British Muslims want Sharia, Islamic Law implemented in the UK


By —— Bio and Archives February 7, 2008

Comments | Print Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us

Polls show that 40 percent of British Muslims want Sharia, Islamic Law implemented in the UK and the government has moved to accommodate them.

Tony Blair’s government passed a law that would essentially criminalize blaspheming Islam. The law was weakened in the House of Lords but it will return again stronger than ever especially as the electoral and terror power of Muslims grow along with the desire of Western governments to appease them.

Norway and Sweden have already begun the process of implementing similar laws. In parts of Australia criticizing Islam can get you jail time. In Israel a woman was sentenced to prison for drawing and distributing a cartoon of Mohamed as a pig. In Russia and Belarus newspaper editors have faced jail time for reprinting the Danish cartoons.

Despite the faith of Americans in their own immunity thanks to the Constitution, the legal framework for it is already in place. Hate Crime laws allow for actions that are not in and of themselves criminal to be treated as criminal actions. Increasingly such laws also define a hate crime not based on the motive or action of the accused perpetrator but on the perception of the presumed victim. Beyond the legal statues, perceived intolerance is penalized in numerous ways economically and socially.

Despite the fact that Americans have stronger freedom of speech protection than Europeans, fewer American than European newspapers printed the Mohamed cartoons. A handful by comparison. Europe’s newspapers still need laws to be censored, American newspapers gladly censor themselves without even facing any real threat. Even before the mobs have come, the press has voluntarily obeyed them because social sanction is stronger than even the fear of violence. American reporters fear accusations of racism more than they fear a prison cell, because an imprisoned reporter rallies public outrage, but accusations of bigotry serve as a social and career death sentence.

For all intents and purposes, from our government to our media to our public entertainment and educational system; the first law of Islam has been implemented. The First Law of Islam is Thou Shalt Not Criticize Islam. The laws beyond that will follow. Since this special status of Islam leaves all other religions unprotected, Islam already has a superior status to other religions while other religions have an inferior status to Islam. With the first law in place, we are already living as Dhimmis.

Islam may be propagandized in schools while Judaism or Christianity may not. Muslims may pray in schools, members of other religions may not. Muslim holy books are treated as holy, while the holy books of other religions are treated as myth. The violence of other religions is condemned, while the violence of Islam is covered up. This leads us to Islam’s second law, Islam Is Superior To All Other Beliefs. By giving exclusive status to Islam, we have already implemented this as well.

By giving in to Islamic rage, we have already set the pattern of functioning as Dhimmis, of responding to Muslim tantrums with appeasement. The pattern continues from there with Muslims in public life enforcing their religious laws on everyone else. Muslim taxi drivers are already doing this by refusing to carry passengers who carry alcohol, seeing eye dogs for the blind and Muslim cashiers are refusing to handle pork.

There are Islamic laws that place restrictions on women. These won’t require government authority to legislate. Muslims simply implement them by making clear what happens to women who don’t. In parts of the world that has meant throwing acid into the faces of schoolgirls who don’t wear the Hijab as in Indonesia, preventing women from entering public areas if they are not dressed ‘modestly’ as is widespread in African countries where Islam is on the rise, treating any woman not dressed in the Islamic manner as a legitimate rape target as in Europe.

Sharia Law doesn’t need to function officially as long as Muslims have the leverage to implement it by force on an individual level. Through sensitivity training and religious protection laws, Muslims are forcing schools to allow Hijabs and Sex Separation as their requirements for women and through violence and harassment will force women to follow those requirements. At Nigerian protests a female Muslim reporter was stoned for not wearing the Hijab head covering, a head covering that was itself developed during the Lebanese conflict and modeled on the wimples of Catholic nuns to enable Arab Muslim fighters to distinguish between Christian and Shiite women as legitimate targets for assault. Harrassment by Muslims of Jewish students is already prevalent on campuses while the administration looks the other way. The same feminists who hold Take Back The Night Rallies along with solidarity rallies for Palestine will discover themselves the targets soon enough, as women increasingly face harassment from Muslim bosses, clients and customers for not complying while the various offices of civil and human rights naturally look the other way.

The only major step Muslims have yet to achieve is to force disputes between Muslims and Non-Muslims to be mediated in Muslim courts. This will begin as part of workplace sensitivity regulations for Muslims requiring disputes with the company to be arbitrated in a Muslim forum and some disputes between civil authorities and Muslim workers as well. The media and government broadcasting and rebroadcasting with the propaganda that Islam is a Religion of Peace will have nothing but praise for them. CAIR and similar groups will run puff pieces on how these arbitration mechanisms function much more peacefully than civil courts and save everyone money.

Then there will be Muslim unions that will strike not over job issues but over political ones. Support for Israel or sanctions against Iran or any opposition to a Muslim demand by a city will mean striking transit workers, taxi strikes and work stoppages that will derail local, state and national economies. It will be cheaper and simpler for most to simply give in. If this is hard to believe, consider that American labor is increasingly immigrant based and unions are trying to compensate for their loss of influence by aggressively recruiting immigrants. It won’t be long before those same immigrants are running the unions. The New York transit strike was orchestrated by a man who could barely speak English. Today he’s Haitian, tomorrow he’s just as likely to be Pakistani or Yemeni.

The hour is much later than we think.

 


Daniel Greenfield -- Bio and Archives |

Daniel Greenfield is a New York City writer and columnist. He is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and his articles appears at its Front Page Magazine site.

Daniel can be reached at: .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Commenting Policy

Please adhere to our commenting policy to avoid being banned. As a privately owned website, we reserve the right to remove any comment and ban any user at any time.

Comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal or abusive attacks on other users may be removed and result in a ban.
-- Follow these instructions on registering: