever stripe), Buddhist, Jewish, Hindu, Native American, etc, are being DENIED access to pastoral care from persons of their faith/ belief system??? What of a Catholic prisoner who becomes seriously ill in prison? Will he be denied anointing-with-oil, or the viaticum? What of a Catholic or Anglican prisoner who expresses a wish to receive communion?
If This is in fact the case – that Muslims in prison have access to Muslim ‘chaplains’ and Muslim dawa is permitted/ encouraged while all other non-Muslim faith leaders are DENIED access to members of their faith who are in prison, and outreach (by groups such as Kairos or the Prison Fellowship or just the local priest / parson/ minister wanting to conduct a service in prison, or a bible study for prisoners who express interest) is *forbidden* – then this needs to be brought to the attention of congresspersons and senators and the leaders of all major Christian groups in the USA. Because it is blatantly abusive, and discriminates against all non-Muslim prisoners, by denying them a/ access to pastoral care if they identify as a member of a non-Muslim faith and b/ the opportunity to investigate any faith other than Islam.
If you have hard evidence of the claims you have made in your posting it should be communicated to ACT for America, so that they can mobilise their membership to do some heavy-duty lobbying and publicising of this grossly discriminatory situation.
Halal Bacon says
I wonder if they realize they are worshiping a pedophile – we know what happens to pedophiles in jail…
Barguest says
Usually yes, but what we call paedophilia is, following mohammed’s example, considered normative in islam. And I bet the prison authorities wouldn’t want to be seen allowing any ‘islamophobic’ behaviour if the non-muslim cons starting dishing out beatings.
Terry says
Sickest ideology in the history of mankind!