Why must we bow to the intolerant ways of Islam?

Jim Fitzpatrick MP and his wife were quite right to leave a wedding because it was segregated by sex, says Alasdair Palmer.

 

By Alasdair Palmer

Published: 5:07PM BST 15 Aug 2009

 

Comments 267 | Comment on this article

 

When Jim Fitzpatrick MP and his wife decided to leave a Muslim wedding party after they discovered it was segregated by sex, he did not anticipate the controversy his decision would generate. "It reflects badly on him," said Sir Iqbal Sacranie, the former head of the Muslim Council of Britain. "It shows a lack of interest… to engage with people of different backgrounds." Tim Archer, the Tory who is standing against the minister of state at the next election, commented that "Fitzpatrick is playing a certain race card to save his skin at the next election".

 

All this because Mr Fitzpatrick did not want to imply that he endorsed sexual segregation by remaining at the party. Yet what can possibly be wrong with an MP, or anyone else, withdrawing from a celebration whose organisation suggests that women are not equal to men? 

Related Articles

Jim Fitzpatrick was wrong, but he had a point

How The West Was Lost (ctd): the Burkini Some people claim that segregating the sexes is a matter of personal choice, like choosing between flavours of ice-cream. It has no implications in terms of your view of the equality of the sexes, any more than wearing the niqab or the hijab – the Islamic garments that cover women from head to toe – implies that you think women are inferior.

The Muslims who feel most strongly about sexual segregation, or about the importance of ensuring that women dress "modestly", see those customs as ordered by God. They are profoundly offended by the idea that they reflect merely human choices. That is why there is a vocal strain of Islam in Britain that insists that Muslims should be governed, not by British law, but by sharia.

 

Islamic law does not, of course, accept that men and women have equal rights. Sharia courts in Britain have already judged that a man may have up to four wives at any one time; that a wife has no property rights in the event of divorce; that a woman may not leave her home without her husband's consent; and that a woman cannot marry without the presence and permission of a male guardian.

 

In 2004, in response to pressure from some of its Muslim leaders, the Canadian province of Ontario planned to impose legally binding arbitration on Muslims according to sharia. The most vigorous protests came from Muslim women, who insisted that the main reason they had emigrated to Canada was to get away from it. Their arguments prevailed over those who claimed that sharia was merely "a choice" which should be allowed in any "multicultural society".

 

There are other conflicts with the liberal tradition. A fundamental part of Islamic law is that someone who converts to another religion should be executed. In Islamic states, the death penalty for apostasy is on the statute books; even in Britain, very few spokesmen for the Muslim community will condemn such laws as wrong.

 

So it is a mistake to pretend that there is no conflict between principles that are supposed to animate British society – freedom of religion, equality of the sexes, and the primacy of secular law made by democratic representatives – and fundamentalist interpretations of Islam. But much official policy seems to be based on the hope that such a conflict is illusory, and will simply evaporate if we pretend it is not there.

 

For example, polygamy is illegal under British law. But while condemning it in theory, the Government endorses it in practice: each woman in such a relationship is entitled to the same benefits as the wife in a monogamous married couple.

 

Mr Fitzpatrick warns that segregation is a recent development, one which reflects the increasing influence of more fundamentalist strains of Islam. Perhaps it is time for the Government to consider a more vigorous stance in defence of Britain's fundamental values, rather than continuing to pretend the issue has no more significance than the conflict between those who like chocolate ice-cream, and those who prefer hazelnut.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/6034998/Why-must-we-bow-to-the-intolerant-ways-of-Islam.html

 

Comments: 267

 

If I walked into a wedding where blacks were separated from whites, Catholics from Baptists, males from females, short from tall, or any other ridiculous reasoning, I would leave too. Be thankful you have an MP willing to stand up for what's right.

E Kryzanowski

on August 17, 2009

at 05:00 PM

Report this commentIf you want to be governed by Sharia law, then go back to the third-world hell holes that Islam has created and live there. And if you are a citizen of a Western nation and wish to be governed by Sharia, then move to where that vile system reigns and leave the rest of us alone.

Bob

on August 17, 2009

at 04:50 PM

Report this comment17Aug09

Were I to invite a Muslim couple to join me for day at a nude beach, and were I turned down, should I consider them racists for not participating in this aspect of the host country culture?

 

lonegranger

on August 17, 2009

at 04:25 PM

Report this commentPaul in FREE France

August 17th 2009

12.16pm

 

Paul, You WILL NOT get them in FREE FRANCE unless OUR! STUPID GOVERNMENT MOVE OVER THERE. YOU ARE SAFE! my friend.

Davetherave

on August 17, 2009

at 01:44 PM

Report this commentFOR WHAT IT'S WORTH:

 

abc

on August 17, 2009

at 10:46 AM

 

I thank you ABC for giving your reply and divulging some of your knowledge of Islam, as i am no expert in Islamic affairs and merely take what is said to me in good faith, being the believer in Jesus/Yesua the Christ.

 

However, i am concerned that with your rathr extensive knowledge you appear to mistrust the Muslim and all that he says, so i looked in what you wrote to see if this is possible, or could you be mistaken.

 

ABC SAID:

 

"That Sura 109, (The Unbelievers) is often used by Moslems when speaking to uninformed non-Moslems as a prime example of Islam's supposed tolerance to non-Moslems. In reality, it relieves Moslems of any obligation to compromise in any sense with non-believers, expressing disgust at the disbelief of the kufr. Mohamd instructed his followers to always recite this verse before sleeping, as 'immunity' from 'polytheism.'"

 

In case you and any other reader cannot see the issue i am referring to, which it would appear hangs your theory of why you cannot trust the Muslim or the Islamic faith, when they give their word, i shall hereby insert the text and draw attention to your conclusion.

 

MY LEAD COMMENT:

 

When referring to the comment i made about Muslims not forcing anyone to take their religion, stance, position, they have a saying, not verbatum "You to your way and me to my own"

 

ABC was kind enough to inform me that this saying is called the SURA. I shall take no issue of with his suspicions on me, but merely seek to deal with his comments.

 

ABC SAID:

 

"In reality, it relieves Moslems of any obligation to compromise in any sense with non-believers"

 

This explanation of yours is so flawed, it just goes to show that in the hands of someone without the skill and sensitivity, their use of langauge and interpretting of script can be dangerous!

 

Compromise on all issues is a fools choice, for i will NOT compromise on my values in regards to freedom of speech, even if the truth hurts the culprit.

 

It surely does not mean i am therefore untrust worthy, or mean ill to a non believer in my faith, or values, it just means i will not adopt someone else's flawed views!

 

In which case, since you've interpretted the Sura, i will say i stand firm with its principles and do not see the Sura 109 as being evil,or covert in any way.

 

Now when one considers the SURA 109 to the Jewish "Kol Nidre", there is no comparison.

 

The "Kol Nidre" is a prayer said every Yom Kippur/Day of atonement, whereby Jews promise to break every vow, oath and pledge they give to who they deem the Goyim.

 

In real terms that means, when we the people are in a position to depend upon the truth coming from a Jew, will may as well casts lots, for his decision, or actions will solely depend onn what is good for him. ER NOT TO BE TRUSTED, HENCE WHEN TONY BLAIR COULD HAVE BEEN KEPT IN CHECK OVER THE ILLEGAL INVASION OF IRAQ, GOLDSMITH DIDN'T DO THE HONOURABLE THING AND STOP HIM, WITH THE TRUTH, HE ALLOWED BLAIR TO GO AHEAD!

 

You see ABC Harbinger has it more or less correct, Islam is no threat, has never been a threat, but if you continue to take your que from the Zionist point of view and from Zionist controlled Tavistock thought manipulator, you'll never be free, or envision what freedom looks and feels like.

 

However, i will take a look at the Cairo human rights link you put up, but may i inform you, the Cairo human rights, EU human rights and any other are superceded by the 1948 United Nations Declaration of Human Rights.

 

The trick has been employed by the Banksters to use their money reach and inform the infrastructure of our nations to ignore the preamble, whereby it states, that ALL SCHOOL CHILDREN WHERE TO BE TAUGHT THEIR HUMAN RIGHTS. This was not done, because the cabal had a long term plan to introduce an EU law, which basically takes our freedom of thought and speech away and by virtue of not telling us about the UNUDHR, we wouldn't even know we were free enough to speak up and resist the Cairo, or EU straight jackets, mascarading as lawful edicts.

 

The idea of another human right, is akin to making another yes, there is only one, it is true, we understand it and we use it to good effect, as we do with no, when informed of a correct occassion to assert those God given rights.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Noble Lord

on August 17, 2009

at 01:22 PM

Report this commentBravo to the MP. He shouldn't tolerate segregation by sex any more than segregation by race. Nothing wrong with upholding traditional British customs. Who would think in a modern, advanced country that there would still be tolerance of segregation.

Jim

on August 17, 2009

at 01:16 PM

Report this commentI'm not really interested in nit-picking about this bit or another of their war manual.

The bottom line is;

 

I DON'T WANT THIS CULT ANYWHERE NEAR ME OR MY FAMILY.

 

 

Paul in free France

on August 17, 2009

at 12:16 PM

Report this commentabc

on August 17, 2009

at 10:46 AM

 

I used to think that Islam was a threat to the West until I realised that they are merely the tool being used by the banking elites, who pull the strings of world government. They are flooding the Western Civilisation with alien cultures in order to destroy indigenous cultures, heritage and nationalism. This is partly down to Banking greed along with Marxist Critical Theorists who fled the German School of Frankfurt to the West in order to utterly destroy Capitalism and instill Communism. Communism is very much alive. All one has to do is read what Vladimir Bukovsky has to say on the EU, what Yuri Bezmenov has to say on Communist Subversion techniques (You tube) and of course Alexander Solzhenitsyn on Zionism and of course Communism.

 

Islam is not the threat that people think it is in the West. It is merely a tool with which to bring in liberty destroying laws in the form of anti terrorism. We have merely been seeing a continuing amount of Reichstag incidents in the Western world in order to make people believe they're being attacked who will then gladly give away their liberties and freedoms in order to be protected by the state. Don't however get me wrong about Islam. I know all about it. I know its history, but you then have to ask the question (which I did after truly believing that Islam was the problem): "If we know of Islam and its history (especially Jihad) and how Islam laid siege at the Gates of Vienna, almost conquering Europe, how on earth could it ever be allowed to grow and prosper in the Western Civilisation?

 

It was when I started doing extensive research to see that they've been let in, to grow, to cause chaos and disruption and these are all parts of the Marxist School of Frankfurt, Critical Theorists, Communist Subversion techniques to utterly rip apart what the West stands for.

I never thought I'd ever say this, but I truly believe that Islam in the West is being set up, given overwhelming power only for a massive fall and persecution.

 

Our worry is not Islam. Our worry is the EUSR and of course the Zionists and powerful bankers controlling it.

Harbinger

on August 17, 2009

at 11:44 AM

Report this commentTolerance of other religions in muslim countries Illgetmycoat? Tell that to the Christians burnt to death in Pakistan a few days ago because someone claimed that Christians had 'insulted' a copy of the koran. Or tell it to the Christians in the Indian state of Orissa enduring constant and ongoing viiolence and persecution from the muslim majority. We (the West) leapt to the defence of muslims being killed in the Balkans a few years ago; do you see any reciprocal actions on the part of muslim authorities towards persecuted minorities? Enjoy your little enclave, while it lasts.

M.Robinson

on August 17, 2009

at 10:46 AM

Report this commentTo: Noble Lord at 09.18 Aug 17: If Moslem immigration into Britain and the West is not stopped and accommodation to Sharia continues, you will find that it will avail you nought to quote Article 19 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights because it will be Article 19 of the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam, and specifically, Article 19d therein, which will hold sway in this land and throughout the West:

 

Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam:

"19d There shall be no crime or punishment except as provided for in the Shariah."

 

I suggest you view this link which presents the texts of, and contrasts, the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam before you reach a final conclusion on the subject of 'tolerance' in Islam:

 

http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/Ohmyrus.30816.htm

 

As to your paraphrasing Sura 109 as an example of tolerance in Islam, you are either ignorant of Islam or employing taqiyya (obfuscation, lies to present a false, positive image of Islam) or kitman (withholding full knowledge):

 

That Sura 109, (The Unbelievers) is often used by Moslems when speaking to uninformed non-Moslems as a prime example of Islam's supposed tolerance to non-Moslems. In reality, it relieves Moslems of any obligation to compromise in any sense with non-believers, expressing disgust at the disbelief of the kufr. Mohamd instructed his followers to always recite this verse before sleeping, as 'immunity' from 'polytheism.'

abc

on August 17, 2009

at 10:46 AM

Report this commentFWIW, this late in the argument, Fitzpatrick should, if he knew that the genders were to be segregated, have politely refused his invitation to the wedding. Do you believe that he was unaware of this? If he was, he must be hopelessly naive.

And for him then to turn someone's wedding into an opportunity for political grandstanding was completely unforgivable.

Occasional Ostrich

on August 17, 2009

at 10:46 AM

Report this commentFOR WHAT IT'S WORTH:

 

Catweazle

on August 17, 2009

at 08:30 AM

 

CATWEAZLE SAID:

 

For the benefit of "Noble Lord" (who I would be astonished to find was either) here are a few definitions of "antisemitism":

 

""Antisemitism (also spelled anti-semitism or anti-Semitism; also known as Judeophobia) is prejudice against or hostility towards Jews, often rooted in hatred of their ethnic background, culture, or religion." Wikipedia".

 

My word Catweazle you have been busy haven't you and all that to insinuate to the reader that i am some how anti semitic!

 

I told you the charge was a canard, a lie, a bogus charge already, because 96% of world Jewry are Yiddish speaking Ashke-Nazi's and Yiddish is not a member of the Hamito Semitic family, never was and never will be.

 

So let's just take a look at this bogus charge ANTI SEMITIC and scurinise its origin.

 

I have alluded on several posts that the term is NOT Semitic, but Hamito Semitic, which indicates who, or rather what type of people are being referred to, when using the full descriptor of a vernacular for a people and the clue is Hamito, which is derived from HAM, one of Noah's sons.

 

It has been agreed by all scholars that Ham represents the African/Negro peoples of the world, as does Shem to some degree.

 

The above you can confirm yourself, by your expert and star witness WIKIPEDIA.

 

So some how the indicator that Hamito Semitic belongs to the African/Negro peoples of the world has been lost, ever since the clue to the true identity has been lopped off, ie you do not hear people say you are being Anti Hamito Semitic.

 

So let us explore who it was that did the lopping off of the descriptor Hamito to its vernacular family and we find none other than the Jewish agitator Whilhelm Marr.

 

It is generally accepted the Wilhelm Marr coined the phrase Anti Semitic in 1879, when he piped up and headed an illusory organisation, which perported to be anti Jewish, hence giving a bogus claim some clout, as well as masking his true identity and fooling German people into believing it was a disgruntled German, who wanted to target his ire on the Jewish population living well in Germany.

 

Sound familiar so far Catweazle?

 

So let us recap, we have a descriptor terminology, being truncated for the use of a people, who wish to insert themselves into hitory.

 

In less than 20 years and of the back of this growing canard, the first world zionist conference was held in Basle Switzerland and headed up by the father of Zionism Theodor Hertzl, who's sole aim was to invent the land mass, to where his tribe can be supplanted and world Jewry agreed that it should be Palestine, where the Hamito Semitic language belonged.

 

14 yrs later they had their "Balfour Declaration" and we are here, still suffering the deceptions, wars, tyranny and terrorism, even though the zionist have got what they wanted.

 

However, it would appear that that is not all what they want, perhaps "The world is not enough"!

 

I digress, the fact that it is generally accepted in Jewish academic circles that they are NOT semitic or Hamito Semitic, it is still not widely known to the mass and even if it were, they canard has produced bountiful booty and allowed the Jewish state of Israel to bomb and kill UN personell at will, as well as defy a multitude of UN resolutions (A world record).

 

The Christians and Muslims living in the middle east today have more claim to being semitic than those Ashke-Nazi Jews, who are by deed the true "Anti Semites" albeit the true term is Hamito Semitic.

 

Lastly, i am informed that anyone can edit and update Wikipedia to suit their own purposes and an ignorant person who advises a keen student, only makes them good at being ignorant.

 

Catweazle, i bare you no hatred, or harm, neither do i hate or wish to harm anyone else, Jew or Gentile.

 

As this post has somewhat strayed from the authors warped opinion, i will cease to debate with yourself, if all you have to say is bogus and ad hominem.

 

History is like a rough diamond waiting to be discovered, by an intrepid explorer or recorder of past events.

 

United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights; Article 19:

 

"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers"

Noble Lord

on August 17, 2009

at 10:28 AM

Report this commentIf you try to look up the Prophet Mohammed on Wikipedia from a Muslim country it is one of the sites "prohibited for cultural reasons". Long live free speech...

Richard L

on August 17, 2009

at 10:08 AM

Report this commentNoble Lord?

August 16th 2009

10.48pm

 

Sounds like the nursery rhyme, SHE SELLS SEA SHELLS ON THE SEA SHORE (he said she said etc').

Davetherave

on August 17, 2009

at 10:08 AM

Report this commentSo what day do you want to do the beheadings at the football stadium?

 

Infidel

Harem Infidel

on August 17, 2009

at 10:04 AM

Report this commentM.Robinson

on August 16, 2009

at 11:01 PM

 

"Quick, someone send the men in white coats round to Harbinger's house! Wear protection, he's rabid!"

 

Excuse me? One thing I have found out in life is that people who have lost arguments always attack the person, trying to sully, lambaste and bring them down to a level so people can laugh at.

For your information M Robinson, I have read extensively on Islam, Judaism and Zionism. I also stay away from anything that today's media like to throw at the sheeple.

If you would care to have a discussion then by all means let's but please, I find it exceptionally offensive to attack me with no defence for your argument.

 

P.S. Much of what Noble Lord is saying is very true and I suggest you read his posts to educate yourself.

Harbinger

on August 17, 2009

at 09:53 AM

Report this commentTM

August 17th 2009

07.15am

 

I worked in London for few years

in the 1960s,I made lots of friends even had a slate at the local pub!, but what a difference now! and this applies to MOST towns and city in the country! but mainly here in the north!.

Davetherave

on August 17, 2009

at 09:27 AM

Report this commentJohn Docherty

August 17th 2009

07.15am

 

I would as well!. Oh and by the

way, Igonikon is up bloody early for a Yank, 07.15am as well.

Davetherave

on August 17, 2009

at 09:23 AM

Report this commentImmigration should be stopped and a small naturalisation program should be implemented whereby restricted citizenship may be granted after about 20 to 30 years consideration. This would be similar to some Middle Eastern, African and Asian countries. This would reduce considerably the inevitable cultural clashes we are seeing due to the inept leadership of Westminster who do not seem to see the population replacement that is going on all over the country.

catnap

on August 17, 2009

at 09:23 AM

Report this commentTo Astrid at 10:22pm on Aug 16: Let me count the ways in which the presence of Moslems is entirely detrimental to British people, their values and their national stability and infrastructures:

 

Islam's treatment of females:

 

Wife beating mandated for in Koran 4:34; in Germany, for example, Moslem women form the majority of those seeking refuge in shelters for victims of domestic abuse and that pattern is repeated throughout Europe)

 

Child Brides (Mohamad's Paedophilia in 'marrying' 6 year old Aisha and 'consummating' it when she was 9 and he 54; confirmed in 13 aHadith, holy texts of Islam, which can be read at:

 

http://europenews.dk/en/node/5545

 

Apart from the abuse and lifelong effects of this perversion on the child, a society permitting this descends into moral degeneracy which leaves it open to further decay and collapse

 

Polygamy (again, Mohamad's own example in the aHadith) and stated in the Koran with considerable detail; the British public is cheated by being forced to pay benefits to these polygamous unions which can be up to four wives, despite the fact that polygamy is against British Law and, of course, the family structure and effects on the children is debilitating with spiraling effects on society

 

Female Genital Mutilation (again, through a Hadith in which Mohamad approves of it and instructs the 'exciser' how it is to be done); it is estimated by British police that over 4,000 females, usually children, are subjected to this barbarism every year; the NHS must deal with the medical, financial and psychological costs of this from blood poisoning, dangerous child birth and life-long aftermath

 

Forced Marriages (apart from Aisha, the child bride, the Koran mandates for sex with 'captive' women, and states baldly in Koran 4 that any married woman so captured ceases to be regarded as being married and is thus available for sex; this is a direct result of Mohamad informing his army that they need not balk at raping the women captured (and whom they would otherwise have offered for ransom) because 'Allah' alone decides who will be born; this is reflected in the gang rape figures in England and Scandinavia with the latter's hospitals (Copenhagen, Oslo and Stockholm) reporting the largest percentage increase in decades --- the victims are usually 'native' Europeans and the rapists euphemistically referred to as 'immigrants')

 

Restrictive Female Attire: Again, the Koran's two mentions of this are explained through the aHadith of Bukari (Vol 1, Bk 4, No 148 and 149 and Muslm 26.5395 and 5397 "Narrated Aisha, The Prophet (Mohamad) said to his wives: 'You are allowed to go out to answer the call of nature..' This is too long to quote in its entirety here: Muhamad as a warlord, captured women, either ransomed them, turned them over to his army as sex slaves or used them that way himself or chose them as his 'wives'; he kept them indoors, allowing them only out at night for the purpose of relieving themselves and, upon one of them being observed so doing (by a Moslem man), this man went to Mohamad and (by a much-used literary device in the aHadith "longed for the revelation on the veiling of women to be sent down" (from 'allah') and Mohamad, after thinking about it, orders the women to cover themselves. The modern day results are Rickets (due to lack of natural light and Vitamin D deficiency) and the perfect concept (all nonsense about 'modesty' aside) of Islam's view of the female as expressed by Mohamad: "Ali reported the Prophet saying: "A Woman has ten awrat (shameful orifices); when she gets married, the husband covers one and when she dies, the grave covers the other ten". The mental effects of this confining apparel and the overall effect on any society of such misogyny can be seen by the underdevelopment, historically, of Islamic societies.

 

Sharia: the jurisprudence within Sharia is founded on this inherent inequality, the contempt with which Islam holds non-Moslems and all females and their resulting legal denigration in its 'law'

 

Consanguinity: Islam's view of non-Moslems, its need to remain contained and removed from outside influences has led to first cousin marriage being practised by at least 55% of Moslems world-wide and within Birmingham alone, 65% of all Pakistani marriages are consanguinous. Moslems, although accounting (we are told) for only 3% of the population (more likely higher %age) produce at least 30% of ALL births of mental and physically handicapped babies which display genetic links to consanguinity: the costs to the NHS, educational, housing and social infrastructures is life-long

 

Crime: Islam is the ideology of a warlord who himself committed mass murder (as Ibn Ishaq confirms), encouraged rape, committed paedophilia, mandated for slavery and developed a three point tactic of Jihad: forcible conversion, demand for Jizya (protection monies) or death.

 

On this subject of crime, the Moslem mandate for 'emigration' to non-Moslem lands in order to make them Islamic is not mere prosyletisation because it involves 'preparing' these societies: by building mosques, setting up Islamic schools, making a Moslem presence felt with women's apparel, halal foods, demands for accommodation to Sharia Law (with Sharia courts granted force of law and existing as a parallel legal system to the established law of a nation), segregation of the sexes (swimming baths, school activities), changes in academic curricula to accord with Moslem revisionist history; deliberate overbreeding (Moslem birth rate is ten times that of British) in order to establish Moslem no-go enclaves (as throughout Europe) and, most destructive, the silencing of the press, politicians, academia and clergy (the latter being involved in ignorant and pointless 'inter-faith' - da'wa --- monologues). All this is prior to the violent Jihad to take over a nation, as reflected in what the French Police Union Head called 'the Moslem intifada' against his country in 2005 with low-scale Moslem riots of burning, attacks on police and ambulances which is now repeated throughout Europe and Britain.

 

More than a 'spot of bother', I would say.

 

 

 

 

 

 

abc

on August 17, 2009

at 09:23 AM

Report this commentFOR WHAT IT'S WORTH:

 

David

on August 17, 2009

at 07:04 AM

 

Bearing in mind that the article is entitled, "Why must we bow to the intolerant ways of islam?" and thus far i have merely juxtaposed Judaic Talmudism and provided evidence to support the juxtaposition, i find it strange that anyone would want to seek to critique anything i have had to say, when all they appear to do, is make ad hominem attacks and make false allegations..

 

DAVID SAID:

 

"Noble Lord,

You're free, like everyone else, to express an opinion. However, I hope the moderator won't mind too much me saying that I have never read such uncontrolled, wholly illogical, illiterate, incoherent, hysterical, shrieking babble as I found in each of your posts".

 

As i have said to other posters, who seek to make ad hominem attacks and bogus allegations, when responding to any of my posts that you feel to be either, inaccurate, blatant falsehood, racist, or the bogus charge of "anti semitic", please feel free to respond and POINT OUT WHERE YOU FIND THESE INSTANCES IN MY POSTS!

 

All you have to do, is copy my name and time, next to the text of my post,paste in in the Your Comment box, leave a two tab down gap, copy the relevant/offending text i used, then paste that also in the Your Comment box!

 

TAB DOWN TWICE AGAIN, THEN REFUTE, PRODUCE YOUR ARGUMENT, WHICH SUPPORTS YOUR CONCERNS, IT'S THAT SIMPLE!

 

As i have state before and shall do again, i am a believer in Jesus/Yesua the Christ and it was he and his light, that tells me "The truth shall set/Make you free"

 

Having said that, i also produce the international standard for truth telling, by citing the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights; Article 19:

 

"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers".

 

IN CASE YOU ARE UNAWARE, THE ABOVE INTERNATIONAL LAW, SUPERCEDES, TRYANICAL NATIONAL LAWS, OR THE SINISTER EU LAWS!

 

DAVID SAID:

 

"(Yes, yes...I know you think that I'm a zionist terrorist who manipulates the international finance system to erase the truth behind the bombing of Nagasaki - or something similar - and that I'm out to get you because of your unique discovery of my real identity but, honestly mate, you should wipe down your keyboard and find some help. Seriously!)"

 

David i have accused you of nothing, i have insinuated nothing and not slightly interested in what you think i think.

 

The article asks for your opinion by default, however i do not ask for your opinion, albeit you have the right to say as you please and i wlll not lobby against your right to express your opinion.

 

However, if you cannot refute the facts i have merely assembled and put forth, then say nothing and do the research and confirm those facts for yourself.

 

Whether i need help or not is immaterial and to be honest, if i were unstable in anyway, do you think your comment really sounds like you are conerned for my well being, or is it beng rather haughty and snide?

 

Personally i don't think Islam is intolerant, neither do i think Islam is asking us to bow to its ways. It does have a text saying "You to your way and i to my own".

 

Compare that to the Talmud and the actions of the Zionists:

 

FBI says it has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11

 

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article13664.htm

 

 

Top ranking CIA operatives admit Al Queda doesn�t and never existed

 

http://polidics.com/cia/top-ranking-cia-operatives-admit-al-qaeda-is-a-complete-fabrication.html

 

 

Don�t just read about it, watch the video

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-hYorNi0nA&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eindigogen%2Ecom%2F&feature=player_embedded

 

 

So who was behind the World Trade Center attack of 11th September 2001, commonly known as 911?

 

http://www.911missinglinks.com/

 

Why was the above evidence ignored?

 

 

WHO BENEFITS?

 

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/975574.html

 

So Benyamin Netanyahu told you and you still don�t believe, perhaps a history lesson is in order?

 

 

Nearly forgot this gem, Bush rejected the Taliban offer, TWICE, put Bin Laden on trial in a neutral country and produce evidence to back up the charge.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/bush-rejects-taliban-offer-to-surrender-bin-laden-631436.html

 

DAVID YOU CAN ALSO LOOK UP THE FOLLOWING:

 

King David Hotel bombing,

 

Lavvon Affair

 

USS Liberty attack

 

You will also note that all the incidents were NOT carried out by practitioners of Islam, but of Judaism and its Talmud.

 

Also, you can clearly see that these terrorist attacks were created to blame practitioners of Islam, so as today we can have this debate, whereby the author buys into this attack on Islam, by virtue of believing it is Islam against the West when it is not.

 

Lastly, there are nutters in all walks of life, but never do we take a nutter as the true face of the sensible majority do we David?

 

As this post has gone into another area, by virtue of attempting to focus the reader on the deception, the author of the article has inserted, ie insinuate that Islam is the problem.

 

Ad hominem attacks are not refuting successfully data provided in my posts, so if you cannot do this, i will consider this debate with you over.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Noble Lord

on August 17, 2009

at 09:18 AM

Report this commentIt is good to see the DT letting this run on.

It is also good to see that many people have investigated the cult and seen it for what it is.

The internet may save us yet!

Paul in free France

on August 17, 2009

at 09:18 AM

Report this commentWe should not be forced to bow to any religious festivals/weddings.

It is also not okay to expect us, nonbelievers to go along involuntarily, unhappily with any alien culture/religious practice that we don't agree with and have nothing in common with.

WLIL

on August 17, 2009

at 09:18 AM

Report this commentThis is a wedding and we are talking about customs, so it is pretty intolerant and rude to walk out and then publicly comment. If people were taking drugs in a corner then I would probably leave or keep away, but what was happening at the wedding was not illegal (under our laws), or even that extreme.

 

Some of the comments reveal an alarming level of ignorance of Islam and the tolerance shown to other religions in most of the Islamic countries. As someone with agnostic CofE leanings who resides in the UAE I have some direct experience.

illgetmycoat

on August 17, 2009

at 09:18 AM

Report this commentWe made our laws starting with the Magna Carta, for this country. If other religions don't like it they should stay in their own country, we don't want their ideas. We don't want to become their country. What I would say however is that our punishments for breaking our laws should be a punishment, not a soft consideration of the politically correct and consideration of 'human rights'. Will somebody please start putting the indiginous inhabitants first before we become the endanged species and end up been outlawed or extinct in our own country! Bring back honour, consideration and respect for the individual morale populus. At current rates of immigration and other religious 'breeding' habits we will be the minority in our our country soon. In some citys we already are. Once this happens what chance has the real population got of living how they want to live there lives? And we taxpayer pay for this breeding programme. I was once told the pleaching of the Koran was domination by numbers, anybody else see where this is going?

Charlie

on August 17, 2009

at 09:18 AM

Report this commentThe real issue is not with Islam but with immigration. In the past 50 years the UK has taken in an unprecedented number of immigrants and is now finding that the face of Britain has changed for good. It is irreversible and I am afraid of the future identity.

Gerald Davidson

on August 17, 2009

at 08:31 AM

Report this comment"Mr Fitzpatrick

 

can play the race card he has lost the votes of the Muslims in his constituency . "

 

The race card, imran?

 

I wasn't aware that Islam was a race, I thought it was a religion.

 

Race is something you are born with and have no choice about whatsoever, religion is a lifestyle choice, like supporting a football club. Something that can be changed, any time you like.

 

No more, no less.

 

 

Catweazle

on August 17, 2009

at 08:31 AM

Report this commentIslamIsGood

on August 16, 2009

at 09:31 PM

 

What do non Muslims have to do with Islam? Well quite a lot really. Since the 7th Century, non Muslims have been persecuted continuously for their non Muslim beliefs whether they be religious or not. Regarding the West (where you come from), non Muslims particularly in the middle ages died trying to stop their countries being Islamised, not forgetting their people taken as slaves to Islamic lands. I hate to say it but the very fact that you, a European converted to Islam shows great insult to your ancestors and I'll leave it there on that note.

 

The thing is that we "are leaving you alone" you just can't see this. Muslims simply do not realise that they are taking more and more of Western Culture and your post proves it - "Our true enemies are the Satanic, Lesbian, Homosexual, Pedophiles and Masonic movements." Now while we've got Cultural Marxism and moral relativism to thank for the rise of homosexuality, to absurd levels of being allowed to have IVF for children or adopt, we've also seen the rise of feminism that's destroying the family. While I disagree with the aforementioned 'stated', I would never dream of persecuting or oppressing them as Islam has and does. Paedophiles really is not a good name to mention in concordance with Islam I'm afraid. As regards to Satanic, well, satan is merely a construct of religion and does not exist. In fact there is no proof either of a God or an Allah either.

 

This leads me onto the next point that Islam is by all means most certainly not beautiful but instead a cult that indoctrinates all of its followers into following the teachings of a man who lived 14 centuries ago who did much evil in his time. Apart from the murdering and the paedophilia, there was also the setting fires on Jews chests in order to gain information on the whereabouts of their gold. There was also the allowing of deceit amongst his followers in order to trick opponents creating smoke and mirrors. There is of course much, much more.

 

If you really think that joining a cult will help stop the problems of today, you're far mistaken. All man needs is his honesty, liberty and integrity in order to sort out society. We don't need to join cults or follow movements with which to stop chaos from happening. It's all about uniting behind what is good and right and you don't need to be a member of a group to do so. Islam by definition is a political ideology there to oppress and control. There is nothing peaceful or good in Islam and for you to think there is shows that you are exceptionally ignorant as to the meanings of good and peaceful I'm afraid.

Harbinger

on August 17, 2009

at 08:31 AM

Report this commentSo true. Islamic people want everyone to bow down to their religion, or else... Salman Rushdie's "Satanic Verses" describes Islam for what it is.

robert

on August 17, 2009

at 08:31 AM

Report this comment"playing the race card"?

 

What kind of an idiot says that? Islam is not a race. It is a violent and oppressive religion with people from almost every race belonging to it.

 

It is nothing but trouble. Will someone tell me what good Islam has done for this country?

badger

on August 17, 2009

at 08:30 AM

Report this commentFor the benefit of "Noble Lord" (who I would be astonished to find was either) here are a few definitions of "antisemitism":

 

"Antisemitism (also spelled anti-semitism or anti-Semitism; also known as Judeophobia) is prejudice against or hostility towards Jews, often rooted in hatred of their ethnic background, culture, or religion." Wikipedia.

 

"Prejudice or discrimination against, and persecution of, the Jews as an ethnic group" The Free dictionary.

 

"anti-Semite n. One who discriminates against or who is hostile toward or prejudiced against Jews.". answers.com.

 

"anti-semitic definition

anti-Semitic (-sə mit′ik)

adjective

having or showing prejudice against Jews

discriminating against or persecuting Jews

of or caused by such prejudice or hostility" Websters New World College Dictionary.

 

Plenty more where that came from. But you knew that anyway, didn't you? So why make yourself look ignorant?

 

Still not had that operation I recommended, then?

 

 

 

Catweazle

on August 17, 2009

at 08:30 AM

Report this commentGood grief. What a carry on. I do notice that in the main, the comments posted are by males. Perhaps that says something??

jane

on August 17, 2009

at 08:30 AM

Report this commentGasp! What to do? Our views about womens' rights conflicts with the demands of a large, vocal and strident muslim minority.

Do we condemn an MP for attending the wedding thereby endorsing the forced segregation of women? Or, do we condemn him for not attending, thereby showing his lack of cultural sensitivity?

I know! Let's revert to the traditions, beliefs and bonds that have taken shape over many hundreds of years to guide us and our British culture. Oh wait....we threw all that out. Darn! What to do?

Robert

on August 17, 2009

at 08:30 AM

Report this commentIslam does not recognise rights of others so others do not need to recognised islam.

The issues as simple as that!

If somebody would like to live islam as private, i have no problem. But if that person claims that islam covers whole of humanity and we should oblige by it, that is the problem.

In short we should not allow islam generalise about us!

Emir

on August 17, 2009

at 08:30 AM

Report this commentMy wife and I did not attend a muslim funeral because we found out that we would be segregated. That was TOTALLY unacceptable to us.

Richard Avon

on August 17, 2009

at 08:30 AM

Report this commentIt seems that many of the comments here were made by bigots, and fools. In my opinion, at a Muslim wedding, he should just have gone along with the Muslim traditions. There is nothing un-British about having respect for other cultures. In fact it is rather racist of him to leave because of the way the occasion was conducted. I also think that this article is badly titled. There should be no question of "bowing", but simply a peaceful co-existence of cultures, by which we all learn important lessons. When there is conflict, secular law must prevail over religious law. That said, if a woman from the UK moved to Afghanistan, she would be expected to conform to the requirements of dress of the country, and many people complain that the reverse is not imposed on Muslims moving here. I would very much appreciate it if one of these complainers could tell me precisely what it is that British women wear traditionally, so that this dress code can be un-democratically forced on immigrants. The difference between the cultures, and the fact that the fundamentalist Islamic sharia law system is far more restrictive than that of the UK, is academic. It's not about who's being more fair towards the people of their country, it's about accepting that when you move to another country, the laws are going to be different. Culture you can take with you and introduce to the new country, laws are geographically stationary. It should be as simple as that.

 

Finally, to Shahriar Bader, (August 16th, 8:50PM): You, sir, are an oaf. I refuse to be in any way held accountable for the mistakes of hundreds of years ago. My ancestors may have been personally involved, but I was not. Do not blame me for the mistakes of others, nor call this "the consequences" of that. This is just another example of an MP doing what they do best; making a mess of something.

IAmJoshYouAreNot

on August 17, 2009

at 07:51 AM

Report this commentWouldn't it be wonderful if all muslims went to live in a muslim country where the rules they like to live under are part of the ethos.

 

These muslim rules are not part of the ethos of the UK or the law - so don't expect us to accept them.

elizabeth

on August 17, 2009

at 07:51 AM

Report this commentThe answer to the question posed in the headline is that you don't. Majority Muslim countries that are democracies (Indonesia, Turkey etc) and those that have large Muslim populations (India etc) and are democracies do not accept unreservedly all the supposed traditions of Islam. They insist, as secular democracies, that the law of the country is followed. We should do the same without imagining the sort of difficulties mentioned in the article and the misconceptions about Islam displayed in the following comments.

 

In Indonesia Sharia is used in family and property disputes in certain semi-autonomous areas. Whether it is working or not is unclear but the signs seem to be that the ordinary civil law of Indonesia, based on Dutch Common Law, is preferred in practice even in these areas. There is no reason for Britain to alter its law structure because the bulk of the population in Indonesia is Muslim and the vast majority do not use sharia for any dispute. This is true throughout modern Islam.

 

Islam works well with democracy and the freedom of individual. It is only obstructive to human rights where it is used by autocratic regimes to enforce their agendas and suppress the population (Saudi Arabia, Iran etc. The problem is not the religion.

 

It is possible to quote excerpts from the Koran and from the Bible and the Torah until the cows come home but the reality is that I know pork eating Muslims, in fact there is a pork butchery section in Carrefour here in Yogya and in other supermarkets there are pork products displayed and sold; as there are in Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Malaysia and many places where Islam is the main religion, or the religion of a significant minority.

 

Segregation is the choice of the family arranging the wedding. It is not mandatory here and I see no reason why it would be in a Muslim household in Britain. To elide this with Islam is disingenuous. There are many community traditions that are assumed to be part of Islam that are not. They may be able to be interpreted as such from detailed study of the Koran if one is wishing to use the book to enforce cultural behaviour useful to your own agenda (as in suppression) or to reinforce a non-existent argument; as here. This does not mean that in practice they are significant.

 

The fear of a creeping Islamisation of Britain and the intent to convert the country to Islam, is wrong and only reinforced by inflating incidents such as the one of the MP and the segregated wedding out of all proportion.

 

If; as with men only clubs etc, you want to enforce the rights of the sexes to mix at a private wedding then get a test case and place it before the courts.

 

Polygamy is illegal. Use the courts if it is found to exist. Cruelty to another human is illegal. If a woman complains she is forced to wear unpleasant and restrictive clothing then make sure the courts act on her behalf. Instead of writing articles that dance around the edges of the problem while only inflaming the prejudices of those waiting to be ignited; look at how the democracy, and its rule of law, of which we are so rightly proud, can in practice protect and assist in the integration of all of the population.

John Pitcher

on August 17, 2009

at 07:51 AM

Report this commentCan I add something here?Many people have already commented on this topic.I was born and brought up in a muslim family.I must request you all to keep an open mind while discussing religion.First of all,please don't forget that muslims are also human beings like you and they have feel the same way other people feel.They are sad when they see something bad and happy when something really good is happening.

Please bear in mind that any religion is retrograde to modern civilisation.If you think deeply you will understand the prophets were human beings like us and ,like us,no revealation was made to them.No angel came to them and neither was a prophet born without a father.Once you think freely coming out of your prejudice,everything will be crystal clear.

Now,Islam allows a man to have more than 1 wife only and only if his existing wife gives him permission.You hate this.I hate this too.Many people here have sex with others other than their wife/husband/others.You love this or at least never want it to be considered as illegal.Well,I hate it too.

If a woman joins in a naked race,it looks normal to you and when a woman is wearing hijab,you hate it.I don't have any problem if a woman tries to show her body by being naked and I also have no problem if a woman wants to cover her body.This is her personal decission.Yes,if a woman is forced to cover herself in hijab or to get naked in front of the world,this is not acceptable.

Regarding the killing of a man who changes his faith and converts to any othe religion from Islam,is definitely inhuman.Mohammed had no right to make it a law and it is never justifiable,under no circumstances.At the same time running propaganda and wasting money in favour of any religion is equally unjustifiable.

 

Mohammed

on August 17, 2009

at 07:31 AM

Report this commentAdam, there is a critical and fundamental difference between the two: Jews do not seek or welcome converts, let alone force their religion on others-- fundamentalist Muslims DO!

Shoshanna

on August 17, 2009

at 07:31 AM

Report this commentIt is very clear to me why we must bow to the intolerant ways of Islam, particularly Wahhabi Islam, and that is because of the business relationship between our government and that of Saudi Arabia.

Paul

on August 17, 2009

at 07:31 AM

Report this commentPerhaps Mr Fitzpatrick could invite this couple to attend Christian wedding, to see the different "cultural" standards at first hand? They could be seated in two segregated areas.

Uncle John

on August 17, 2009

at 07:31 AM

Report this commentWarning. Went to a muslim wedding. No booze. Never again. Can't blame the guy for walking out.

John Docherty

on August 17, 2009

at 07:15 AM

Report this commentSebastian and patriot have been making great and highly educative posts. My thanks to them.

 

Please keep more posts coming!

Regards,

Krishna. R. Kumar

on August 17, 2009

at 07:15 AM

Report this commentVisited London recently from Sydney... It had been 15 years. My god - what has happnened to this wondefull city..? I could almost feel the tension in the air... Give absolutly no quarter to backward Islamists and their 7th century demands. As many others have pointed out - They certainly wouldnt for a christian or a Jew, hundu etc in th eir lands... so why continue to bother. The hospitality has been totally abusued & the rank & file Brit can see Islam clearly for what it is. Lots of hassle... ZERO benefits... & a definate decrease in society cohesion.

TM

on August 17, 2009

at 07:15 AM

Report this commentThe Hijab not only insults women by implying then are inferior, it also insults men by implying they are unable to see uncovered women without raping them. The whole thing is based on a warped and pathological view of sexual relations.

Kevin Dunn

on August 17, 2009

at 07:15 AM

Report this commentImran at 10:46 PM raises an interesting point. That Muslims have been a contributing part of British society for sometime is undeniable. However, with the radicalisation of Islam in Britain, with its ever increasing demands to be treated differently there should be little surprise that the rest of Britain (and Europe)will start to "push back". If this radicalisation is as disturbing to Imran and all the other reasonable muslims as it is to non muslims then why hasn't there been a vocal opposition within that community? Why have they failed to stem this cancer? Because, I suggest, they are all scared. Just as our politicians and policy makers are scared.

 

This continual demand to be treated with "respect" will ultimately result in a catastrophic backlash. Such a backlash will sadly not discriminate between reasonable and unreasonable muslims.

 

In all this, the feminist movement been noticeably quiet. This the bastion of women's rights, equality, anti-female abuse etc. Not a peep. Remarkably those that that apparently fought so hard for a just and fair society are all on holiday. Perhaps because these are the very same groups who pushed so hard for multi- culturalism and other illusory social policies that have shown to be utter failures.

 

Perhaps when the hangman arrives some visible minorities will want to be "invisible". I am sad to say I can see no other solution to Britain and Europe's "problems" but a period of very disturbing social upheaval.

jonny

on August 17, 2009

at 07:15 AM

Report this commentTo the people of Britain,

 

You seem reasonably united against the tyranny of Islam, yet all you do is talk- rise up in your next elections and take back your great country and its freedoms, these people and they're religion are making a mockery of you

LA

on August 17, 2009

at 07:15 AM

Report this commentWhat I find curious about Muslims is that they flee the Islamic world for the freedom and opportunities of the western industrialised countries and then seek to set up the very constraints from which they escaped. Most odd.

Norm

on August 17, 2009

at 07:15 AM

Report this commentTwo hundred years ago, my fellow Hindus had a charming custom called sati in which widows were burnt alive on their husbands' funeral pyres. This barbaric custom was stamped out by your ancestors when they encountered it in India - they declared it illegal, hanged a few hundred Hindus who persisted in following this custom, and sati disappeared from the Indian continent (it must be said that Hindu reformers like Raja RamMohan Roy played an important role in this).

 

Somewhere in England, there must still be a few people who have the self-confidence to believe that they can distinguish between civilization and barbarism. Declare this 7th century Sharia savagery illegal, hang a few of these fanatical Islamic b*ggers from the nearest gallows, and your problems will disappear. It's what the Chinese are doing with the Uighurs - and you don't hear much about that from the Muslim ummah, do you?

FedUpIndian

on August 17, 2009

at 07:15 AM

Report this commentThis is an unusual, but,

important story brought about

by Alasdair Palmer's article.

I usually pre-eminently deal with sectarian issues from a spiritual, non-sectarian

approach. It's just that time

constraint and other factors have imposed limitations.

I still do as many commentaries as I can. But, it's the scholarly nature--research and composition--that takes time.

Still a lot is being done. The only consequence is the delay such as this, which I overcome with post-publication reference in later, current commentaries.

 

First of all, I'll say that

sex segregation is not the worst

aberration in Muslim religion.

I don'tendorse discrimination, let alone gender or sex aparthied. But, if I recall, congregational gender separatism is not limited  to Islamic congregations. I recall going to worship in Christian church services as a boy growing up: Men and women sat separately in different settings and alleys. Women covered their heads, men didn't.

I quit organized religion, but, still keep in touch with trends and forces of sectarianism in

order to promote better systems of humankind and relationship with God; especially that short of comcustible forces of violent religionism.

Against this background, walking out of an Islamic gathering where men and women gathered separately, may satisfy one's beliefs and principles: It's good public-relations approach.

For one particular reason. It does not meet the exigent-circumstances test. If the guest fails to leave and stayed till the ceremony ends, no irreparable harm would be done to either side.

 

But, for purposes of civility and mutual respect, remediation begins more appropriately after

the ceremony when host will be thanked, but, with qualified remarks. "Thanks for everything.

But, next time, in other for me to attend or promote your course, there will be no gender separatism. This is a clash of cultural civilizations that must reconciled. Here, in my society in the West, we don't practice sex aparthied--keeping men and women apart. We allow them to mix and interact as a symbol of gender equality.

There is always the adage when you go to Rome do as Romans. But, the larger imperative is: When you are in Rome, be a Roman--live like Romans. Citizenship rights confers obligations, too: Which is living in accordance with local laws, one of which is rejection of sex discrimination or gender separatism."

The guest is applying leverage here. This is how dignitaries have used their positions and patronage of certain events, societies and obligations, to effect change. And, in most cases, valuing the services and promoting postive reforms, a lot of the groups they patronized have moved in the right direction of non-violent, constructive change and reforms.

This one particular incident does not conform to tolerance of Islamic exrtremism where one attended a ceremony not knowing that gender separatism is a part of the inherent culture. This is about etiquette, civility, decorum and public relations.

Other than that, western, non-Muslim societies must not succumb to Muslim intolerance, Islamic extremism and Jihadist, radical, violent, fanatical fundamentalism that mixes bloody guirrilla tactics with worship of a peaceful God, without distinguishing victims: Men, women, children, pregnant women--most of them innocent victims who have nothing against Muslims or their causes.

 

This has become a public-relations nightmare--hanging like an albatross around the neck of majoritarian, moderate Muslims. They don't know what approach to adopt. It's because

they ignored the problem for centuries and it metamorphosed into a global, "epidemiological"

catastrophism. What will change and improve the situation is that Islamic state and national

governments have joined hands with western forces to combat evil religionism. Christianity

went through degenerate change and evolution, which last 600 years before it cleaned its act.

We see some evil consequences in our lifetime. People tend to forget that the Northern Ireland

conflict was driven by intra- Christian, sectarian antagonism. Regional tribalism was another

catalyst.

But, here, two great, neighborly nations joined forces, drew a hard bargain to finally resolve

the conflict. The healing process is still going on. It'll be long before full recovery, integration and reconciliation.

Islamic extremism is as dangerous as violent Christian, religious fundamentalism. The case of the religious fanatic who killed an abortion doctor in the United States, is getting ready to go to court. Death penality is likely to be sought in the indictment Because, crime took place in a state that allows it.

Suspect claims he did it for the unborn children. But, his divorced wife, speaking tearfully on a TV interview where she condemmed the act, asked if he did it for unborn children and love children so much, why did he abandon his own child and hasn't been paying child support?

It try to balance these sectarian criticisms to let it be known that I have nothing against Islam, by, also, bringing up some egregious aberrations in Christianity-- driven by extremism. Extremism

in organized religion is the problem; not mainstream religion--peaceful worship of God.

 

A typical example is where western philanthropists are building schools for Afghan youths where they learn computers and gainful-employment skills, and the Muslim natives are extremely grateful. Then, the Taliban would come late in the night and blow some of them up, because they prefer the useless and non-skill indoctrination of the madrassas where youths are trained as canon fodders for evil forces of violent religionism and "demolition" evangelism

 

Worse: They pour acid on women who dare attend these schools. But, the women defy them anyway. These are the areas Islam should redeem itself: Meaningless interpretation, misapplication and misrepresentation of 7th-century, atavistic message of primivtive Islamism.

Britain should never allow this to happen on its own soil. Sharia that chops off limbs for

petty offenses like thefts shouldn't be allowed in Britain. What happens if it applies to

minors or people doing so out of desperation--starvation--just stealing food? What about stoning women who separated from their spouse and engaged in conjugal or concupiscent relations with other men? Savage primitivism or religion?

Well it's not worse than burning people at the stake--people who did what is considered normal and lawful today. But, it took centuries to accomplished ideological liberalism in the West. Britain or the Brown administration should not reward Islamic extremism, religious intolerance

and violent sectarianism with egregious multiculturalism and atrocious liberalism.

Other than that, be friendly to Muslims who open up to western libertarianism that don't mix

social independence with religious intolerance. That way may see the light of secular, ethical libertarianism. Igonikon Jack, USAIgonikon Jack on August 17, 2009

at 07:15 AMReport this commentThe GD pigs enable this swill. Mark

on August 17, 2009at 07:15 AMReport this commentIf those "liberals" denounces segregation by race, why should they condone segregation by sex? Alas，it's the Muslim tradition and we should repect it. So, why don't they dare to ask the Muslim community to respect the tradional British value?James Wong

on August 17, 2009at 07:15 AMReport this commentJim Fitzpatrick�s behavior demonstrates all the ugliest traits we associate with politicians. We have ignorance coupled with arrogance, bigotry masking as tolerance and then add in a big dose of self interest.

Did he not know that a very large percentage of Muslims practice segregation of the sexes in many situations? He ought to. The labor party has been preaching and legislating tolerance and understanding since it got in over a decade ago. Where has Jim Fitzpatrick been all this time?

This couple was gracious enough to invite Jim Fitzpatrick and his partner to their wedding. None of us know a thing more about them than that and the fact they are Muslims, at least nominally. Jim Fitzpatrick responded with gross bad manners at the very least. That is the very best interpretation. A wink to bigotry is in there as well. He has pissed all over their day and all just to save his own career at the next election.

Not only has labor trashed the finances, broken up the union and ravaged the social structure it appears its parting gift will be some racial biff as well. What did the UK ever do to deserve this lot and how were you ever dumb enough to vote them in? There are some absolute nutters on this thread (if you are half way sane you know who I mean). These are the obvious new constituents of labor. They deserve each other.

Philip

on August 17, 2009

at 07:04 AM

Report this commentImmigrants of any kind should not force their culture/religious practice on nonbelievers.

If they wish to practice their own tribal traditonal/cultural/religious wedding ceremony, by all means do so, but please don't pressure "VIP" nonbelievers to attend their alien religious wedding or force nonbelievers to accept them or make nonbelievers to feel uncomfortable.

WLIL

on August 17, 2009

at 07:04 AM

Report this commentCan anyone point to a "multicultural society" that was successful, harmonious and NOT held together at gun point?

Yes, many may extol the virtues of such a society. These are but dreams and fantasies, and not of this world.

Perhaps the closest the world has come are our American cousins who based their society on English Common Law and religion. For 380 years, they had a true melting pot where all cultures blended to create the unique "American".

The ""multicultural society" was then foisted off on them in the late 20th century, and then infected us.

Now, instead of a unique Briton with our own melting pot, we have become simply a dispirit collection of people with dissimilar cultures, each demanding its own powers, privileges and rights. There is no longer a common bond that binds us all together.

 

Great Britain has already paid too great a price for such perfidy from naive zealots.Frogeye

on August 17, 2009

at 07:04 AM

Report this commentNoble Lord, You're free, like everyone else, to express an opinion. However, I hope the moderator won't mind too much me saying that I have never read such uncontrolled, wholly illogical, illiterate, incoherent, hysterical, shrieking babble as I found in each of your posts.

(Yes, yes...I know you think that I'm a zionist terrorist who manipulates the international finance system to erase the truth behind the bombing of Nagasaki - or something similar - and that I'm out to get you because of your unique discovery of my real identity but, honestly mate, you should wipe down your keyboard and find some help. Seriously!)David

on August 17, 2009

at 07:04 AM

Report this commentJim Fitzpatrick MP has stirred this one up by going to the paper in the first place, and all the muslim muppets come out of the woodwork on cue, but at least he is being consistent. But hang on, why can't we have men only bars and clubs, if the mossies can have their segregation... Surely, my lefty buddies, what is good enough for our guests, is good enough for us too. Why can't we have men only bars (except for the entertainment of course, which should include some females, modestly clad naturally!)

dave evans

on August 17, 2009

at 07:04 AM

Report this commentI think something a little more enlightening would have come of this had the Fitzpatricks stayed for the whole wedding. Mrs. Fitzpatrick - known only as "wife" in this discussion - had a chance to talk to the "victims" of this Muslim tradition and hear what they had to say about it. I would bet that many were only too happy to spend a pleasant evening away from the company of the men. Moreover, I think there would have been more than enough intelligent Muslim women there to shed more light on the present state of Islam and its future than anything I've read in this dicussion (not that I read every word in the comments section) She - Sheila Fitzpatrick? - could've written an article for the Telegraph.

 

By the way, sex segregation at a wedding doesn't sound that much worse than some of the things Baptists (fine Christian folk) here in Texas do. Several years ago I was at a friend's wedding (she was the bride). She was marrying a man from a small texas town full of strict Baptists. At the reception, the groom's family - at least half of the people there - got up and left the rented hall when the bride's side started to commit the sin of dancing to the music of the band she'd hired.

Michael G.

on August 17, 2009

at 07:04 AM

Report this commentImran - don't be sorry for the great sacrifices your parents made on behalf of a commonwealth of races. It will always be remembered with thanks and humility, here, in these islands.

gareth

on August 17, 2009

at 07:04 AM

Report this commentMore or less correct Susan, except for one or two minor details.

Firstly I neither accept nor respect the Islamic attitude of regarding females as second class citizens. It would appear that they believe males are completely helpless in the presence of women who are inappropriately dressed or otherwise not adhering to Islamic tradition - and that under such circumstances any unpleasant consequences are entirely the fault of the woman - the man having been 'provoked' and therefore entirely blameless. How disgusting! It speaks volumes for the Islamic opinion of men, placing them more or less on the level of farm animals. It is difficult to do something about this in other countries but here, be it London, Luton or Leicester or indeed anywhere in the UK, we can and must.

I hope I'm wrong and only talking about fanatics - after all, historically Islam has made wonderful contributions to science, learning and knowledge.

Secondly your references to Christianity. It has a chequered history, not always good. Yes British law was originally based on Christian values, but no longer. One can be upright and moral without belonging to or believing in a religious faith, as I think I do. Outside a nearby Church, on a board with large capiitals - "God loves you" - and I think of Baby P (and others)

Male chauvenist pig

on August 16, 2009

at 11:54 PM

Report this commentThere's one person close to the walk-out, who's said nothing: Jim Fitzpatrick's rather educated and community minded wife. I'd like to hear her straightforward version of events. But I don't think we will. Pity.

sebastian

on August 16, 2009

at 11:52 PM

Report this comment"Islam is the most potent retrograde force that civilization faces today" (Winston Churchill)

 

I wonder how long it will be before we see Churchill's statue torn down and a mosque put in place of parliament?

I really do think it's only a matter of time. jack

on August 16, 2009

at 11:52 PM

Report this commentWhy do we pander to Islam when Islamic countries would not allow a Western woman to wear a bikini on one of their beaches?

Why don't the (left-wing) BBC do a documentary on what Islamic women REALLY think of their place in their society .... no chance of that ever getting off the ground!

phil

on August 16, 2009

at 11:52 PM

Report this commentWhen the french government saw fit to ban the burka, the Muslim Council of Britain were so outraged that they felt obliged to publish a press release denouncing the decision. The decision of a democratically elected government.

 

They have yet to publish a press release on the brutal suppression of the Iranian election protestors.

 

Can we assume that the way Ahmedinejad has acted meets with their approval?

Julio

on August 16, 2009

at 11:52 PM

Report this commentM Robison : Never mind Mohammed.What did Abraham, Moses, Jesus etc etc ever 'prophesy' that has actually come to pass? All religions are utter total drivel and their 'prophets' either charlatans or madmen (or in Judaisms case fictional).

eric skelton

on August 16, 2009

at 11:02 PM

Report this commentQuick, someone send the men in white coats round to Harbinger's house! Wear protection, he's rabid!

M.Robinson

on August 16, 2009

at 11:01 PM

Report this commentIsn't it about time this newspaper stopped posting contributions from permanent spotty adolescant boys (presumably in heavy metal T-shirts) who won't even use their real name? Or is half of Britain actually called something that sounds like the title of an Iron Maiden album?

eric skelton

on August 16, 2009

at 11:01 PM

Report this commentDespite some contributors' rancid reaction to A Brown's comments, she/he is entitled to make them, and is absolutely right in what she/he says.

Jeffrey

on August 16, 2009

at 11:00 PM

Report this commentFOR WHAT IT'S WORTH:

ariel

on August 16, 2009

at 06:47 PM

 

ARIEL SAID:

"@ His Lordship

Had you bothered to read my comment -- assuming that you are even capable of such a taxing task -- you would note that I made no allegations of peddling untruths against you."

 

Well Ariel, let's just see if you can be honest, since you desire an audience to witness your "misspeak"

ariel

on August 16, 2009

at 02:40 PM

 

ARIEL SAID:

"You, who are so addicted to fruitcake conspiracy theories, make no mention of ..."

CONSPIRACY THEORY?

Again i ask you to refute what it is that i said is untrue! You cannot so you attempt to make bogus AS charges!

ariel

on August 16, 2009

at 06:47 PM

 

ARIEL SAID:

 

"It is YOU, Sir, and the verbal matter that extrudes from you keyboard, that is the subject of my ire and contempt."

 

ARIEL, YOU HAVE ADMITTED THAT I HAVE NOT SPOKEN ANY UNTRUTHS, NO? SO WHAT IS IT THAT IRKS YOU SO, PLEASE BE SPECIFIC!

You accuse me of being an Anti Semite, yet YIDDISH is not of the Hamito semitic family of languages. Yiddish is not a Hamito Semitic vernacular, never was and never will be. 96%+ of world Jewry are Yiddish speaking, hence they ARE NOT HAMITO SEMITIC, THUS THEIR CHARGE AND YOUR CHARGE AGAINST ME, IS NOTHING BUT A CANARD, A LIE, FALSE CHARGE. In any case, who made you spokes person for the Hamito Semitic speaking people of the world? NO ONE!

In future, deal with the facts presented, or be silent and save yourself from the tendancy to lie and cry wolf!

stephen

on August 16, 2009

at 05:06 PM

STEVEN SAID:

"Can you cite an article YOU wrote being critical of the Jewish Beit Dein courts that have been operating in this country for years? ......Can you cite an article YOU wrote,being critical of

The Deputies Board of Jews, a PARLIAMENT operating in the UK? .......Can you cite an article YOU wrote,being critical of the Jewish lobby group(Labour,Conservative, Lib Dem) friends for Israel? "

Beth din, a court? of what? How to kill a chicken? and of course the Jewish lobby? I suppose its part of the zionist plan to rule the world (where my share of the profits?) these statements are made by either an idiot or anti-semite.

Board of deputies a parliament?The board of deputies is nothing. I don't know anyone that knows what they do except report there is no anti-semitism in England. They obviously haven't met "Noble Lord"

 

YOU SIR, ARE EITHER IGNORANT, OR LYING IE BEING FAITHFUL TO YOUR "KOL NIDRE", for those who do not know, this is an oath sworn every year, on Yom Kippur/Day of atonement and it basically means, all vows, promises and declarations of truth given to us the Sheeple/Cattle/Goyim WILL NOT BE HONOURED.

In other words, don't expect the truth from a Talmudist any time soon.

Phil de Buquet

on August 16, 2009

at 08:50 PM

 

PHILL SAID:

 

"We've been down this road before. Back in 1933 there was this jolly chap who called himself Hitler. Him and his mates used to wander around Germany shoving their arms up in the air and all our politicians knew what was going on but ignored his antics."

 

In 1933 Jews declared economic war on Germany, all one need do is type in "Judea declares war on Germany" and you will be surprised at what you read.

 

You will also note that Samuel Untermeyer says that all 14 million Jews are to wage this war!

 

Funny that, seeing as the world Almanac put the Jewish population in 1948 as 15 million and the New York Times put the World Jewish population at 15-16 million.

 

Do the maths, can't see how pre war 1933, there are 14 million Jews in the world, according eminent Jews, then after the war 1948, Jewish owned New York Times says the Jewish population is between 15-16 million?

 

Can anyone explain this anomaly?

 

United Nations Univresal Declaration of Human rights, Article 19:

 

"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers".

 

I hope you understand, as a believer in Jesus/Yesua the Christ, i too believe THE TRUTH SHALL MAKE/SET YOU FREE!

 

Noble Lord

on August 16, 2009

at 10:48 PM

Report this commentMr Fitzpatrick

can play the race card he has lost the votes of the Muslims in his constituency .

By the way Mr Fitzpatrick this has been happening for years ! This is how we celebrate our weddings if you got a problem don't attend !

Stick to your frozen curry .

We are not immigrants we have done more for this country than most of you lot who have been on Benefits!.Muslims contribute over �30bil a year to this country

 

My great granddad and granddad fought in WW2 for this country now i am deeply offended when people say we are immigrants !

 

Imran

on August 16, 2009

at 10:46 PM

Report this commentIf this labour fool did not realise this is what happens at Muslim marriages labour party MPs are even dumber than I thought.

labour continues to transport the muslim to our shores and should have done there research before they inflicted Islam on us.

 

The muslims may have some useful purpose if their Imam puts a fatwa on this labour imbecile.

Mark Newcastle

on August 16, 2009

at 10:41 PM

Report this commentI think they made the correct choice, it's quite wrong that they should pander to the islamist minority.

 

To echo other comments, this is Britain, and we don't have islamist beliefs. If radical muslims don't agree with that, fine, there are plenty of Sharia countries for them to choose instead. Don't try to change our way of life.

 

I really do feel that such outrageous grievances will lead to a point where the silent majority starts to speak.

George

on August 16, 2009

at 10:40 PM

Report this commentYou really don't know anything at all about either Christianity or Islam, do you, 'Noble Lord'?

M.Robinson

on August 16, 2009

at 10:40 PM

Report this commentRob Dewar; If your 'Vichy' regime ever comes to power I pray to God that I am with the Gaullists! What a bizarrely misguided analogy.

eric skelton

on August 16, 2009

at 10:39 PM

Report this commentA Brown 6.48 pm......this comment is completely unacceptable and must be removed from this board.

 

Surely, what we are all against is extremism in whatever form it takes.

Jack Roob on August 16, 2009 at 08:55 PM

So a threatening, non-Islamic-phobic rant by Bilal Patel on August 16, 2009 at 12:25 AM can stay, but A. Brown�s equally forthright comments should be removed as YOU find them unacceptable?

 

I think you need to reassess what you consider to be extremism as well as the value you place on free speech.

 

A. Brown, don't be a wallflower, tell us exactly what you think? Patel did.

 

patriot

on August 16, 2009

at 10:25 PM

Report this commentFor all the jibes in all directions, it's hard to see the wood for the trees So, keep calm all of you.

 

Indeed, it may so be that immigrant populations are free to practise their cultural behaviour in our country. It may also be that when we enter their countries, we receive no such civility.

 

However, we do have the oldest democracy backing us. We are going through a spot of bother with apparent exigencies on the part of these immigrants in the public sphere.

 

Our elected leaders and savant judges - appointed for their wisdom - need a little time to adjust to handling unusual situations. They may have erred in their judgments on one or two occasions.

 

We need to keep cool because in the end all this petty animosity will dispel and groups and communities adjust to their new situation. All will learn to live within their borders with regard to their foreign ways, or whatever.

 

In conclusion, we just need to listen to our inner selves. Our traditions in Britain are too solid and too mature for them to be walked roughshod over. So, let us pause and think as to whether the Press is helping to magnify what is really not worth worrying about. Ultimately, there are ultra modern moslems and non religious moslems and moderate moslems and moslems of myriad backgrounds. Those who share in our traditions of freedom and openness would care to be our friends. They are most welcome. Those who hold to bizarre ideas and wish to stay ghettoised or apart have ample space in which to do it without affecting us one jot or one tittle.

Astrid

on August 16, 2009

at 10:22 PM

Report this commentWe are British, this is our country. If immigrants do not like or are prepared to comply with our way of life the answer is obvious.

EX-BRAT

on August 16, 2009

at 09:35 PM

Report this commentI take it that none of the people complaining about segregation would ever attend a stag/hen night.

Bill Phillips

on August 16, 2009

at 09:34 PM

Report this commentInteresting all the comparisons between Muslims and Jews. Talk about 'Follow the gourd, no the sandal' (Life of Brian). Whole thing is pointless and futile. This life is all there is. GET ON WITH IT!

funnyfish

on August 16, 2009

at 09:32 PM

Report this commentIt'll hit the fan now!

Someone has mentioned the elephant in the (our) room.

Tom Taylor-Duxbury

on August 16, 2009

at 09:32 PM

Report this commentThis is utter nonsense. What do non-muslims have to do with Islam? Answer: Nothing! So leave us alone (I am European but converted to Islam 2 years ago and Consider myself moderate). Islam is beautiful, and Christians and Jews should embrace it. Our true enemies are the Satanic, Lesbian, Homosexual, Pedophiles and Masonic movements.

IslamIsGood

on August 16, 2009

at 09:31 PM

Report this commentBritain will become an Islam state eventually due to the higher birth rate..Britainistan is coming.

Labour is an absolute disaster in every department,especially in multi culturalism and their enforcement of it....

r brady

on August 16, 2009

at 09:30 PM

Report this commentWhat a miserable, pompous bunch of comments. This is a WEDDING we're talking about.I suppose a Greek wedding would appall you too- all that wastage of hurled plates...

Julia

on August 16, 2009

at 09:30 PM

Report this commentIslam doesn't compromise, never has never will. In a way I'm glad our economy is about to collapse, nothing else would concentrate the minds of British people quite so effectively.

One by one the establishment turns on Islam, it's a game, but I'm glad they are finally playing it.

jim

on August 16, 2009

at 09:30 PM

Report this commentWe don't have to bow to this. We have to lay down the rules of living in our respective countries and Muslims must follow them or go to an Islamic country.

janalou

on August 16, 2009

at 09:29 PM

Report this commentModern Islam is anything but tolerant.It is arrogant and does not allow debate or criticism.

It is out moded and needs to become more allow all to follow their own path.

r brady

on August 16, 2009

at 09:29 PM

Report this commentAug 15th 2025:

London.

Minority MP Jim Fitzpatrick Jnr was today sentenced to public beheading for storming out of a wedding ceremony. He objected to women and men being segregated at the wedding and his appeal for clemency to the Prime Imam the Rt Hon Mohammed Iqbal was turned down.

Home Secretary Aseef Khan commented 'Death to the infidel'..

WAKE UP ENGLAND

joe

on August 16, 2009

at 08:57 PM

Report this commentBritain already is a caliphate.

Blame the Labour party for letting it happen.

 

Labour's been the biggest threat to our sovereignty.

 

Forget the IRA, forget the Taliban, forget the Muslim Extremists... pah!... all fish food for all I care when compared to the Labour Party.

 

In ten years of bad government they destroyed our sovereignty, freedoms and system of values.

 

It was an insult to see Gordon Brown say we were a Christian society. He wouldn't know it if Jesus Christ was standing in front of him - then again he had a beard!

James Kerrigan

on August 16, 2009

at 08:56 PM

Report this commentto walk out on a wedding to which you have been invited as a private individual is plain bad manners.

 

to walk out on a wedding of one of your constituents, at which you are inevitably to some extent present in your official capacity, indicates a lack of basic research. It would have been preferable, and more professional, to have looked into the matter and declined beforehand.

 

I have never been a supporter of multi-culturalism, having seen far too much of the world beyond Dover to have had any confidence from the outset.

 

it's long past time that someone in this country recognised that Islam fundamentally denies the precedence of secular law over religious law, and the conflict is therefore insoluble

 

 

ben arnulfssen

on August 16, 2009

at 08:56 PM

Report this commentReligion is an excuse to do whatever you want and escape all responsibility for your actions because it's the deity's will. Throughout the ages, religions have had their truly barbaric episodes with islam currently in the spotlight.

 

I don't believe in a god and yet conduct my life with a degree of morality which doesn't require me to behead, flog or stone anybody simply because they've done something I haven't.

 

I loathe islam and christianity for its retrograde effects on humanity.

Keith Halewood

on August 16, 2009

at 08:55 PM

Report this commentA Brown 6.48 pm.........I assume all the S. Tel. moderators are in Tuscany......this comment is completely unacceptable and must be removed from this board.

 

Surely, what we are all against is extremism in whatever form it takes. Fundamentalist Islam is a perversion. But born-again Christianity and its ludicrous rhetoric isn't far behind.

Jack Roob

on August 16, 2009

at 08:55 PM

Report this commentI find it so sad that some posts have felt it necessary to bash the person of Jesus Christ in their desperate attempt to somehow protect islam or some foolish leftist ideology. The fact is while adherents of Christ have sometimes acted disgracefully His teachings are of love and peace. There really are so many in the UK who believe that once they have thoroughly knocked christianity off its pedestal, they will have the perfect society. They are bringing about an islamic nightmare. May God forgive them

Lilly

on August 16, 2009

at 08:54 PM

Report this commentWe've been down this road before. Back in 1933 there was this jolly chap who called himself Hitler. Him and his mates used to wander around Germany shoving their arms up in the air and all our politicians knew what was going on but ignored his antics.

 

"Strange sort of chap y'know gets all those brownshirts marching round the streets carrying flags and doing the stiff arm thingy, nothing to worry about, it'll pass " But it didn't pass did it ?

 

Our brave politicians knew what was going on and did nothing, as usual, that's because our politicians are three parts WET !

 

Hitler wasn't around for long really, moslems have been around since the 6th century and the rules haven't changed much since then have they ? Ignore this situation, be a jolly good understanding person y'know, live and let live and all that sort of thing and before you know where you are the country will have sharia laws being passed by the EU. As usual now, if the EU or the USA say we do it, we do it, don't we !

Phil de Buquet

on August 16, 2009

at 08:50 PM

Report this commentA few hundred years ago, Your Fine Country conquered a large part of the Indian sub-continent and duly exploited it's resources. In the process you imported a large quantity of cheap labour. You called them WOGs and "Post Office Types". You now face the consequences. Why make such a hue and cry about religions and other irrelevant matters?

Shahriar Bader

on August 16, 2009

at 08:50 PM

Report this commentIslam is an ideology rather than a religion. It should be banned in the west because it is a very real threat to our way of life. A way of life that might not be perfect but I am more than happy with it.

M Henderson

on August 16, 2009

at 08:49 PM

Report this commentWhen men and women mix they learn about each other and have more of a positive effect on each other as well. It dont take a genius to realise that but for some reason some faiths written hundreds of years ago do not appear to like the idea of mixing and appear to prefer segregation. I just cannot see how that can be of any use but the world population is increasing so lets ask where that is. Oh yes its not in the west. Hmmm confusing aint it.

Pete Best

on August 16, 2009

at 08:49 PM

Report this commentIt appears to me that many muslims practice sex and race discrimination (as defined by UK legislation), and yet the Government ignores this.

 

The reason of course is that muslims now represent millions of voters in the UK who, surveys consistently show, predominantly vote Labour, as do many other asian minorities, in the same way the white working class have done for years (although perhaps they are now realising what a disaster this has been for them and are gradually switching to other paries who better represent their views).

 

Part of this pact is Labour's open door immigration policy.

 

The Tories of course are also anxious to win over this voting block. Hence Cameron's support for the UAF, who appear to be more fascist than the BNP if recent press reports and photos are anything to judge by.

 

Consequently any Government will tolerate for example unfair treatment (by UK standards)of Asian women in the interests of retaining votes.

 

With postal voting we also hear examples of men submitting women's votes, and tales of whole communities being told how to vote.

 

Whilst this behaviour may be the norm in some countries, if it is to be tolerated here on the basis of cultural/religious diversity, at least the law should be changed to except certain cultures from its requirements, otherwise the law is made a mockery of e.g. allow muslims multiple wives. Either that or the current laws should be enforced.

 

 

Mr Fitzpatrick appears to be an unusual and possibly brave MP in objecting to this behaviour, at least in so far as his wife is concerned.

David

on August 16, 2009

at 08:46 PM

Report this commentWe should not bow to Islamic intolerance. These people fail to integrate wherever they are in the world, unless they are surrounded by a population that is entirely composed of their own particular sect. Even in Moslem countries, Sunnis & Shiites fall out.

 

Jeff

on August 16, 2009

at 08:46 PM

Report this commentIt is naive to imagine that Fitzpatrick "did not anticipate the controversy his decision would generate". If he didn't then he is certainly a fool.

 

If he was genuinely incensed at gender segregation he could have left quietly without comment. He could have raised the matter of how Islam affects our society elsewhere and at another time (and, I might add, I would agree with him). But he did not, he was wilfully rude and abused hospitality that he had freely accepted in order to drum a bit of cheap publicity for himself. The man is an oaf.

Roger Angove

on August 16, 2009

at 08:43 PM

Report this commentPhilip on August 16, 2009 at 05:57 PM

 

 

So you have a hang-up with Jews?

 

Wrong forum. Phil, or do two wrongs make a right where you come from?

 

Bye bye

patriot

on August 16, 2009

at 08:41 PM

Report this commentAlasdair, you've done this country an enormous favour. I've never seen such a successful "Spot The Looney" competition before, so hats off to you.

 

Please do a piece on how nuclear energy "ate my hamster" and we'll have the UK purged in no time.

 

For what it's worth, if the UK ever becomes an Islamic State, it'll be over my dead body. Had I been born before Christ, I'd have said that too.

Darkseid

on August 16, 2009

at 08:41 PM

Report this commentI am willing to listen to anyones point of veiw just so long as they are willing to listen to mine.

david smith

on August 16, 2009

at 08:40 PM

Report this commentPavo Absolutus

on August 16, 2009

at 05:10 PM

 

"All talk here of Judaeism and Zionism is hogwash. It is true we have fought against and with these peoples, but despite many generations presence they remain a part of us and not a controlling factor despite all the Third Reich insinuations by some commentors........."

 

I used to think so to. Then I read and I read some more and I read yet more and I'm still reading. Judaism and Zionism are about as close to one another as Glasgow Rangers and Glasgow Celtic in amicability that is. Zionism has been behind and orchestrated much of the war and troubles in Europe for the last couple of Centuries. This cannot be overlooked in the slightest. How far back do you want to go? How about the French Revolution, the American Civil War, the Russian Revolution, WW1 & 2, the Vietnam War.... we can go on. Zionism consisting of the Banking Elites has utterly wrecked havoc on the peaceful western civilisation. It has infiltrated much of our society and the damage has been caused by manipulation and lies. Islam is in the west because of Zionism. They want to flood the rest of the world, destroy their cultures and civilisations while pumping trillions into Israel to rule the world as the elite. Forget Hitler and the Aryan Race as he and they have nothing on the Zionists. They want utter totalitarian control of this whole world - one government - one bank - one culture. Zionism is by far more deadly than anything Islam is. We can see Islam coming a mile off. We can tell what they want to do because they're still living in the 7th Century for goodness sake. Zionists on the other hand have been telling us they are our friends for a long time, when that has been far from the truth. They care only for themselves and their fellow Zionists and they are destroying all the good peoples of this world in order to set themselves up as rulers.

 

 

Harbinger

on August 16, 2009

at 08:40 PM

Report this comment@ Rastus C. Tastey

 

You have saved me some typing - I agree 100%

This isn't about 'the bigger picture' it's about an unpleasant little man being insufferably rude because he perceives there to be a political advantage for him.

 

Simian Herbalist

on August 16, 2009

at 08:40 PM

Report this commentSegregating the sexes at a religious service is not unique to Islam, some Christian sects also practise this. All that Jim Fitzpatrick did was to show himself a small minded bigot. His hosts� usages offended him and out he flounced.

 

His hosts probably thought, �Good riddance�

 

luap

on August 16, 2009

at 08:40 PM

Report this comment"My imaginary friend is better than your imaginary friend. So there!"

 

If that's the best the theists can do, perhaps we're better off without the lot of them? Multiculturalism is bunk; a secular state is the only solution.

Arthuro Calzino

on August 16, 2009

at 08:40 PM

Report this commentI am British but lived in the Middle East for over thirty years. When I visited the home of my husband's boss I was not allowed to enter through the front door with my husband. Whenever a male from the household wanted to pass through the room females were allowed into we had to 'hide' in the kitchen. Standard practice in a Muslim household. Brits have no idea what Islam really entails.

Pam

on August 16, 2009

at 08:38 PM

Report this commentIf the barbaric excesses of Islam were committed away from the protective umbrella of so called Religion, the perpetrators would be tried and jailed. Nuff said.

Richard

on August 16, 2009

at 06:54 PM

Report this commentI look upon myself as a member of the Ahl al-Kitab and should therefore be accepted by Muslims as one who "stands among the righteous".

 

However since I wholeheartedly accept the Divine Trinity, I must therefore be someone who knowingly and consciously rejects the Divine Unity - and the same goes for any other devout Christians. That surely brands us all as "kuffaar" - unbelievers.

 

Sura 47:4 of the Qur'an says: "Fa-idha laqaitum aledhina kafaru fa-dhraba al-riqabi �" (If you encounter those who are unbelievers, strike off their heads �) in other words, Islam and the Muslims are not monolithic and the psychopaths whose parents eagerly accepted the bounties of living in our relatively efficient, uncorrupt, prosperous, predominantly Christian welfare state - but who hold a hell-bent determination to perform mass murder, have no problem in claiming that the Qur'an al-Karim authorises them to do so.

 

The thought that our green and pleasant land, for all its faults, might one day be declared the Caliphate of England fills me with horror and disgust. the thought that my children and grandchildren might be controlled by ignorant, self-appointed imams, obsessed with hate and death, our daughters subjected to the obligatory wearing of the burqa, jilbab etc., brothers expected to murder their sisters for falling in love with someone �. I think that's enough horror.

 

Ahah, you may say, that only really describes life under a way-out regime like that of the Taliban. The trouble is that the fanatics of Ansar al-Islam etc., the ones who confidently intend to turn us into another failed Muslim state, whilst killing loads of kuffaar in the process, are without question graduates of the Taliban persuasion.

I used to live in the Middle East.

I used to respect Islam.

- - - -!

 

Malik al-Kuffar

on August 16, 2009

at 06:54 PM

Report this commentAs a Christian I attended a Bar Mitzvah where the men and women sat apart. I don't see the problem.

 

The Muslim couple had the decency to invite the MP and his wife. To walk out was plain bad manners.

MML

on August 16, 2009

at 06:51 PM

Report this commentRob Dewar

on August 16, 2009

at 10:21 AM

 

Sorry Rob, but your speech sounds like that of a 'typical city dweller'.

 

Have you never attended any of the 'Folk Festivals' associated with our many 'Open Air Museums' ( Chichester for example ) or seen the Morris Dancers on our Village Greems along with the schools participation in the MayPole traditional 'dances' ?

 

Visit some of our "Country Fairs" , Shows and Village Fetes, and you will see that it is not only France that retains her sense of individuality and history.

 

"Non scholae sed vitae discimus".

 

( we learn not for school but for life ).

 

Pavo Absolutus

on August 16, 2009

at 06:50 PM

Report this commentIt's going to get a lot worse. Only the French have the good sense to ban headscarves, hijab etc. Britain will become an Islamic state. Labour will have that as a policy after the next election.

davidke

on August 16, 2009

at 06:49 PM

Report this comment

@ His Lordship

 

Had you bothered to read my comment -- assuming that you are even capable of such a taxing task -- you would note that I made no allegations of peddling untruths against you.

 

It is YOU, Sir, and the verbal matter that extrudes from you keyboard, that is the subject of my ire and contempt.

 

All in here know you as a rabidly anti-Semitic bigot, who purports to see the hand of Jewry in all the world's evils.

 

As your own word condemn you as an unthinking racist, what need is there of further criticism on that score from me?.

 

You are, one suspects,too young ever to have read the pages of Herr Steicher's Der Sturmer ( the SS house magazine ) but what you write might well have been cut and pasted from its odious pages.

 

The sheer venom and puerility of your comments is greatly enhanced by your immature use of capitals in a -- vain -- endeavour to add impact to your perverted opinions.

 

They are shocking enough not to require the literary equivalent of shouting.

 

" in Spain, there is an enclave of approximately 1 million Non spanish speaking Brits living happily there, listening to Zionist jerk, John Gaunt radio and watching East Enders!"

 

My, you do surprise me!

 

Having lived in Spain for 9 years, I've never heard of this guy.

 

The only bit of your remarks that rings true is the Eastenders part.

 

ariel

on August 16, 2009

at 06:47 PM

Report this commentMy wife like most other women in most places on earth is concerned about her appearance and takes a lot of pride in what she wears. She's not very happy if she sees someone wearing the same as she is herself. I have noticed this female desire to be different, to be special in the many places I have visited around the globe. It is part of the female psyche. I am now asked to believe that women choose voluntarily and without coercion first to look identical to every other woman in their group or circle and and secondly that they are happy to have every aspect of their appearance concealed by a large black shroud.

 

Sorry, I don't believe it.

 

It exhibits all the features of oppression - the deprivation of choice, the denial of personality, the seclusion from ordinary human contact. No one chooses these things for themselves.

John Stobart

on August 16, 2009

at 06:16 PM

Report this commentI've just read this review of a book by a former Muslim, a convert to Christianity and authority on Sharia, Sam Solomon, that explains the role of 'emigration' (hijra) in Islam and the steps involved in eventually taking over non-Islamic societies/countries. It all sounds quite sadly recognisable from the British vantage point:-

 

MODERN DAY TROJAN HORSE

by

Sam Solomon and Elias Al Maqdisi

 

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/08/the_hijra.html

bookworm

on August 16, 2009

at 05:58 PM

Report this commentPatriot writes: �Firstly, the DT has not published a plethora of Islamophobic articles. It does not have a persistent and abnormal fear or dislike of Islam.� That is such a laughable lie that you can only be a Zionist. I have counted seven Islamophobic stories in a single edition The Telegraph in one day alone this year. By anti-Semitic I merely mean critical of Jewish influence over the 99.5%of the British people who are not Jewish.

 

As for your list:

Practise their beliefs and faith without adverse effects on others � sounds like Muslims in this country.

Accept and are accepted as different in their beliefs and lifestyle � most Goyim are ignorant of Judaic supremacist beliefs because of Jewish control of much of Western media.

Do not seek to impose their will on those of other races and beliefs � then why is the Holocaust on the school curriculum and why do must schools send pupils to Auschwitz and why are most MPs �friends of Israel�?

Do not regard believers of other faiths as inferior or sub-human � are you kidding?

 

Rabbi Menachen Schneerson, the �Lubovitcher Rebbe� who headed the Chabad orthodox Jewish movement, and wielded great influence in Israel as well as in the US, explained:

 

�The difference between a Jewish and a non-Jewish person stems from the common expression, `Let us differentiate.� Thus, we do not have a case of profound change in which a person is merely on a superior level. Rather we have a case of `let us differentiate� between totally different species. This is what needs to be said about the body: the body of a Jewish person is of a totally different quality from the body of [members] of all nations of the world � A non-Jew�s entire reality is only vanity. It is written, `And the strangers shall guard and feed your flocks� (Isaiah 61:5). The entire creation [of a non-Jew] exists only for the sake of the Jews ��

 

Do not embark on disfigurement or murder in the name of honour � no it is a religious duty.

Do not ignore our laws on sexual equality and bigamy � are you saying all Muslims do?

Respect the laws of this country � then why are there Jewish courts?

Have not allowed their youth to radicalise and murder 50+ innocents in London � no, they let Mossad do it.

 

There is plenty of reasons for articles critical of Jewish influence over life in Britain which poses a far greater danger to this country than Muslims do.

Philip

on August 16, 2009

at 05:57 PM

Report this commentAlasdair Palmer has certainly whallopped the proverbial 'hornets' nest' with this column.

 

The concept of 'multiculturalism' requires all parties and faiths to act in goodwill and good faith.

 

As a concept it has patently failed miserably, and for no other reason that none of the parties to it have acted in good faith.

 

Therefor let us all remember just where this small Democracy of ours originates.

 

Britain, or the 'United' Kingdom as it is amusingly referred to as these days, grew from the basic constuct of a Christian-based Faith, serving as the bed-rock of our Constitution and our guiding principles and Laws.

 

This basis of Christianity as the core concept of our civilisation has served us well and absolutely must continue to be rigorously protected against all incoming politically correct fashionable destructive ideas proposed by vociferous growing minorities hell-bent on our destruction and subjugation to THEIR will.

 

There are at least two ways this could come about within the next fifty years ( generation ).

 

Our continued subjection to a rapidly developing Islamic EU, and the Islamification of Britain herself through deliberate birth-rate design.

 

All talk here of Judaeism and Zionism is hogwash. It is true we have fought against and with these peoples, but despite many generations presence they remain a part of us and not a controlling factor despite all the Third Reich insinuations by some commentors.

 

Islam is a quite different kettle of fish, and whilst I have no desire to invade the Islamic world or restrict their responsible activities there, I deny them the right to invade by any means MY world of Christianity !

 

Simply put, they ( the Islamists ) remain here under sufferance until they can prove they accept OUR values, OUR way of life and OUR laws.

 

If they do not agree to this, then I will not prevent them leaving for somewhere they feel more welcome.

 

"Venienti occurrite morbo !"

 

( Nip it in the bud !)

 

Pavo Absolutus

on August 16, 2009

at 05:10 PM

Report this comment"O ye who believe! Ye are forbidden to inherit women against their will. Nor should ye treat them with harshness, that ye may take away part of the dower [money given by the husband to the wife for the marriage contract] ye have given them, except where they have been guilty of open lewdness; on the contrary live with them on a footing of kindness and equity. If ye take a dislike to them it may be that ye dislike a thing, and God brings about through it a great deal of good. (The Noble Quran, 4:19)

bing

on August 16, 2009

at 05:09 PM

Report this commentTo Darkseid at 03:37pm: You stated "Patriotism is narcissism...'My country right or wrong' sucks."

 

The correct, complete quote is:

 

"My country, right or wrong. If right, to be kept right. If wrong, to be made right."

 

Patriotism is love of one's land and that quote makes quite clear that such patriotism involves the responsibility to see that the land remains true to its basic values.

 

-------------------------------

 

As to Sacranie's remark that "It shows a lack of interest to engage with people of different backgrounds":-

 

Koran 9:28 "Oh ye who believe! (in Allah's Oneness and in His Messenger Muhammad) Verily, the Mushrikun (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah and in the Message of Muhammad) are Najasun (impure).

 

Christians and Jews are al-mushrikun because they "ascribe partners with God" (according to Muhammad, the Jews believe 'Ezra' is God's son and that their rabbis are lords beside God and the Christians profess Jesus is the Son of God and that He and the Christian monks are lords in place of God).

 

Those things which are defined as Najasun (Najis)in Islam are:

 

Urine

Faeces

Semen

Dead Body

Blood

Dog

Pig

KAFIR (Unbeliever, non-Moslem)

Alcohol

Sweat from animals

 

Koran 5:51 "O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and Christians for your friends and protectors. And he among you that turns to them is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust."

abc

on August 16, 2009

at 05:09 PM

Report this commentDarkseid

on August 16, 2009

at 03:37 PM

 

Patriotism, the love for their people, their cultures, traditions and histories, their great love for their ancestors and elders and all those who gave their lives so they could be free is by far narcissm or a spurious and noisome.

 

I have just left London having spent almost half my life living there, having seen it go from being one of the most beautiful places in the UK into a hovel. I am Scottish but deeply sad to see my English brothers and sisters lands being destroyed, knowing all to well it's a matter of time before it happens up here too. I have seen London boroughs that once had vibrant, peaceful, communities where everyone knew one another turn into ghettos of whatever immigrant culture happened to be the most dominant. I have watched the East End of London become populated with non English speaking peoples, who care little for our laws and cultures, while seeing the Indigenous move out to Essex and Kent. I've watched Muslims march through Bethnal Green and Whitechapel demanding Islamisation of the UK and Sharia Law and yet seen the police pull people aside who wave the Union Jack or St George cross, not forgetting disallow them from having their National day so as not to offend other cultures. I have seen the utter takeover of London to become the epitome of everything not English and British.

 

Now you may be quite happy to see that happen. You may relish at the thought that England is no longer England, but then I ask you, what is it if it isn't England? What will it become? What will happen when alien cultures grow to outnumber the indigenous and want to impose their own values? Where will liberty, democracy and freedom live then?

 

England and Britain is because of what created it - Patriotism. It was the uniting of fellow men and women to defend their land from foreign cultural colonisation the EU is allowing in without giving us the right to protect our land and defend ourselves. We are seeing the destruction of British culture, its heritage and its traditions. It is these ideologies that created the Western civilisation and attracted everyone to it in the first place.

 

Imagine being attracted to a fair ground because of the Wurlitzers, Dodgems, ghost castle, Rollercoasters etc etc only one day to go there to see that it had all disappeared. Would you still go in? Would you still pay your money knowing that what attracted you in the first place no longer is?

 

It is the liberal left, the creators of Nazism, Fascism and Communism who have sullied and attacked Nationalism. It is they who have decided that the love for one's people and country automatically makes them racist (whites only I must add). It is they who are destroying the greatness that was that gave everyone equal standing. Britain would not be where it was without patriotism. It's really that simple. You need people who are willing to die for their fellow countrymen in order to protect their culture, traditions and beliefs. That is patriotism and without it, civilisations fall. What next for the UK? Well, something that will be ultimately far inferior to anything that it's already achieved, but in good old Orwellian doublespeak, they'll tell the people how far better off they all are.

 

Madness.

Harbinger

on August 16, 2009

at 05:07 PM

Report this commentDarkseid on August 16, 2009 at 03:37 PM

 

 

Typing error, here corrected for the avoidance of any doubt:

 

Well said, Susan.

 

Unfortunately people like you deem to run down patriotism as some sort of evil disease

 

Let me spell it out for you.

 

If you live in a country you are deemed to be bound by its laws and customs, the same laws and customs you seek protection from when wronged.

 

You contribute to and, in exchange, accept the benefits of life in that country.

 

If the country calls you to defend it and its way of life, you do so.

 

 

What part of this is narcissic and what part of it do you not understand?

 

patriot

on August 16, 2009

at 05:06 PM

Report this commentNoble Lord wrote

 

Can you cite an article YOU wrote being critical of the Jewish Beit Dein courts that have been operating in this country for years? ......Can you cite an article YOU wrote,being critical of

The Deputies Board of Jews, a PARLIAMENT operating in the UK? .......Can you cite an article YOU wrote,being critical of the Jewish lobby group(Labour,Conservative, Lib Dem) friends for Israel? "

 

Beth din, a court? of what? How to kill a chicken? and of course the Jewish lobby? I suppose its part of the zionist plan to rule the world (where my share of the profits?) these statements are made by either an idiot or anti-semite.

 

Board of deputies a parliament?The board of deputies is nothing. I don't know anyone that knows what they do except report there is no anti-semitism in England. They obviously haven't met "Noble Lord"

 

 

stephen

on August 16, 2009

at 05:06 PM

Report this commentFOR WHAT IT'S WORTH:

 

ariel

on August 16, 2009

at 02:40 PM

 

ARIEL SAID:

 

"Reading -- or rather, attempting, usually vainly -- to wring the least shred of coherence and logic from your ... well, I suppose one must refer to them as comments, one thing strikes me about them".

 

Don't waste your time waffling Ariel, WHAT WAS IT THAT I SAID, YOU FORGOT TO REFUTE?

 

What was it that i said, YOU CATEGORICALLY CAN PROVE TO BE UNTRUE?

 

Don't hold back now, cite my name and time, then copy and paste my comment, leave a gap, then put your counteracting point ok.

 

NO AD HOMINEM ATTACKS, BOGUS A-S CHARGES, OR CALLS FOR C CAMPS FOR PEOPLE WHO SPEAK THE TRUTH!

 

M.Robinson

on August 16, 2009

at 02:40 PM

 

I must be honest here, i've never asked a Muslim if Muhammed Prophised anything, or why they view him a prophet. However i do know they revere Jesus/Yesua the Christ and on that basis i deem Islam a brother in faith and a faith that can live side by side with Christianity.

 

 

Noble Lord

on August 16, 2009

at 05:05 PM

Report this commentFOR WHAT IT'S WORTH:

 

Susan

on August 16, 2009

at 01:02 PM

 

I was rather hestitant in responding to Susan's post, because it had been pointed out that her post was indeed flawed, in fact it's flawed on so many levels, again i didn't really wish to respond to it.

 

So my excuse for addressing it, is because there may be others persuaded by her opinion, passionate though it is, is totally without substance.

 

 

SUSAN SAID:

 

"I am tired of reading about this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture.. Since the terrorist attacks, we have experienced a surge in deep patriotism by the majority of Christians in England".

 

If this is the case Susan, try and not to spend your money on the Zionist and Bolshevik newspapers!

 

Also, it would do your soul good to stop listening to Zionist and Bolshevik radio, be that BBC London, LBC, Talk Sport or BBC 5 Live, albeit the latter doesn't always screen their calls thoroughly and we get the odd slip up of truth coming out.

 

Susan, it is your omitting of Yiddish that worries me, because you focus so much on Islam and people from Asia, one can almost think you were offering some covert racist rant.

 

I take it, you have no problem with Jews having designated areas, namely the Eruv, or the fact that they have a court, namely the Beit Dein, or for that matter the need to set up their own Parliament, The British Board of Deputies Jews!

 

Furthrmore, you don't mind that they have undue political influence on our domestic and foreign policy, to the point that their man, Tony "War Crimes" Blair told us that we had to "Pay the blood price"!

 

Are you not concerned about their lobby groups, namely Labour,Conservative,Lib Dem friends for Israel?

 

It wasn't a Muslim who was our attorney General, it was a Jew Goldsmith, who turned his back on INTERNATIONAL LAW and gave Blair the green light to become a war criminal?

 

Susan, take a look at this documentary featuring many brave and patriotic UK politician and ask yourself a question.

 

WHAT EXACTLY WAS THE COMMONWEALTH ABOUT, IF IT WASN'T FOR YOU TO BE ABLE TO LEARN FROM YOUR FELLOW MAN AND WOMAN AND TOGETHER FIGHT THE FINANCIERS OF SOCIAL DISORDER?

 

No body who follows Islam is taking anything away from you, neither your present or past is being arrested.

 

Balfour to Blair part 1

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEkEVcj-O9o

 

Balfour to Blair part 2

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZdEog7OXxYU&feature=channel

 

 

 

I truly don't mean to have a go at you, i just want you to look a little deeper and realise that perhaps your fears are unfounded.

 

I get the impression you would call yourself a patriot,but i don't suppose you realise the Queen has broken her oath of coronation and handed us over to the EUSSR? Many have said that what she has done is an act of treason.

 

Susan, have you seen this documentary?

 

http://jforjustice.co.uk/77/

 

Lastly, Britain is all that it is and before others from the Commonwealth came to work and live in the UK, they had to accept a deal at the point of a Henry rifle and a thin red line.

 

HOMEWORK:

 

Who financed this "British Empire"?

 

Mayer Amschel Rothschild Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes her laws.

 

 

Nathan Mayer Rothschild quote: I care not what puppet is placed on the throne of England to rule the Empire,The man that controls Britain's money

supply controls the British Empire.

And I control the money supply."

 

Is this father and son team, Christian, Islamic, Buddhist, Janist, Rastafarian, Zoarastrian, Hindu, Hari Krishna, Jewish, or Jedi?

 

At least Muslims revere Jesus/Yesua the Christ, as opposed to calling him a B'stard and boiling in hot excrement!

 

This PC, don't speak the truth, or how you feel business has nothing to do with Islam, as Islam has no influence over what you hear on the radio, read in your papers and see on the television.

 

Just remember where you hear the nonsense and always look to find out where it truly comes from, before you judge and say, it's them Muslims again, or it's some loony Christians.

 

There is a third party making mischief and has the financial influence to have your leaders make the same mischief at home and abroad.

 

 

Noble Lord

on August 16, 2009

at 05:03 PM

Report this commentWhat have we gained by allowing

these people and many others into our country,nothing,and costs us a fortune

Angry

on August 16, 2009

at 04:28 PM

Report this comment

I can't explain how much it depresses me thinking about my children growing up in modern day Britain.

 

I welcome the thought of them mixing with people of all colours and ethnic bakgrounds, but why have we so quickly rejected the secular, enlightened outlook that took us a thousand years to develop?

Mike Taylor

on August 16, 2009

at 04:04 PM

Report this commentCllr Chris Cooke on August 16, 2009 at 02:57 PM

 

Talk about the laws of 30 years!

 

This has been happening in the US, India and many nations. In India, we are having mockery of judiciary too with Britain closely following. Please closely follow some of important judicial trials of Islamic terrorists and asylum cases in Britain!

 

We need workable laws and judicial system in 21st century and not outdated 19 and 20th century laws and judicial system.

 

Krishna. R. Kumar

on August 16, 2009

at 04:04 PM

Report this commentpatriot

on August 16, 2009

at 02:31 PM

 

Sadly I must disagree with you. While there are a true Jewish people who follow the teachings in the Torah and of course the Old Testament in the Bible, there are those who broke away from both and worship the Talmud instead which immediately nullifies points 3, 4, 5, 7 on your list. You also forget that these people of whom I describe are hugely powerful, from powerful families that have controlled much through the last couple of centuries. Zionism is what poses the greatest threat to the western way of life and although Islam is vast in size, in power, wealth and intelligence it lacks greatly compared to the powerful Zionists and worshipers of the Talmud.

 

It is vitally important to realise here that there are two distinct groups of Jews. The first group are the true Jews, of the House of Judah, one of the twelve tribes of Israel. These Jews worship the Bible and the Torah and are peaceful people. They all also greatly oppose Zionism and the creation of the Jewish state of Israel and the persecution of Palestinians under them. In fact we in the UK should look to our history and Zionist terrorist groups such as the Irgun who waged a campaign of terror on the British in the early 20th Century and of course the Palestinian people.

The second group are not Jews but Zionists, who worship the cult of the Talmud. They always look to this book before the Torah and Bible for guidance and if one is able to read the original they will coil back in horror at the hatred spewed out to the Christians/Goyim in this book. It is these Zionists and worshipers of the Talmud who have wreaked havoc for centuries in the Western world and continue to do so. They are hellishly intelligent and humoungously wealthy individuals that wield unbelievable power, attaining positions in banking to rule and control. One such family are the Rothschilds. There are many more although a mere fraction of the peaceful true Jews, who were from the House of Judah.

 

Zionism is far more deadly that anything Islam could ever throw at the West.

Harbinger

on August 16, 2009

at 03:39 PM

Report this commentpatriot

on August 16, 2009

at 02:40 PM

 

"Wee said, Susan"

 

Couldn't have put it better myself, and you're taking the p too, patriot.

 

If ever there was a more spurious and noisome ambition than blind patriotism, I can't think of one.

 

Patriotism is narcissism. The UK is easily one of the best places in the World to inhabit, especially as a native, but "My country right or wrong" sucks.

Darkseid

on August 16, 2009

at 03:37 PM

Report this comment@ patriot

on August 16, 2009

 

A very good point!

 

Of course, the same can justly be said of Sikhs, Hindus, Buddhists et al.

 

An intriguing thought is just what do devotees of these religions feel about the craven appeasement of Muslims?

 

The mere fact that these are almost completely ignored -- are below the radar, so to speak -- shows how bizarre the whole appeasement project is.

 

And how unforgivable ; for it makes clear that the threat of violence, and its perpetration works.

ariel

on August 16, 2009

at 02:57 PM

Report this commentI can't help thinking that many of these comments break the religious and race hate laws. Yet they are clearly true and heart-felt.

 

On one hand I am grateful that these laws are generally being ignored in terms of free speech in the media. But on the other hand, it is frightening for me to understand how dictatorships also bring in very many pernicious laws (BTW, more laws have been made in Britain over the last thirty years than in the whole of the rest of British history!) - and then pick and choose which laws to enforce and who to prosecute in order to assert their power over people. It has got to the stage where it is becoming impossible not to break the law - in almost every part of our daily lives. Any one of us can be prosecuted anytime no matter how law abiding we try to be.

 

So - Susan, Chris, Tony, Dave et al - feel free to say what you want. With respect - you're nobodies. Good on you. But if your name happens to be Nick Griffin - and you happen to lead a political party called the BNP - then don't be surprised if you are arrested and locked up for saying exactly those same things.

 

We are living in very dangerous times - made much more dangerous by people kept in ignorance, unable to see what's really happening. We have lost principles of common law and common sense. Now it's just a matter of time before we lose what remains of our freedom.

Cllr Chris Cooke

on August 16, 2009

at 02:57 PM

Report this comment

It's working!

 

You ( and I, although I no longer live in your benighted land ) are playing our proper, predestined part in your rulers' Grande Projet.

 

We have our little Democracy Wall, upon which, like good little girls and boys we may scribble all our childly thoughts.

 

Ha! Ha! See, I said it would work!" said ( probably Mandelbug )

 

" There they are, the morons, so busy scribbling on a wall that nobody but them ever reads! Give it time, and all will be forgiven! Expenses? What will they have recalled about expenses?"

 

" Why", he said with a demonic laugh, " they can't even see that we've already stripped them of most of their freedoms ; and when we get back to the EU, we'll have the rest off 'em, too!"

 

 

ariel

on August 16, 2009

at 02:53 PM

Report this commentsebastian

on August 16, 2009

at 02:08 PM

 

A phobia is an irrational fear of something. As hydrophobia is a fear of water that cannot be explained (very possibly experiencing a past life event) Islamaphobia's true definition is an irrational fear of Islam. Alas, there is no 'irrational' fear of Islam. The word Islamaphobia can only be compared to Naziphobia, Communismphobia, Fasciphobia and any other ideology that has caused great harm and suffering in this world. Thus the word Islamaphobia is a word created by Muslims who fear that non Muslims are cottoning on to their machinations aimed at the West. They fear that non Muslims are beginning to see Islam for what it is and this worries them because from the 7th Century, Islam has continually promoted itself as 'The religion of Peace' itself incorrect a what is meant is that Islam WILL be the Religion of Peace when all are Muslim.

 

Thus, as was the word homophobia created to end logical debate on homosexuality and racism used to end any debate on immigration and multiculturalism, so to has the word Islamaphobia been created to end all debate on what Islam is and what it seeks to do in the Western world. It is a deadly dangerous word to even be considered in the western civilisation as this word acts as a destroyer of any attempt for a non Muslim civilisation to attempt to defend itself. It immediately ends all debate on Islam and worse still continues to promote a false message of what Islam truly is, brainwashing western minds and indoctrinating our young. Our media acts as the champion, defending Islam and multiculturalism, unbeknown that it is in fact placing a gun to its head and playing a deadly game of Russian Roullette.

Harbinger

on August 16, 2009

at 02:46 PM

Report this commentI've never understood why Muhammad is regarded as a prophet. What did he ever prophesy? If anyone can come up with a genuine prophecy of his, was it fulfilled? If the answers to these questions are in the negative, why are we even listening to those who call themselves his followers? The Bible has many prophets, whose prophesies, including those regarding Jesus, have come, and are coming, true.

 

And sorry, Noble Lord, but I don't recognise your definition of Christianity. Jesus commands us to be a body of believers who work to spread his Gospel by love, example and care for one another.

M.Robinson

on August 16, 2009

at 02:40 PM

Report this comment@ Noble Lord

on August 16, 2009

 

Hail, thou who lacks any lordly attribute of noblesse oblige, and whose illiterate and perfervid rants have not the least tincture of nobility within them! Hail!

 

Reading -- or rather, attempting, usually vainly -- to wring the least shred of coherence and logic from your ... well, I suppose one must refer to them as comments, one thing strikes me about them.

 

You, who are so addicted to fruitcake conspiracy theories, make no mention of ...

 

The World Trade Center bombing[s]

 

The Illuminati, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the Zinoviev Letter, and the Freemasons.

 

Oh, and of course the mysterious death of the Polish General Sikorski ; mustn't forget him, must we?

 

Surely, somewhere in a corner of your comments ( not necessarily a prominent one ) you could insert some mention of these events and people?

 

After all, one or other of them figure so prominently in most other nutty conspiracy theories that one is led to believe that your knowledge of history ( already known to us as highly defective ) does not include any familiarity with the above.

 

Or perhaps you are merely keeping these shots in your locker, and one day will fire off another absurd and illiterate comment addressing these events?

 

No doubt others in here share my eager anticipation of your thoughts on these mysteries and conspiracies.

ariel

on August 16, 2009

at 02:40 PM

Report this commentI AM 200% WITH SUSAN. VERY WELL SAID.

s matthews

on August 16, 2009

at 02:40 PM

Report this commentHow I agree with Alasdair Palmer and more particularly M.Robinson's comments. I fear it's too late to turn back the tide. Demographics show that in 50 years this country will be part of a European, if not world wide Islamic caliphate. Thank God our little granddaughter has brown eyes, is all I can say.

Sally Spedding

on August 16, 2009

at 02:40 PM

Report this commentSome time ago (perhaps 15 to 20 years ago) my manager said to me, "I never employ people with beards" asking why he replied,

"WELL IN THE MAIN THEY HAVE SOMETHING TO HIDE".

Davetherave

on August 16, 2009

at 02:40 PM

Report this commentWhy is it that religions that do not follow your beliefs are somehow intolerant. Women are not equal to men in any sense of the word. They do however walk upright!

voltare

on August 16, 2009

at 02:40 PM

Report this commentOh, how I laughed. And laughed. Is this "Britain" you inhabit a kind of Twilight Zone or parallel Britain? It's certainly not the majority-atheist Britain I live in

 

Darkseid on August 16, 2009 at 02:01 PM

 

 

Whatever it is it is Britain.

 

OUR culture in OUR country is what matters, not your simplistic and fundamentalist assessment of our beliefs.

 

Whatever your origin or religion you have the same choice as everyone else if you find the UK so offensive.

 

Wee said, Susan.

 

patriot

on August 16, 2009

at 02:40 PM

Report this commentPhilip on August 16, 2009 at 12:50 PM

 

Firstly, the DT has not published a plethora of Islamophobic articles. It does not have a persistent and abnormal fear or dislike of Islam.

 

It shares and reflects the exasperation its readers feel about intolerance, violence and threats.

 

Secondly, I assume your reference to anti-semitism refers to the Jewish community.

 

A good contrast.

 

The UK's Jewish community:

 

Practise their beliefs and faith without adverse effects on others

Accept and are accepted as different in their beliefs and lifestyle

Do not seek to impose their will on those of other races and beliefs

Do not regard believers of other faiths as inferior or sub-human

Do not embark on disfigurement or murder in the name of honour

Do not ignore our laws on sexual equality and bigamy

Respect the laws of this country

Have not allowed their youth to radicalise and murder 50+ innocents in London

 

patriot

on August 16, 2009

at 02:31 PM

Report this commentWhile I agree with Susan's views I must point out that she makes the same erroneous claim that my fellow American do. Western Society was founded on the ideas of the Enlightenment not Christianity - which like Islam does not teach equality of women, and has several of the same ideas found in Islam like no property rights, or right to divorce or custody of their own children.

-------------------------------

 

"Mostly, British citizens believe in God. This is not some Christian right wing political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. There is only one Law we live by and If God or Christianity or UK Laws offends you, then consider another part of the world as your new home, because God and the Law of our land is part of our culture."

joy

on August 16, 2009

at 02:13 PM

Report this commentSusan

August 16th 2009

1.02pm

 

Thanks Susan, a very well put argument, BUT it is flawed in just one way, Here in most of the towns of the north west, in places like supermarkets etc; all you hear around you is a foreign language and certainly NOT ENGLISH.

Davetherave

on August 16, 2009

at 02:08 PM

Report this commentI think Philip is confused. Islamophobia is fear of islam. Not a single telegraph writer has expressed this. Apprehension? Yes. Scepticism? Yes. Disbelief? Yes. Some sensible disapproval? Without doubt. Annoyance at what seems like Government and others' appeasement? Certainly. But "fear"? No.

On the contrary, it's muslims that are fearful. Fearful that we may be less blindly compliant and slavishly obedient to their unconvincing creed than they are. Fearful that the west, to which they flock, really may have more to offer than the islamic societies they've hastened from. Scared stiff that our tradition of critical thinking and objective enquiry may unanswerably debunk many of islam's central claims and core assertions (which is what is happening). Trembling at the knees that we might actually expect them to breach their own code of self-segregation, and integrate. And having nightmares at the prospect of muslims exercising our freedoms of conscience to become something else - as many do.

Not quite sure what's meant by a shortage of anti-Semitism. Unless he's got in mind the dastardly Mossad/CIA/M16 plot to silence dastardly bloggers like me from saying much against Semites .. also Buddhists, Hindus, Rastafarians, Wiccans, and Salvation Army bandsmen and women so militantly determined to take over the world on the strength of a dubious creed that prohibits open debate about its questionable self.

sebastian

on August 16, 2009

at 02:08 PM

Report this commentAll this political correctness and being subserveant to muslims,and other eastern beliefs were brought upon our nation,not ina belief of equality or respect for others.But in the votes at any price for new labour and their greed and lust for power,and sanctioned by their misled followers.As the bible states as you sow so shall you reap,and their is now a wild wind gathering.

owen

on August 16, 2009

at 02:01 PM

Report this commentSusan

on August 16, 2009

at 01:02 PM

 

Your xenophobic essay on religious and racial bigotry is predicated on the "fact" that we Britons are Christian believers.

 

Oh, how I laughed. And laughed. Is this "Britain" you inhabit a kind of Twilight Zone or parallel Britain? It's certainly not the majority-atheist Britain I live in - you know, the one where empty churches are becoming car park and supermarkets and Godley used to be part of 10cc.

 

Yours is a very, very sad post, Susan, full of imagined nightmares and non-existent anxieties. Even in the years BC, the British Isles have hosted foreigners and odd religions. We're not that different now, except we pay them less attention.

Darkseid

on August 16, 2009

at 02:01 PM

Report this commentBilal Patel, ISLAM IS NOT A RACE!!! Therefore to criticise or even insult it is NOT racism. Please get your facts right before launching into criticism yourself.

M.Robinson

on August 16, 2009

at 02:01 PM

Report this commentActually, John Blackley, a wedding is a public ceremony; anyone may attend. At my daughter's wedding a large group of friends, whom we had been unable to invite because of limited numbers at the reception, stood at the back of the church throughout and were most welcome.

 

Ordinary people in this country really need, urgently, to find out just what Islam is all about. If enough people did this and started fighting against it, we might just be in time to save this country. If not, forget it, here comes sharia!

M.Robinson

on August 16, 2009

at 02:01 PM

Report this commentBilal Patel

on August 16, 2009

at 12:25 AM

 

Once upon a time there was a country that over hundreds upon hundreds of years of infighting, invasion and more fighting, it eventually created laws, bills of rights and a society where integrity, liberty, honesty and freedom were the key foundations. We had a land where people around the world respected it greatly, knowing that regardless what your crime, you would always be given a fair trial. This land was the creator of what is known as the Western Civilisation and people knew that not only was the aforementioned a certainty, but also it was renowned for having the greatest establishments in many fields, continually being bettered in order to create a better world.

Sadly though, upon creating such a safe environment, people became weak because there was no threat from outside thanks to the many brave men and women who would lay down their lives so they could sleep safe at night. They decided to challenge hundreds of years of wisdom, to cast aside teachings known to work and better still had created the safest and fairest civilisation the world has ever known. We saw a huge swing from right wing political and logical thought to left wing moronity. With the let wing moronity it of course brought socialism and with socialism we saw the creation of Communism, Fascism and Nazism, all the creation of the left, but through years of propaganda our society has been brainwashed and indoctrinated into believing that Fascism and Nazism are right wing.

Around WW2 our socialists were infiltrated by Marxists and Trotskyists. They set about their destruction of Western Civilisation. They realised that a great way of doing this was to flood the lands with a huge mixture of incompatible cultures and one of those cultures was Islam. Islam is nothing more than a political ideology. Over time it has managed to fool many people with it being a religion/cult, when all it sadly is is the construct of a 7th Century Warlord, who sought to dominate the globe, oppress, torture, rape and kill anyone who would not submit to his wishes on how people should live.

 

Islam is not a race.

 

To go back, I will also say that before the huge cultural colonisation began in the West, here in the UK, a fair trial meant a logical trial. A fair debate meant a logical debate, but sadly, another creation of Marxism (Trotskyism to be precise) was the creation of the word racist. This word was brought in for one purpose and that was to attack another person of a different viewpoint to your own. One would call that person a bigot, yet who is the bigger bigot, the bigot or the bigot who calls him a bigot? We can no longer have intelligent debate because of the cult of "not offending." Ironically though liberty is the right to offend and when you remove Freedom of Speech you destroy liberty = oppression, something all Islamic countries share.

 

Multiculturalism is doomed to failure. It always has in the past and always will. Islam is in the UK for one purpose and that is colonisation and to take over another land (out of the many it's already taken over time) under the banner of the crescent moon.

 

You speak of Fitzpatrick showing disgraceful conduct? Really? Might I remind you that Islam is merely a guest in a foreign land that is continuously promoting its own culture at the expense of the host? Do you truly think that fair? Would I be allowed to go to an Islamic land with all my friends, the women dress however they pleased and we could all crack open champagne and get intoxicated with alcohol?

What I fin deplorable about your reply is that you decide that any attack on Islam, when it is not in an Islamic land to be racism and xenophobism, yet you forget that almost none of our western cultures would be tolerated whatsoever in Islamic lands. This is what I mean in that Islam takes and does not give when in a non Muslim land.

 

Were I in a Muslim land, I would not go to a wedding and roast a pig while consuming alcohol, along with the women I was with wearing clothes that showed much of their flesh. I would respect Islamic culture. I would also have no choice. However here in the UK, Islam does not respect our culture as segregation of women, the forcing of others to wear the Burkha is classed as oppression and misogyny. We do not deal with that in our libertarian western beliefs, but many have no choice to oppose this despicable Islamic oppression of women thanks to liberal-left-cultural-and-moral-relativism.

 

It is high time the people like you woke up in society to realise that the Western Civilisation is incompatible with Islamic beliefs and at this precise moment as I speak both ideologies are on the same track, traveling at high speeds towards one another. When in Rome live as the Romans do and Islam, regardless of where it goes, as it grows never honours that belief. On the contrary it is and always has done the exact opposite.

 

 

Harbinger

on August 16, 2009

at 01:45 PM

Report this commentHow can anyone with half a brain in their head worship a religion concocted by a crackpot child molester?Islamic opressors use an already hardline religion to justify their repression; much as christianity did in years gone by.But there's a difference: most christian countries embraced democracy and moderated their understanding of the bible; muslim leaders use the Koran to justify acts of unbelievable barbarity, drifting into the territory of the pure evil.

The Ranting Nat

on August 16, 2009

at 01:43 PM

Report this commentSwatantra, my patience is doing fine. Except when it comes to jumped up little socialists. Speak for yourself pal.

 

Darkseid, hear hear on most of what you said except for 'there are muslim atheists and muslims who follow other religions'. Not hardly, any more than there are christian atheists.

pewkatchoo

on August 16, 2009

at 01:43 PM

Report this commentI'm with Susan. post 01:02 PM. 100%.

EX-BRAT

on August 16, 2009

at 01:43 PM

Report this comment"It shows a lack of interest to engage with people of different backgrounds." Does Mr. Sacranie suppose that everyone in Western society is ignorant of the fact that Islam teaches its adherents NOT to associate, let alone be friends with, people who are not Muslims? I'd call that the ultimate lack of interest etc.etc. If,(let's hope it's not when) Islam achieves its goal of a worldwide caliphate, those who grovel and toady to it now will finally have their blinkers removed, but by then it will be too late.

M.Robinson

on August 16, 2009

at 01:43 PM

Report this commentOh come on. Fitzpatrick is a clown. He walked out of a couple's wedding knowing full well that it would raise a stink. I don't like segregation and I think that Islam is one of the worst culprits in this area. But it is by no means the only one. Judaism is almost as bad while the RC church is not exactly cutting-edge on the idea of female equality. All religions need to take a good look at themselves in this regard. Better still, they should all come to the conclusion that they are all talking a load of nonsense and start disbanding.

 

However, this was still a young couple's wedding and this clown has turned it into a political circus. Nice one Fitzpatrick, remind me not to invite you to any of MY parties. There are more appropriate times to make a statement.

pewkatchoo

on August 16, 2009

at 01:43 PM

Report this commentIMMIGRANTS - NOT BRITAIN - MUST ADAPT. Take It - Or Leave It.

I am tired of reading about this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture.. Since the terrorist attacks, we have experienced a surge in deep patriotism by the majority of Christians in England.

 

This culture has been developed over many centuries of wars, struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought peaceful means and even died for its freedoms.

 

We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Hindi/Urdu, Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language.

 

Therefore, if anyone wishes to become part of our British society . Learn and write the language!

 

Mostly, British citizens believe in God. This is not some Christian right wing political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. There is only one Law we live by and If God or Christianity or UK Laws offends you, then consider another part of the world as your new home, because God and the Law of our land is part of our culture.

 

We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us and don't try and change our established life-style.

 

This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFE-STYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, take advantage of one other great British freedom, 'THE RIGHT TO LEAVE'. If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted.

 

Apparantly what Rudd suggested the Brit's should consider.

Susan

on August 16, 2009

at 01:02 PM

Report this commentThere must have been scores, possibly hundreds of Islamophobic articles published by The Telegraph over the past 18 months alone and yet I have not seen one anti-Semitic one. This state does not reflect the attitude of British people I meet. I wonder why this is?

Philip

on August 16, 2009

at 12:50 PM

Report this commentWe Must Not!

Bob Hall

on August 16, 2009

at 12:45 PM

Report this commentDarkseid: "There are Muslim atheists and muslims who follow other religions, too."

I.......don't....think......so. You really need to read more.

 

sebastian

on August 16, 2009

at 12:45 PM

Report this commentD.reamon

on August 15, 2009

at 10:36 PM

 

You forgot the communal swim at Croydon pool.

 

mike mines

on August 16, 2009

at 12:45 PM

Report this comment"It reflects badly on him," said Sir Iqbal Sacranie, the former head of the Muslim Council of Britain. "It shows a lack of interest� to engage with people of different backgrounds."

 

Well, here are a few of my "cultural insensitivities" :

 

I don't believe that

 

-a womans testimony is half that of a man.

 

-a non muslims testimony is half that of a muslim

 

-that theft should be punished by amputation.

 

-that arab/african/asian people who reject Islam and convert to other religions or none, should be punished by death for their apostasy.Disgusting. These people have the right to live freely as anyone else

 

-that adulterers should be stoned.

 

The above list of backward and degrading viewpoints are totally alien to Britain and have no place, ever, in Great Britain.

 

I make no apologies for holding these "culturally insensitive" views or for my "lack of interest" in "engaging" with people who hold these views.

Always British never European.

on August 16, 2009

at 12:45 PM

Report this commentThank you abc for spelling so much of this out. Very necessary and entirely authentic. As for politicians keeping us in the dark - this will become harder to do as interest in islam - based on attention it attracts to itself - leads to the perhaps unintended consequences of informed disapproval and educated dislike of this otherwise narcissistic cult, so intolerant of criticism. (The OIC's [Organization of the Islamic Conference] attitude to Darfur in particular and "religious defamation" in general, is telling): http://www.iheu.org/node/2546

We have to stop pussyfooting around with this mendacious creed and start seeing it for what it is.

sebastian

on August 16, 2009

at 12:45 PM

Report this commentDarkseid

on August 16, 2009

at 09:45 AM

 

You need to grow a pair mate. Either that or roll over and take your 40 lashes.

Toby Morgan

on August 16, 2009

at 12:19 PM

Report this commentNoble lord, ABC, Sarah and Sebastian, now come, COME, lets not get to blows over this debate, Don't start behaving like the people we are discussing!.

Davetherave

on August 16, 2009

at 12:09 PM

Report this commentD.reamon

on August 15, 2009

at 10:36 PM

 

Priceless. Dark, but priceless all the same. (Ooops - am I allowed to say 'dark')?

Toby Morgan

on August 16, 2009

at 11:54 AM

Report this commentone day the Telegraph will look back and have to justify this wicked racism it continually portrays as 'criticism' of Islam.

 

Bilal Patel on August 16, 2009 at 12:25 AM

 

 

This sounds very much like a threat to me.

 

It sounds like the Muslim community (Islam is a religion not a race by the way, you dummy) intends to keep itself isolated, whine every time it perceives an offence and eventually attempt to impose its laws and values on the rest of us.

 

Not a chance.

 

The majority have to justify nothing to you or any other group.

 

Asinine comments like this do nothing to modify the views of most of us about this 'tolerant' religion and the intentions of its adherents.

 

If you don't like the ways of this country, you will find Heathrow at the end of the Piccadilly line.

 

patriot

on August 16, 2009

at 11:48 AM

Report this commentFOR WHAT IT'S WORTH:

 

abc

on August 16, 2009

at 10:46 AM

 

ABC SAID:

 

"Noble Lord: Christianity is no relation to Islam; spout your taqiyya and kitman elsewhere:"

 

I SAID Christianity and Islam are brothers in faith and as a lover of Jesus/Yesua the Christ, i stand by that. Of course all is down to interpretation, as i do not follow "Corporate Christianity" i believe in Jesus/Yesua the Christ....privat matter.

 

ABC SAID THIS:

 

"John 8: 1-11 "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her...and Jesus lifted up Himself, and said unto her, "Woman, where are they? Did no man condemn thee? And she said, "No man, Lord". And Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn thee: go thy way; from henceforth, sin no more."

 

I understand the context of this revelation and it is, as you have put it out of context, not that you would know, or perhaps you do.

 

ABC SAID THIS:

 

"Ibn Ishaq (Sira, biography of Mohamed, part of Islam's 'holy texts' along with Koran and aHadith) p 970: as part of Mohamad's final address on his final 'pilgrimage' to Mecca: 'Mohamad said, "the adulterer must be stoned";"

 

IN WHAT CONTEXT WAS THIS SAID?

 

I'll help you shall i?

 

Was she not only an adulterer?

 

Was she responsible for someone's death?

 

Was there a life and death situation whereby such a decision had to be made?

 

ALL IS RELEVANT HERE.

 

There is capital punishment in the USA and many women have been executed, you do know this don't you?

 

Muhammed is a prophet, no?

 

Let's face it, i'm inclined to think, you may think bombing Iran is a good and noble idea no?

 

Perhaps you think the Rober Oppenheimer Atom bomb dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima were necessary objectives, even though Japan had surrendered and were merely asking for their Emperor Hirohito to remain Emperor, to which the dog being wagged by the tail said NO! Then they dropped the bomb and got them some real live guinnea pigs.

 

Hmmm let's not mention the Manhattan project and the SEVENTH DAY ADVENTICE CHRISTIANS,THE JEWISH BOMB KILLED....TESTIN TESTIN ONE TWO BOOOOOOOM!

 

 

 

 

 

Noble Lord

on August 16, 2009

at 11:39 AM

Report this commentTo Darkseid: the dark side of Islam is Mohamad and his example is followed in Moslem countries today (and in Britain and throughout the West) with regard to his instructions for Female Genital Mutilation of females (140 million females according to World Health Organisation) and of his 'marriage' to 6 year old Aisha and the 'consummation' when she was 9 and he was 54. Interestingly, whenever there are attempts to change existing laws in Moslem countries re child brides, Moslems always refer to these aHadith:

 

"According to Aisha, The Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old"

Bukhari 7:62:64 and 7:62:65

 

"According to Ursa ibn al-Zubayr, The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old"

Bukhari 7:62:88

 

"According to Aisha,

My mother came to me while I was being swung on a swing between two branches and got me down. My nurse took over and wiped my face with some water and started leading me. When I was at the door she stopped so I could catch my breath. I was brought in while Muhammad was sitting on a bed in our house. My mother made me sit on his lap. The other men and women got up and left. The Prophet consummated his marriage with me in my house when I was nine years old. Neither a camel nor a sheep was slaughtered on behalf of me"

al_Tabari, 9:131

 

British people, despite claims that the entire nation is debauched (as re earlier comments on this thread), are appalled and disgusted at sexual abuse of children. The very first act of the Ayatollahs, after taking power in Iran, was to change the laws to permit child marriage. This is the case throughout Islamic countries. Why would anyone imagine that Moslems would not observe the same practice elsewhere, especially in recognition of Muhammad's example as "an exalted standard of character" (Koran 68:4) and "an excellent model of conduct" (Koran 33:21).

 

Is this what another commenter had in mind when he/she stated that Britain might find Islam the 'lesser of two evils'? Surely not, if this person but knew the facts.

 

And then there's the 600-700 men and boys of a defeated tribe whom Muhammad is recorded as personally beheading, as they were brought before him in batches before the trenches that served as their graves (Ibn Ishaq p 468-469).

 

How the politicians and journalists of Britain must hate the British to inflict this upon a public who have been deliberately kept in ignorance.

abc

on August 16, 2009

at 11:38 AM

Report this commentJulia,

 

You said:

 

Have us Brits forgotten the past tradition of men retiring after dinner to enjoy a port or six- women strictly excluded?

 

The strict form of Islam that practices gender segregation is not about smoking your pipe with your male buddies once you've had dinner. Neither is it about toilets for men and women and other spurious nonsense, as others have suggested.

 

Forms of Islam which expect gender segregation segregate by gender in virtually every aspect of life to the point where it is not becoming for a woman to be seen in the presence of a non mahram (related or betrothed) male. It is nothing in the slightest like smoking a pipe or having a men's club, and not at all as benign.

 

Apologise for this at your peril. Many Muslim weddings are not segregated, and you don't want to encourage the form of Islam that mandates it. Saudi Arabia is an example of what you end up with when it's practiced widely. If it takes root here, you'll have extremely isolated communities because people will not be interacting with each other.

 

Google Mahram for how broad the concept of gender segregation in Islam can get. Smoking pipes after dinner it aint.

Sarah

on August 16, 2009

at 11:38 AM

Report this commentHas Julia (10:34) never heard that port is haram, as is mixed dining except between close family members? Not much of a comparison there, Julia. And Rob Dewar has clearly never lived in an islamic state under sharia law and all that flows from that. The Turks once did; now they don't. The muslim Ottoman Empire shrunk to nothing and finally became secular. Now they want to join Europe. So much for the triumph and the benefits of islam. There's nothing so bad in Britain that can't be corrected by the restoration of some of our own traditional values. For those we need to go back a short time only - certainly not as far as medieval Arabia. Failing that, Rob, you could always retire in peace and tranquility to the wonderfully ordered, moral and enlightened Swat valley where you'd be islamically relieved of the painful right to be so boldly outspoken.

sebastian

on August 16, 2009

at 11:32 AM

Report this commentFOR WHAT IT'S WORTH:

 

I would like to apologise to the TELEGRAPH MODERATORS, for assuming they had not published this post;

 

Noble Lord

on August 16, 2009

at 09:49 AM

 

I commend them for being brave and honest in a time, whereby 27 milles across the Channel such truths are deemed an offence and many truth tellers have been jailed for their opinions, which are often backed up by THE FACTS!

 

We have evolved enough to know that some truths will upset those who would rather profit from those truths being hidden.

 

It is refreshing to know that the Telegraph are, as of yet, free to publish critical debate without fear or favour.

 

Thank you.

Noble Lord

on August 16, 2009

at 11:32 AM

Report this comment'Note to Bilal.

Islam is not a race, it is a religion

Tony Nicholls

on August 16, 2009'

 

Sorry, Tony.

islam is a dogmatic, political ideolgy. Not a religion.

Paul in free France

on August 16, 2009

at 10:51 AM

Report this commentWhat is all the fuss about? This is an Islamic Country now with Sharia law,if you British folk dont like it go to Dubai,they celebrate Christmas and you can buy as many Christmas trees and decorations you like,you can moan all you like but its not going to change,you must admit that its all a bit ironic,TWO HUNDRED AND ONE BRAVE YOUNG SOLDIERS have died abroad,and what do the Politicians do here?just let the enemy walk straight through the front door without any checks,and most of you lot out there cant wait to vote Dave in who will perpetuate the problem,there is only one party who will change this Immigration farce and we all know who they are.

Lord Barnett

on August 16, 2009

at 10:51 AM

Report this commentFOR WHAT IT'S WORTH:

 

At the risk of having yet another post unpublished for speaking the truth, i a believer in Jesus/Yesua the Christ shall endeavour to enlighten.

 

Kathleen West

on August 16, 2009

at 08:09 AM

 

KATHLEEN WEST SAID:

 

"It is obvious that the England where I was born and grew up no longer exists. I thought that when we saw what appeasement brought in 1939 we would have learned our lesson "

 

TYPICAL!!!

 

In an age where all truth is revealed and the internet gives all the opportunity to research and scrutinise, what has been told to us as fact, she insists on parrotting the narrative given!

 

The England where you were brought up Missy, didn't exist. You did of course and your teachers gave you a propaganised version of history, neatly airbrushed of the critical facts, but today Missy, you can look it up for yourself, no funny hand shake, no need for membership of some con organisation, just sit comfortably in your own littoow bedroom.

 

It was Churchill, the Zionist and documented Gasser of Arabs, who started WWII, not Hitler. Fact!

 

It was Churchill, the Zionist hard drinker, who decided that bombing of civillians is a good idea, not Hitler. Fact!

 

I personally never trust computerised voting systems, as the programmes are often owned by some cabal somewhere in the middle east, posing as a democracy, even though the racist laws aren't hidden.

 

All that to say this, it is ironic, maybe not, that Britains greatest Britain, voted by the Sheeple, some say Cattle, some say Goyim, was the man with Jewish roots, er er Churchill!

 

Nothing but the FACTS will do here, i'm sure you agree, so let's not have any Ad Hominem attacks, accusations of be an AS, or lover of any idividual past or present...Oh and i'm not a member or any far whatever group ok.

 

I didn't make the past, i just happen to understand the value of the internet library.

 

Come away from your Zionist programme for a bit, you may find the truth, at first tastes a bit funny, but hey, all your life you've had one version of events from the winners of WWI &WWII THE BANKSTERS!

 

 

Noble Lord

on August 16, 2009

at 10:51 AM

Report this commentNoble Lord: Christianity is no relation to Islam; spout your taqiyya and kitman elsewhere:

 

John 8: 1-11 "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her...and Jesus lifted up Himself, and said unto her, "Woman, where are they? Did no man condemn thee? And she said, "No man, Lord". And Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn thee: go thy way; from henceforth, sin no more."

 

Ibn Ishaq (Sira, biography of Mohamed, part of Islam's 'holy texts' along with Koran and aHadith) p 970: as part of Mohamad's final address on his final 'pilgrimage' to Mecca: 'Mohamad said, "the adulterer must be stoned";

Hadith Bukhari 6:60:79: Mohamad orders adulteress stoned; Hadith Muslim 17: 4196 and 4206 and 4209: a pregnant woman, confessing to adultery, is told by Mohamad to wait until she gives birth, has weaned the baby, and then Mohamad orders her to be stoned to death. Stoning to death, for adultery (that includes being unable, as a raped victim, to provide the four MALE witnesses required under Sharia to prove rape, so the raped woman is 'guilty' of sex outside of marriage) as well as for apostasy from Islam and murder (only of another Moslem) are the three grounds under existing Sharia law for stoning to death.

 

If this newspaper were willing to print, on its pages, instead of relying on its internet readers' comments pages, the FACTS about Islam and Mohamad, we would not be in our present dangerous state, either as a nation or as part of Western civilisation under attack. If you think this reference to stoning is emotional nonsense, I refer you to Tariq Ramadan, grandson of founder of Muslim Brotherhood, and spokesman for "a European Islam" who, when questioned specifically about stoning, remarked that it should have a 'moratorium' for the 'time being.' He means, until Moslem numbers are sufficient as a voting bloc to put Sharia law, intended for all peoples, in place as the law of the land.

abc

on August 16, 2009

at 10:46 AM

Report this commentPeople have been warning us of the dangers of adopting Islamic culture and no one listens. Out comes the oh so common liberal-left slur of racist, a conversation and debate killer, by those who decry fascism not realising they themselves are. As people on here have already pointed out that after 12 years of socialism heavily diluted with Marxism, we find ourselves in a situation where it is a crime to be indigenous British and any personal criticisms we may have on alien cultures, we find ourselves sullied and lambasted at every given opportunity. The cult of 'not offending' has now led to the banning of personal opinion and views.

 

To understand Islam, one has to know Islam and I'm not talking about 'riding on a train to Marakesh'. One has to read about Islam, not just the Koran but the Hadith and even better, the history of Islam from the 7th Century onwards. One has to know how it decimated many countries, imported millions of slaves, been the cause of the destruction of many cultures and work of beauty so as not to offend misogynistic Islam.

Our media remains ignorant as they sit in their liberal-left-multicultural-moral-and-cultural-relative-love-bubble. They praise cultural diversity when they see Muslim women in the police force given Islamic head dress with police insignia. They praise the secular Britain, not realising that the only religion that's growing at an exponential rate is Islam. They are simply unable to realise that here in the UK regarding Islam it's a case of give and take - we give and Islam takes. Our media and liberal elite are jubilant that as our culture diminishes, Islam's grows. They are simply unable to realise that Islam would never give non Islamic peoples the same in their lands as we do here. They are simply oblivious to the fact that churches are not allowed to built in Muslim lands along with any non Muslim faith to be openly worshiped.

 

What we have in the UK regarding our politicians and Islam is a very grave situation indeed. It can only be compared to a school hiring a teacher (politician) to teach history who has never read a history book in their lives and is simply 'winging' it. Therefore they're casting aside hundreds of years of wisdom and understanding because they think they know better.

 

If you let a wolf into the sheep pen then you've got a huge problem on your hands. We've gone a step further - we've removed the pen.

Harbinger

on August 16, 2009

at 10:45 AM

Report this commentMulticulturalism is flawed because of Islam and by the way, most people DO hate Islam - even if they're scared to say so. It's not a race - it's a political agenda and does not seek to live side by side with non-Muslims in peaceful co-existence, rather it seeks to dominate and eliminate them over time by peaceful jihad or by other means.

 

Anyone saying this is usually called a "racist" but in what way is it a matter of race? No more than Communism was a race.

 

Those pathetic liberals in Britain are falling over themselves to tolerate this political agenda because of one major defect:

 

their arrogance.

 

They are so utterly convinced of their own superiority over everyone else on the planet, so sure that their dogma of multiculturalism is so inherently superior to every other model of social order on the planet that they think Muslims will immigrate here from the Islamic world and because their multicultural system is so superior that they will just be simply won over by it within 12 months at the most, and will forget their intolerant ways.

 

History begs to differ on that one. Islam does exist in contented equilibrium when it is the minority.

 

Nigel Reid

on August 16, 2009

at 10:39 AM

Report this commentI'm not convinced Britain does still rule the waves, you know. What? Stop stoning me! It's not blasphemy! Yes, I know it's written in the anthem, just like other gruesome verses that we don't blindly follow - just like nasty exhortations to violence in the Christians' Wholly Bubble or the Koran.

 

Stop quoting passages on the false premise that all Muslims must either believe it or blindly follow it. They don't. There are Muslim atheists and muslims who follow other religions, too.

 

Let's not forget that fundamentalism isn't the wholly-owned province of Islam, either. Ultra-orthodox Jews, Greeks, Christians and even Buddhists exist. It's part of being human that a small number of us are wired-up to be obsessive, and that occurs in every corner of the globe.

 

If this planet finally grew up and became civilised, by that I mean stops believing there must be gods because we humans are so damned inadequate, would Muslims suddenly become really great blokes and women despite their spicey diets and non-office clothing?

 

A long time ago, our Government decided on multiculturalism, while the French chose integrationism. Boy, did the French get it so right and we got so, so wrong.

Darkseid

on August 16, 2009

at 10:39 AM

Report this commentHave us Brits forgotten the past tradition of men retiring after dinner to enjoy a port or six- women strictly excluded?

Julia

on August 16, 2009

at 10:34 AM

Report this commentIf the event had been segregated by race, you'd find few people apologizing for it. But segregate by gender, and all of sudden we need to bend over backwards to be tolerant.

 

It seems that some forms of apartheid are more acceptable than others.

Sarah

on August 16, 2009

at 10:21 AM

Report this commentPeriodically I read references in articles such as this, and in the posts which follow, to a "British culture". Pray, what culture is that? I see no evidence of a national culture in Britain, unless it be that of a scummy, overcrowded, drugged-up, drunken, pagan, criminal corner of one of the USA's most squalid urban nightmares.

 

In Britain, and particularly in England, our children are no longer taught any history; they have no knowledge of national myth and legend; there are no longer any folk-songs surviving, nor sustaining folk myths; there is neither a national dress, nor the survival of ancient folk customs.

When was the last time you saw happy peasants dancing around the maypole, to cheerful folk music played on ancient folk instruments?

 

In order to find evidence of national cultures, one must travel to Europe, to almost any other part of the world in fact; outside of some sentimentalised maudlin remnants in Scotland, and perhaps in Wales, there is no national culture in Britain.

 

Like a Vichy Frenchman during the last War, I am inclined to see that we are faced by a greater and a lesser evil. In our case, perhaps the imposition over time of Islam and sharia would in fact be preferable to the complete negation of morality, decency and righteousness across all levels of society which now prevails in Britain.

Our women dress and behave like whores; our little girls dress and behave like grown women; our children know neither God nor fear of any other authority.

 

We are a nation in complete collapse, seeking in vain for moral leadership from the national church; we appear to be incapable of saving ourselves, for so low have we fallen as a People, that most Britons care little for anything which does not affect their immediate material circumstances. I am not afraid of Islam, which may yet prove to be the lesser of two evils.

Rob Dewar

on August 16, 2009

at 10:21 AM

Report this commentSurely what consenting adults do in private is their own business? However they cannot expect public approval from people who think very differently.

 

Ultra-Orthodox Jews also segregate the sexes at weddings, it is not just an UltraIslamist custom - probably deriving not from religion but from common tribal custom.

 

However in public matters, such as polygamy, legal rights, and property, the general law must prevail.

Independent

on August 16, 2009

at 10:10 AM

Report this commentSurely what consenting adults do in private is their own business? However they cannot expect public approval from people who think very differently.

 

Ultra-Orthodox Jews also segregate the sexes at weddings, it is not just an UltraIslamist custom - probably deriving not from religion but from common tribal custom.

 

However in public matters, such as polygamy, legal rights, and property, the general law must prevail.

Independent

on August 16, 2009

at 10:03 AM

Report this commentIf it is the custom at such weddings to have a male and a female party (and this pertains in some other cultures) then surely it will be made plain in invitations, particularly to those of other Faiths so that they are aware in advance of the nature of the event?

 

Neither those holding the happy event, nor those invited, were intolerant - this is a misunderstanding which has blown up into a brouhaha - not least because the MP in question must have an exaggerated sense of self-importance to imagine his presence or otherwise was endorsing anything.

 

If Fitzpatrick is concerned at *undesirable customs* he might give pause to remember that at least this was a wedding, with a religious element. Isn't that somewhat better than the circumstances into which a great many children are today being born in Britain - at best via secular civil ceremonies, but in hundreds of thousands of cases, without even wedlock let alone two attached, supporting parents?

 

160809-09:45

simon coulter

on August 16, 2009

at 09:57 AM

Report this commentI now live in fear of what will become of the country my children and grandchildren will inherit.

When are these weak, bleeding hearts going to open their eyes to what is happening to our once great country?

When are our spineless MPs going to open their eyes to the way they are being manipulated by minorities, and listen to the people of this country, who love this country and one day will have to fight and die to retain it, and it's culture?

No one hates Islam, just the effect it is having on destroying this country. The Quran instructs Muslims who follow the Quran.

What a pity the leaders of our country also seem determined to folow the Quran to get votes to retain power, and that means MPs of all the main parties, who quite frankly are GUTLESS, SPINELESS and TRAITORS!

Derek Jones

on August 16, 2009

at 09:57 AM

Report this commentI have been thinking about this situation a great deal and yet I am unclear about one thing: how did the press actually discover this incident?? If Mr.Fitzpatrick went to the wedding and upon discovery of segregation , shouted loudly, wave his arms and generally cause a scene, then this would be ill mannered and rude. HOWEVER, if he simply attended the event , discovering that it was to be segregated and then AS IS HIS RIGHT WITHIN SOCIETY felt that he would rather not attend and quietly left then what is the problem? How did this come to the attention of the press?

I find it very interesting that Mr. Fitzpatrick stated that he has attended many Muslim weddings and yet this is only the second one that has been segregated, leading one to believe that it is not a very common practice in the UK. If so, then perhaps the invitation to the wedding could have stated that according to strict Islamic views the wedding will be segregated ; thus those who did not want to attend could have declined at the RSVP stage.

The fact that this wasn't even thought to be an issue by the wedding party and their families increasingly comfirms to me that the majority non- muslim population is expected to not only accept other cultural practices that they find distasteful but are considered "racist" if they comment on it.

I seriously fear where this is all heading and I say this as a non Christian.

K.Chamberlain

on August 16, 2009

at 09:57 AM

Report this commentThe question surely is why do we bow to the intolerant ways of any or all the religions?

 

Why is Islamic intolerance any worse than Catholic, Anglican or Jewish intolerance and thus remarkable: I might add Green and Liberal Cause religions?

 

 

John

on August 16, 2009

at 09:50 AM

Report this commentFOR WHAT IT'S WORTH:

 

ALASTAIR PALMER SAID:

 

"All this because Mr Fitzpatrick did not want to imply that he endorsed sexual segregation by remaining at the party. Yet what can possibly be wrong with an MP, or anyone else, withdrawing from a celebration whose organisation suggests that women are not equal to men?"

 

This is the point where i stopped reading his post, albeit to marvel at the man's blatant stupidity!

 

Or is it stupidity, could he actually be paid to further push the envelope and dupe the those willing to be duped and rabble roused into a religious fight, whereby the party rabble roused isn't even religious, albeit may claim to be?

 

Let me simplify it for the quick fingered author of the piece. WE HAVE MALE TOILETS AND FEMALE TOILETS, THIS ARRANGEMENT, HOWEVER IS NOT A COMMENT ON SUPERIORITY OF THE SEXES!

 

WE WEAR BRIEFS AND WOMEN WEAR PANTIES, ER PERHAPS YOU DO TOO, BUT IN THE MAIN, PRACTICALITY ISN'T NECESSARILY A COMMENTARY ON SUPERIORITY OF THE SEXES!

 

WOMEN HAVE THE BIOLOGICAL "MECHANICS" TO HAVE BABIES,WHERE AS MEN CANNOT, DARN IT, THOSE SUPERIOR WOMEN MAKE ME SICK.....IS THAT HOW YOU FEEL?

 

Allow me to ask a better question, are you wearing a dress at present?

 

Ok ok, so i went back and read the rest of the nonsense to typed, only to find out that it was just an excuse to attack Islam.

 

Hmmm at no point in your article have you said you spoke to the local imam at such and such Mosque to get the facts verbatum, no just more hype and lack of understanding and to be quite honest intolerance towards Islam.

 

INTOLERANCE you may bark back, YEEEES, i reply and with that ask you a fair question, since you mention Sharia courts.

 

Can you cite an article YOU wrote being critical of the Jewish Beit Dein courts that have been operating in this country for years?

 

Can you cite an article YOU wrote,being critical of The Deputies Board of Jews, a PARLIAMENT operating in the UK?

 

Can you cite an article YOU wrote,being critical of the Jewish lobby group( Labour,Conservative, Lib Dem) friends for Israel?

 

Now tell me, if the UK had an Empire and whether Islamic teachings and customs were respected at the time, of the infamous thin red line and thier Henry rifles mowing down men, women and children?

 

Er did Clive of India insist that the RAJ respect the natives and speak their tongue and let by gones be by gones and welcome them to the UK shores?

 

Come to think of it, that thin red line was exported to Africa and although there isn't a thin red line in Spain, there is an enclave of approximately 1 million Non spanish speaking Brits living happily there, listening to Zionist jerk, John Gaunt radio and watching East Enders!

 

Ok ok, maybe there isn't quite 1 million, but who invited Muslims to the UK?

 

Do me a favour, stop rabble rousing and publish a dialogue you had with an imam at your local mosque over this issue!

 

Perhaps you haven't been finding anything to write about lately and your boss said, either you stir the pot and get paid, or leave the building!

 

Why not write a piece about how the Talmud preaches hatred of other faiths, approves of paedophillia and beastiality?

 

Why not explain to your readers what the "Kol Nidre" prayer of Yom Kippur/Day of atonement means to us, when we enter into an agreement with a person who follows the Talmud?

 

You see, Christianity and Islam are brothers in faith and the quirks of one culture may not agree with you, but then many cultures would not have their women collapsed in the street blind drunk, or having sex with any yoof with a pulse.

 

Maybe you should watch the women who have soooo much freedom in your perfect society on shows such as Maury, or Jerry Springer, or that shouty shouty jerk Jeremy Kile!

 

Tut tut tut, glass houses and stone throwing journo's

 

 

Noble Lord

on August 16, 2009

at 09:49 AM

Report this commentThe often-expressed idea that Muslims have a duty to invade by procreation is utterly absurd. You might as well suggest grey squirrels have a Secret High Command hell-bent on wiping out our native red squirrels.

 

A mother's advice to her daughter on her wedding night used to be: "Lie back and think of England," which is how the British held the largest empire the World has ever known.

 

That ugly face in the mirror is ours, guys.

Darkseid

on August 16, 2009

at 09:45 AM

Report this comment".....In the old days we would have described people like the Fitzpatricks as common, ill-educated, prissy, oikish guttersnipes......"

 

Rastus C. Tastey at 06:06 AM

 

 

 

In the 'old days' (and I'm old enough to remember them) this situation would not have occurred. No prizes for knowing why.

 

James

on August 16, 2009

at 09:42 AM

Report this commentI am getting increasingly angry at the way we in this country bend over backwards not to say anything nasty about Muslims and yet Muslims continually abuse our hospitality by trying to force their ways onto us. Many Muslims came to this country to get away from their own oppressive and backward regimes. The least they can do in our country is to try to assimilate themselves into our culture of freedom and tolerance and not try to force their culture of intolerance onto us.

Reg Tripp

on August 16, 2009

at 09:42 AM

Report this commentpeople think i am crazy when i say that one day the king of saudi arabia will rule from buckingham palace. every inch you give into muslims brings that day closer.

political correctness will silently bring britian to its knees and to defeat and destruction.

 

three cheers for the courage of anyone willing to stand up for western civilization no matter how flawed it is.

 

p. bloomberg

old man

glendale, ca

p. bloomberg

on August 16, 2009

at 09:42 AM

Report this commentI am getting sick and tired of people being accused of racism for standing up for British law and way of life.

 

In this country women have rights not to be treated like second class people, if this had happened in any other part of society there would be uproar and possible charges under discrimination laws.

 

It appears that some Muslims think they are exempt from British laws and that people in authority are to scared to do something about it, in case they are accused of being called racist.

 

If people are not prepared to live by societys rules or accept the British way of life they should leave now and go to a Muslim country that has their veiws like Saudi Arabia or Iran.

 

The indigenous population are getting sick of being told we must change our way of life to accommodate Islam, well its time they settled into our ways or left.

Kevin Wardle

on August 16, 2009

at 09:36 AM

Report this commentDARKNIGHT - 12.25am writes.....

The Khilafh is comming (Islamic super state) Now Now, Darknight

THIS VERY MUCH sounds like a "YOU WILL DO AS YOU ARE TOLD!" when it does!.

Davetherave

on August 16, 2009

at 09:36 AM

Report this commentIt would seem to me that Fitzpatrick's decision to make political capital out of a private family celebration simply reveals his profound ignorance and discourtesy. I'm sure it must have been possible for him to withdraw from this event quietly, without causing upset and embarrassment. That he did not do so would suggest that he was motivated by political opportunism.

 

As for the so-called principle involved, that segregation of the sexes implies the inequality of women, would he have refused to attend a Roman Catholic wedding ceremony because it could only be conducted by a male priest? I think not.

 

While I agree with some of the points raised in the article about the threats posed by fundamentalism and misguided multiculturalism in the public sphere, I believe it is important to respect private beliefs and customs unless there is an overwhelming public interest reason not to do so. I for one do not think that a theoretical affront to "women's rights" constitutes such a reason.

James Selby

on August 16, 2009

at 09:36 AM

Report this commentCatholics could be accused of believing women are inferior - they don't allow women to be priests. But noone talks about walking out of Cathholic weddings, or kicking them out of Britain.

 

Judge people by how they live, not by the occasional weird custom or tradition.

Eric Worrall

on August 16, 2009

at 09:36 AM

Report this commentTo: Denis MacEoin on Aug 16 06.10am: More facts about the Deobandi sect: The head of the Deobandi sect, Mohammad Usmani, was featured in a report in THE TIMES on Sept 8 2007 stating: "Our followers must remain peaceful (in Britain) until we are ready to fight Jihad." Usmani is on the board of the Dow Jones Islamic Index, was a former Sharia Judge in Pakistan. Link:

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/Article2409833.ece

 

and

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/Article2402973.ece

 

Sharia compliant finance is the main source of conduits for terrorist funding. Jihad, of course, can be "peaceful" (legal cases, demands for Sharia compliance as re swimming rules, halal foods only at schools, etc); the aim is the same as the violent form, to make a non-Islamic society amenable to Moslems and eventually for it to become Islamic.

 

As for why Moslems are in Britain and Europe: apart from the agreement between the EEC and OPEC states to permit unrestricted immigration of Moslems into Europe in return for unrestricted oil supplies, Moslems are obeying the Koran which requires them to 'emigrate' in order to spread Islam (Koran 8:74 Sura 8 is entitled "Booty"): "Those who believe, and emigrate, and fight for the Faith in the Cause of Allah" (in the Cause of Allah refers to Jihad as the tactic to 'bring them with with chains on their necks, till they embrace Islam" Bukhari 6:60:80)

abc

on August 16, 2009

at 08:11 AM

Report this commentReading the Daily Telegraph here in Canada each evening is a sobering experience. It is obvious that the England where I was born and grew up no longer exists. I thought that when we saw what appeasement brought in 1939 we would have learned our lesson - giving in to unreasonable demands only encourages further erosion of our national identity. The gradual takeover of your way of life will be slow, but inevitable unless the Government begins to actually govern, instead of appease. I am only thankful that the final collapse of England will not occur in my lifetime (I am a senior).

Kathleen West

on August 16, 2009

at 08:09 AM

Report this commentDon't we have segregated schools? I live in Hastings - we have two very large state schools - one for boys, one for girls!

 

Is that wrong? I think it is good. And why does segregation imply inferiority - a claim made in the first few paragraphs. Don't get it, can't see any evidence for the claim.

lawrence

on August 16, 2009

at 08:09 AM

Report this commentTony Nicholls

August 16th 2009

06.42am

 

Never mind Tony, it'll soon be Christmas (thats our Christmas)

Davetherave

on August 16, 2009

at 07:04 AM

Report this commentHow much did he claim on his expenses for attending the wedding ?

Man on Waterloo Bridge

on August 16, 2009

at 06:52 AM

Report this commentA very nice article. More such articles are needed!

 

We have basic problems due to intransigent actions of many Muslims and their fanatical supporters in all non-Muslim nations. Higher the percentages, more uncompromising attitudes, stands and actions!

 

When a guest comes uninvited to a house, has the host to invite, shelter and pander even to the most unreasonable demands of the guest?

 

Most of the Muslims, who have come to Britain, US and other European nations, have come for "better life". If they don�t like the laws, values, religion, cultures and traditions, why don't they just get out honorably?

 

Slowly British, US and some more nations will realize that there will be no ends to caving/buckling to the demands of some of the fanatical seventh century Muslim religious nutcases!

 

"segregating the sexes is a matter of personal choice"

 

Britain has it own laws and values. Those who don't agree with them don't deserve to be in Britain.

 

"wearing the niqab or the hijab � the Islamic garments that cover women from head to toe � implies that you think women are inferior."

 

These days putting women in "moving prisons" to keep them in proper place ie inferior status is not acceptable under secular progressive democracies. Why don't these people move to Muslim nations such as Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Bangladesh and others? We had enough of their endless madness in the name of religion.

 

These days niqab/hijab/burkha clad terrorists in many nations have become security threats. These terrorists have been indulging in reckless terrorist actions wearing burkhas. In some cases, terrorists escaped wearing burkhas too!

 

"someone who converts to another religion should be executed"

 

Before seventh century there was no Islam. If others had applied the same rule as they are doing these days, then there would have been no Muslims.

 

Bottom line: Muslims must understand that there are not many one-way streets. When people get fed up, even two-way streets end up as one-way streets.

Regards,

Krishna. R. Kumar

on August 16, 2009

at 06:49 AM

Report this commentIslam is to the 21st century what socialism was to the 20th. Unacceptable and a blight on civilisation.

 

We must face up to it before it is too late.

Greg Russell

on August 16, 2009

at 06:49 AM

Report this comment� This is an outrageous Muslim-bashing article, and one day the Telegraph will look back and have to justify this wicked racism it continually portrays as 'criticism' of Islam. Palmer is playing, and intensifying, the race card which Fitzgerald is also playing and I can't believe that such an outrageous piece of xenophobic nonsense is parading itself as a legitimate article in a national newspaper.

 

Bilal Patel on August 16, 2009 at 12:25 AM

 

Note to Bilal.

Islam is not a race, it is a religion. This article is therefore not racist.

Fitzgerald and Palmer are not �playing the race card.�

You are.

 

Also, the reason this is a story is because the MCB made it one. The Minister did not announce his walkout, they did. If anyone needs to explain their behaviour, for this and other reasons, it is them.

Also are you the same Bilal Patel who after the Boxing Day Tsunami, objected to relief and direct aid being provided by non Muslims on a BBC forum?

 

Tony Nicholls

on August 16, 2009

at 06:42 AM

Report this commentI have to agree with what one commenter mentioned...go to a Muslim country and try and push your religious/social views on them and see how far you get. Why is it only the soppy leftists in the West that think they should fall all over themselves denigrating their own culture and religion?

 

And to Chris Williams-My goodness-well said!

Colleen

on August 16, 2009

at 06:34 AM

Report this commentYou must submit because you cannot defend yourselves.

jt

on August 16, 2009

at 06:32 AM

Report this comment@ Tam Earl-Aine, Aug. 15, 7.56pm:-

 

" Rob Dewar, obviously you've never had an equal relationship with a woman."

 

What a load of arrogant bo**ocks you write! What presumptuous tripe! You know nothing at all about me, and the very happy, absolutely equal relationship I had with my deceased partner.

I have rarely read a more utterly ignorant piece of nonense than this outrageous post of your's. Except perhaps the original article, which - I repeat - highlights the MP's ignorance of Muslim customs which most insular pig-ignorant Englishmen suffer from today.

Rob Dewar

on August 16, 2009

at 06:32 AM

Report this commentTo Bilal Patel:

Take a sedative Mr Patel and go and rest. You exaggerate: always a sign of an overwrought disposition.

There's nothing "muslim bashing" about any of this and far, far less than the "jew bashing" and "infidel bashing" in the qur'an and other core muslim texts. A benchmark variety of "bash" you might keep in mind please.

Some complain, though, that the MP shouldn't accept such an invitation then impolitely remove himself from circumstances that might've been reasonably anticipated. Maybe. But, either way, I think he could've reasonably been permitted to sit with his highly educated wife. Perhaps that was the issue. Or perhaps the issue was one of political hijacking. Would the MP and wife have been invited if they were mere constituents? Or was it their status that was important? And who was the family? Who was the bride? Was she local or imported? A first cousin, perhaps? Was the marriage arranged? Had the bride truly consented? If we're pressed to "understand" muslim customs in this, let's have the whole lot out in the open.

The Fitzpatricks were "intolerant", some seem to be arguing. Let's test the tolerance, then, of muslims offended by Mr and Mrs Fitzpatrick's intolerant walk-out; muslims slighted by this disrespect to their matrimonial sharia code. Anyone out there about to marry in Church? Invite a muslim family: both to the integrated wedding and to the integrated reception after. Then post your blog.

sebastian

on August 16, 2009

at 06:25 AM

Report this commentI am so sick of this 'resepct for other cultures' mantra whoever propagates it. Quite frankly, in many instances you can swap the word culture for medieval dogma designed to excuse all the worst excesses of political and religious control through the ages designed to keep populations compliant and subservient.

Phillip Layton

on August 16, 2009

at 06:25 AM

Report this commentOk, let's say that you're Muslim, and invited to a Christian wedding where the main course is pork, wine is served with every course, and there's dancing. Would you suffer through it, or leave?

 

Stop pretending, you'd leave. This guy didn't know what he was in for, and when he saw, he left...Ok, he is a politician, so he made more waves than any other guy, but yes, this wedding was about the bride and the groom, and they can do whatever they want at their wedding (as long as it's legal), and whoever does not like it, can leave! WHAT IS THE BIG DEAL?!?!?!?

orrin

on August 16, 2009

at 06:24 AM

Report this commentRead Mr Bilal Patel's comment. That is all you will ever need to understand about Islam. Feel the vitriol - it is spontaneous and quite uncontrolled. As I say........

B

on August 16, 2009

at 06:19 AM

Report this commentIt's not as if ANY religion has its basis in fact.

Religious tolerance is supposed to mean that we tolerate theirs and they tolerate ours.

Unfortunately, they seem to think that we must tolerate their intolerance of ours.

As Britain sleepwalks on its way to becoming an Islamic republic, those of us who love her can only weep.

 

 

vladimir ilyich pugachev

on August 16, 2009

at 06:19 AM

Report this commentPrior to the end of segregation in the US we in Britain looked down our noses at the policies of the mainly Southern US states. Now they have every right to sneer at our hypocricy.

 

We see that segregation is being enforced at public buildings such as swimming pools. If the people do not adhere to these rules they are turned away. Will they then get a refund on their council taxes? To say that not to abide by segregation rules is their choice is a false position. They are choosing not to be forced into an alien culture imposed on them by force in their own home town.

 

We pride ourselves on religious tolerence yet this is intolerence of the Christian religion that many still follow. Is this another left wing attack on our national religion?

 

There is no difference in segregation on racial grounds compared with gender or religious grounds outside the norms employed to uphold modesty and provide for the protection of people. Segregation is segregation and outside these norms is divisive.

 

As for the MP leaving well it was his right if he felt uncomfortable. If the family holding the wedding were tolerent they would understand his discomfort respect his decision rather than expect him to be an unwilling participant.

 

It is ironic that the left can cheerfully ban male only clubs, encourage female only clubs. Discriminate against anything that is seen as exclusivesy white yet promote things such as the black and asian police 'club'. Now finally endorse segregation as long as it is hiding behind Islam.

 

As for the obtuse arguments about men's and women's athletics and pre-weddig parties? Utter garbage. Men and women are physically very different thus to ensure fair play the events are separated. The same with hen and stag parties. Genders are not banned it is simply the groom going out with his friends and the bride with hers in a symbolic break with their single life. Anyone needing that spelling out to them are obviously products of Labour's education policies.

Steve Ipswich

on August 16, 2009

at 06:19 AM

Report this commentSomething no-one has noticed is the location of this wedding. It was held in the London Muslim Centre associated with the East London Mosque. The mosque is Deobandi-run. Deobandism is a hardline form of Islam in Pakistan and Bangladesh, from which the Taleban emerged. The Centre has offices for the Islamic Forum of Europe, which is linked to the fundamentalist political party Jamaat-e Islami, based on the ideas of Sayyid A'la Mawdudi, one of the most extreme Islamist thinkers of the 20th C. The married couple are both intelligent and successful people, so they will have known exactly what sort of Islam was practised here. Mr Fitzpatrick was entirely correct to leave. His presence might otherwise have been used in PR for the mosque and centre.

Denis MacEoin

on August 16, 2009

at 06:10 AM

Report this comment

To behave as Jim Fitzpatrick did was shocking bad manners.

 

Whether or not one approves or disapproves of other people's customs is beside the point. By accepting the invitation to a family occasion like a wedding the Fitzpatricks had no justification in their ostentacious walk out.

 

In the old days we would have described people like the Fitzpatricks as common, ill-educated, prissy, oikish guttersnipes.

 

 

Rastus C. Tastey

on August 16, 2009

at 06:06 AM

Report this commentJim Fitzpatrick and wife were correct. They walked out. Good. We need more of this. I wonder why he was invited in the first place. The family should've known that a British MP and wife could never submit to the backward notion of such sexual segregation in his - and my - own country. This is not Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia. His constituents should've been aware of this. Or was it that they were hoping for some sort of political endorsement of a disagreeable muslim practice?

The former head of the muslim council of Britain is a very silly man if he thinks this episode refelects badly on anyone but muslims. If he was truly responsible, he'd be encouraging muslims to integrate and to be more sensitive to the British way of life which is, after all, much better than life in most muslim countries: which is why so many mohammedans are here not there. My respectful recommendation to him is that, being in the more civilized UK and content to embrace its advantages, he should change his religion and encourage others to do likewise. He'd be much happier for it.

sebastian

on August 16, 2009

at 06:06 AM

Report this commentAlasdair, your article shows your ignorance, your intolerance of traditions and appears to be an excuse to air your prejudices. Islam is not the only one that follows a tradition of segregation in relation to weddings (and other ceremonies) and prayers.

 

It is certainly the case in Orthodox Judaism, and I believe in Sikhism. It is all a question of degree and the fact that some people wish to follow the tradition at the ceremony does not mean that after the event the same segregation will occur, although it may in certain instances.

 

That is no reason to condemn the religion out of hand, as you appear to have done, nor is it a reason to tar the various religions as you have done.

 

Ultraorthodox Judaism does have a tradition of segregation in prayer and in various ceremonies.

 

In the vast majority of cases of orthodox weddings, there is segregation at the ceremony, but not in the celebrations thereafter.

 

Just as there are degrees in Judaism in relation to this, there are inevitably degrees of observance in Islamic ceremonies. I cannot speak with authority, but I believe in Sikhism there is a similar culture.

 

If you are going to condemn traditions, be even handed about it and do not nitpick because of your own personal biased, prejudiced ignorance.

 

You claim that you are in favour of equal rights, but in the very next breath go on to say that you don't agree with something.

 

Equal rights, means equal rights, and that means there has to be a two-way street. As I see at the moment, there is no two-way street, all one way, favouring the female.

 

I am not an Islamist, nor do I agree with a number of their actions and/or their laws or proposed laws. However, in this instance I sincerely believe that you have shot yourself in the foot and you owe an apology, not only to the couple concerned, but to other religions that have the same tradition. Face it, it is not all that long ago that females were not regarded as equal and generally had to withdraw at certain times in the UK.

 

I sincerely believe that you are profoundly wrong. This was a religious ceremony where there was obviously going to be segregation. When did you see, in a mosque, and mixing of the sexes and are you that ignorant that you did not know that in a mosque the sexes are segregated? You never thought about it? It escaped your attention? I suggest ignorance. It never has been a secret, and if you are being invited to a ceremony of a different religion, about which you know little, it behoves you to ask questions.

 

In this instance Fitzpatrick is equally guilty, and dare I say ignorant about the customs of his constituents, something he should have familiarised himself with.

Hugh

on August 16, 2009

at 06:06 AM

Report this comment"I tend myself to find little wrong in selective segregation as a principle:- women are recognised thus not as necessarily inferior, but as other than men."

 

That's a pretty amazing argument to read in 2009. Don't people realise that this is exactly the argument that American segregationists used to use?

 

The segregationist argument was that it was OK to separate the races in the US since it only indicated they were "different" and not superior or inferior. It was called the "separate but equal" argument and the US Suprem Court rejected it as invalid in the sixties. That's nearly half a century ago!

 

 

jon livesey

on August 16, 2009

at 12:28 AM

Report this commenthow would it be if we were in there country with our low tops and short skirts?would they accept it?no!we would have to have respect for there customs so same should apply

b campbell

on August 16, 2009

at 12:25 AM

Report this commentThis is an outrageous Muslim-bashing article, and one day the Telegraph will look back and have to justify this wicked racism it continually portrays as 'criticism' of Islam. Palmer is playing, and intensifying, the race card which Fitzgerald is also playing and I can't believe that such an outrageous piece of xenophobic nonsense is parading itself as a legitimate article in a national newspaper.

 

Also disgraceful is the conduct of Fitzpatrick, who acccepted an invitation from some friends but then chose to ruin their wedding day by having a hissy fit about arrangements and run to the media about it, denigrating them , their culture and religion. Absolutely outrageous, unforgiveable and I'll be very surprised if he retains his seat at the next election.

Bilal Patel

on August 16, 2009

at 12:25 AM

Report this commentdemocracy is the cornerstone of this country not hatred of slam

abu abas

on August 16, 2009

at 12:25 AM

Report this commentBad example here - as Jim Fitzpatrick was attending a wedding. A wedding is, essentially, a private affair - open only to invited guests - and to have upset his hosts and refused their hospitality was insulting.

 

However, the point of the article is not lost. Consider the number of local authorities throughout England who hold sessions for Muslims at their local baths. Anyone swimming during that time is required to wear Muslim swimming dress (covered from navel to knee for males and the notorious 'burqini' for women) whether Muslim or not.

 

It is example like this - where frightened, woolly-minded silly people in positions of power tug the forelock to this alien and apartheit culture.

John Blackley

on August 16, 2009

at 12:25 AM

Report this commentThe Khilafah (Islamic Super State) is comming, all this is irrelevent.

Darknight

on August 16, 2009

at 12:25 AM

Report this commentwhat the hell is going on.It was a wedding.They didnt break the law by having a segregated wedding so why is everyone banishing muslims?As long as they arent breaking british laws then they can follow their religion its not like their harming anyone.

monica

on August 16, 2009

at 12:25 AM

Report this commentI trust he will be banning 'stag' dos and 'hen' nights too, as most segrage the brides female friends and the bridgroom's male friends. Or is he not aware that our culture also does things as women and men separately? Perhaps he should impose a law that all hen and stag nights must be exactly matching in male and female numbers in the name of equality and tolerance.

Peter Bricknell

on August 16, 2009

at 12:21 AM

Report this commentI think from what I heard about this case, the MP was unaware of the segregation issue before turning up for the wedding. Would it have been fair to his wife to tell her that she must go in one room while he went to another, especially since they did not know the couple well? Seeing as he was unaware of the situation before he arrived and he had attended many unsegregated Muslim weddings in the past, why are we getting so heated up about his descision to leave? He felt uncomfortable, and he left the wedding. He had every right to do so.

 

In America in the 50's and 60's, black men and women (with the help of some white men and women too) fought hard to end segregation. In the 60's and 70's, feminist groups fought hard to end discrimination based on gender. In the 80's and 90's, my own father has been involved in the fight against segregation of school children due to disability. Why are we now allowing segregation to creep in by the back door? Do the Muslim women agree with the harsh interpretation of Islamic Law? Who will stand up for them? We need to be very careful how we deal with this situation.

Emily

on August 16, 2009

at 12:21 AM

Report this commentIf Muslims do not like the British Ways then rack off back to your islamic countries, The UK is a CHRISTIAN COUNTRY and will never become a ISLAMIC COUNTRY. Become British or LEAVE!

Nick Johnson

on August 16, 2009

at 12:15 AM

Report this commentLet us be honest, Islamic tradition contains much that is offensive to any inteligent person.

 

Women are worth less than men.

 

Women have fewer rights than men.

 

Women are treated as chattels of men.

 

Homosexuals may be killed.

 

Apostates may be killed.

 

Unbelievers may be killed.

 

All these are proscribed and justified by Islamic Qua'ran and Hadith.

 

The justification for women covering up is that if they do not, men's lust may be inflamed to such a degree that they will not be able to control themselves. As the creaky old judge might have said, she was asking for it, she was wearing a short skirt.

 

I am insulted by the thought that such restrictions are supposed to be necessary because men are unable to keep it in their pants.

 

Why do we have to respect such traditions?

 

Why do we have to tolerate such primative behaviour?

 

This is a modern, sophisticated country, and there is no place in it for such backward, bigoted behaviour.

Tony Nicholls

on August 16, 2009

at 12:14 AM

Report this commentfor a member of parliament to attend an islamic wedding and not know that the wedding would, under islamic tradition and law be segregated is naive to say the least. he went to that wedding with the full intention of leaving in the manner he did. just more shame on a pathetic government system. the house of lords has a direct impact on the law making in this country yet most have never been elected!!!! and WE claim the right to spread democracy?

raif esendagli

on August 15, 2009

at 11:52 PM

Report this commentSacranie is one of the last people in this country to lecture us about a lack of interest� to engage with people of different backgrounds.

 

He and his fellow Muslims are in this country presumably to enjoy the material benefits.

 

In exchange we expect them to assimilate into our way of life and culture. We do not object to them practising their religion as long as it has no detrimental effect on anyone else.

 

Some of us are getting sick and tired of everything they deem offensive being blown into a major crisis.

 

In this country bigamy is illegal and women are equal to men � Ask Baroness Har-fwit.

 

In short, put up and shut up or find somewhere else.

 

patriot

on August 15, 2009

at 11:44 PM

Report this commentWake up and smell the coffee folks. These people are highly organised and spend a great deal of time manipulating the system to ensure Muslims gain out of every confrontation. To them it is a contest and Islam must not and cannot be subservient to any other political system, religion or to kuffars.

Tommo

on August 15, 2009

at 10:39 PM

Report this commentLooks like another thorny problem for the happy-clappy, pot-haddled hippies who promoted the idea of multiculturism.

 

They had a dream..

 

One enormous melting-pot of love, peace and colour with Mrs Brown popping into Mrs Bin Laden's for a cuppa to celebrate the recent marriage of the two eldest children, Mohammed & Kylie. A church service followed by Chicken Tikka 'hot-pot' at the British Legion then off for a knees-up at the local mosque with that nice, 'gangsta' hip-hop DJ from the estate's 'crew'. The local gay bobby enjoying the hokey-cokey with the Rabbi and his Palestinian girlfriend and the Nigerians and Somalians joining forces to end the evening with a stirring rendition of 'Jerusalem'.

 

What went wrong?

 

 

D.reamon

on August 15, 2009

at 10:36 PM

Report this commentJim Fitzpatrick was absolutely right to behave as he did.

Rikki Tikki-Tavi

on August 15, 2009

at 10:33 PM

Report this commentFunny that he does not withdraw from the house, for the same reason every time Haraden Hardbint, opens her mouth

Simple Sailor

on August 15, 2009

at 10:32 PM

Report this comment"Its time we stopping bowing to these non UK religions." 100% agreement, Ian - if these upstart, imported religions like Christianity can't bow to us Wiccans, Druids and Pagans then it's a damned poor show.

 

Despite some people clamouring to use this event as an axe to grind against Islam, or any other faith, it's a triple disgrace: The guest snubbed their hosts and spurned their generosity and hospitality, closed their minds to experiencing something unfamiliar to them, then had the gall to publicly embarrass the people who had welcomed them. Frankly, only the political effete could have done this.

 

The article above only serves as hyperbole and I question its motives, extrapolitig something from nothing as it does. As my late Mother-in-Law used to say, "Why can't people just be nice to each other?"

 

Cameron must be seething at the Fitzpatricks' insensitivity and will be counting the swathe of lost Muslim voters, not only in that MP's constituency, but nationwide, and fanned by the article above - in a Tory newspaper.

Darkseid

on August 15, 2009

at 10:31 PM

Report this commentThe main point of this is it illustrates just how dumb Jim Fitzpatrick MP is.

 

The other points are secondary even if you do not agree with the segration, or you agree with his leaving, the fact is that a current member of parliament knows nothing about the people he was elected to represent.

 

Is it any wonder we are in such a mess.

 

For the attention of Jim fitzpatrick MP; it is your pary's policies that have directly resulted in the situation you found yourself in.

 

Bob Landy

on August 15, 2009

at 10:19 PM

Report this commentAs the excellent Mark Steyn puts it our tolerance of the intolerant is intolerable.

 

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007760

 

LT

on August 15, 2009

at 10:19 PM

Report this commentWho asked you to bow to anyone elses custom? Dont go to the bloody wedding if you dont want to.

 

But dont try to impose your values on others either.

SKM

on August 15, 2009

at 09:42 PM

Report this commentI left the UK in 1975. I live in America. Since I came here many things have changed, mostly technology and social mores, but the core of the country is identical. People were proud to be American then, and if anything are a shade more so now .

 

The fact that many people who read this will roll their eyes and call this kind of sentiment "jingoistic" is exactly why you have a failing society. You have nothing to hold you together.

 

That is because political elite ; left wing social tinkers, have linked identity to fascism. So incoming immigrants having no society to integrate into. Whereas the opposite is true here.

 

It has been going on for a while but if you are strong enough to look fascism in the face you will see Britain's labor party.

 

Their fascination with Islam which should be an anathema to them is perhaps appealing because they share a common bond. They both know they are right, and anyone that disagrees must be destroyed. Perhaps thats it.

 

One thing is for sure. It will end in blood, and while those responsible will either be nowhere to be found, like ex nazis, all claiming they are Swiss or will write a book blaming, America.

 

Democracy. Use it, or lose it. The clock is running.

Stephen

on August 15, 2009

at 09:23 PM

Report this commentThose who don't learn from history are bound to repeat it.

 

I honestly feel the threat of Islam is every bit as big as previously Nazism presented. Unfortunately the populace never realises till it is too late. I used to wonder over history books, how the people let Nazis get into power. Eventually I realised it quite easily really. Most people are beyond stupidity and socialists are among the worst (ala nationalist socialist)

Mike

on August 15, 2009

at 09:23 PM

Report this commentI have nearly given up on the Britain where I grew up.

 

Immigrants who will not live by british laws AND customs should be forced to leave.

MikeH

on August 15, 2009

at 09:17 PM

Report this commentThe Christians were conned by

false gods much too easily and MORE Christinity has declined in favour of immoralities,pre- ferred in actuality.

 

Quote: "Leave your wives and children and follow after me...

unquote.

 

>>>+++++++*> Star-trekkers?

Isabel Witty

on August 15, 2009

at 09:16 PM

Report this commentYou say "Yet what can possibly be wrong with an MP, or anyone else, withdrawing from a celebration whose organisation suggests that women are not equal to men?"

 

That seems to me to be a big leap of logic. Would you refuse to go to the toilet at a resturant, kicking up a big fuss because there were separate rooms for male and female toilet going? How about kicking up a fuss at the local pool because changing rooms are segregated on gender? Or refuse to watch sport/athletics/etc because they segregate the sexes? Just because there's segregation, doesn't mean there's the view that women are inferior - it could be the case and probably is the case here, however you've jumped to a conclusion that wasn't neccessarily there.

 

Jim Fitzpatrick's crime was a lack of tact - he insulted his hosts, and then insulted them some more in the national press. He's alienated a large amount of his electorate because of his inability to tolerate (which means putting up with things you disagree with) the Muslim worldview and culture.

 

His apparently bigoted views and lack of respect for his constituants and their views for may cost him his seat. This is a shame as George Galloway is to contest there and may retain a seat - a rubbish MP with horrible policies.

Si

on August 15, 2009

at 08:34 PM

Report this commentWhy are politics involved? Call me naive, but in any wedding ceremony, religious or otherwise, guests are invited to participate and celebrate. Guests aren't invited to sit in judgement or be divisive.

 

This piece, and the pair who prompted it, are scurrilous. As an arch-atheist, I would still accept an invitation to a religious wedding regardless of the brand of faith for the sake of the couple and show support for them.

 

It's called hospitality. We used to have some here ourselves.

 

Has anyone consider how insulted the couple must feel to have their day spoiled by a political stunt from an intolerant couple they'd doubtless paid good money to host?

 

It doesn't matter what the religion. Their behaviour was appalling, and to go on an publicise it is a gross act of insensitivity.

Darkseid

on August 15, 2009

at 08:26 PM

Report this commentHe should have refused the invitation.That would not have made the headlines, but he could have written an article saying why he had done it.

Anne

on August 15, 2009

at 08:26 PM

Report this commentI thought I was reading the guardian when I came across the comments.

Robert

on August 15, 2009

at 08:26 PM

Report this commentIt is a well known fact, that in certain societies women are considered to be possessions of men.

A person can only live by the values that he or she holds most dear, tolerance does not come into it. If you don't like it, leave........I don't see a problem with that.

If people who come here don't like this way of ours, then they can do the same and go back where they came from.

What others think is also irrelevant, to thine own conscience be true.

Tony

on August 15, 2009

at 08:26 PM

Report this commentMy parents always told me that sometimes we learn the hard way and this might be true for Britain, after all.

 

When Islam becomes the predominant faith in Britain, leaving Britain will be the only choice left for those who do not want to leave under Islam.

Carlos Cortiglia

on August 15, 2009

at 08:26 PM

Report this comment"It reflects badly on him," said Sir Iqbal Sacranie, the former head of the Muslim Council of Britain. "It shows a lack of interest� to engage with people of different backgrounds."

 

Perhaps Sir Iqbal Sacranie might like to reflect and consider whether this statement (see below) made by the current Head of the MCB, Dr Abdul Bari,"reflects badly" on him and the MCB:

 

"Interview with Dr Muhammad Abdul Bari (Telegraph 10/11/07)

 

Telegraph :

Is stoning ever justified?

 

Dr Bari :

"It depends what sort of stoning and what circumstances," he replies. "When our prophet talked about stoning for adultery he said there should be four [witnesses] - in realistic terms that's impossible. It's a metaphor for disapproval."

 

No one should take any lectures from an organisation like the MCB which holds backward and repugnant views like the above.

 

This Islamist body with a more subtle Islamist agenda has many backward and divisive beliefs and thrives on stoking up a culture of victimhood to advance its cause further......

Straight Talk

on August 15, 2009

at 08:25 PM

Report this commentRead the numpties who post saying 'if the couple chose this way of a wedding'...who says the bride had any option? Where does it say the bride agreed to segration? The chances are she just had to do as she was told...

BryStIves

on August 15, 2009

at 08:25 PM

Report this commentI believe the women and men are segregated in synagogues too.

Robinson

on August 15, 2009

at 08:24 PM

Report this commentSpeak up ... or ... forever hold your piece. I think the time has come to say enough is enough. Our patience is running out.

swatantra

on August 15, 2009

at 08:13 PM

Report this commentAll religions kill, enslave and torture (remeber that marxism is a clssic religion - it does what all the others do - it persecutes its' rivals).

 

So what else did you expect?

And SOME "muslim" weddings DON'T have segregation.

It's only the "reue believers" (TM) who do this ......

G. Tingey

on August 15, 2009

at 07:59 PM

Report this commentIts time we stopping bowing to these non UK religions. If muslims want to stay here they abide to our rules with no special dispensation. Lets start looking after ourselves for a change and stop worrying about PC protocols.

Ian

on August 15, 2009

at 07:57 PM

Report this commentRichard T., you have submitted an argument to get Islam off the hook. I suspect that was your intention but it won't wash with people more intelligent than you. Rob Dewar, obviously you've never had an equal relationship with a woman. If my wife and I were invited to a wedding, only to find that we couldn't enjoy the occasion together, regardless of the religion of the celebrants, I'd leave too. Anyone less ignorant than yourself would know that such segregation is not a requirement of Islam and that in many Islamic countires such segregation doesn't take place but people still get married. However, only someone who is very perverse would refuse to admit what the militant Islamists involved in this arrangement are really trying to do to our society.

Tam Earl-Aine

on August 15, 2009

at 07:56 PM

Report this comment

"It reflects badly on him," said Sir Iqbal Sacranie, the former head of the Muslim Council of Britain. "It shows a lack of interest� to engage with people of different backgrounds."

 

Perhaps Sir Iqbal Sacranie might like to reflect and consider whether this statement (see below) made by the current Head of the MCB, Dr Abdul Bari,"reflects badly" on him and the MCB:

 

"Interview with Dr Muhammad Abdul Bari (Telegraph 10/11/07)

 

Telegraph :

Is stoning ever justified?

 

Dr Bari :

"It depends what sort of stoning and what circumstances," he replies. "When our prophet talked about stoning for adultery he said there should be four [witnesses] - in realistic terms that's impossible. It's a metaphor for disapproval."

 

No one should take any lectures from an organisation like the MCB which holds backward and repugnant views like the above.

 

This Islamist body with a more subtle Islamist agenda has many poisonous and divisive beliefs and thrives on stoking up a culture of victimhood to advance its cause further......

Straight Talk, Great Britain

on August 15, 2009

at 07:55 PM

Report this commentExcellent article! Islam is not a tolerant religion that fits into British society without changes. Good to see someone writing about this rather than trying to be politically correct. We need more people openly talking about this topic and expose the dangers posed by Islam to developed and free societies.

Dave

on August 15, 2009

at 07:54 PM

Report this commentI see no reason for conflict here.

If anyone wishes to live under sharia law, fine! There are a number of countries to move to.

A fed-up Englishman.

on August 15, 2009

at 07:53 PM

Report this commentanother muslim bashing article...

 

it was a wedding...the couple chose to have the wedding the way they wanted...

 

most muslims in the UK have mixed things, but some dont...who cares...

 

almost all orthadox jews have similar weddings...

 

making a CHEAP political point on a WEDDING!!

adam

on August 15, 2009

at 07:39 PM

Report this commentvery silly indeed... they want the government to force male muslims to sit with female muslims who are unrelated.

so they're going to pull of the hijab

force them in to rooms

shut down their mosques

tag them

reminds me of Nazi Germany

maghi85

on August 15, 2009

at 07:39 PM

Report this commentWELL DONE TO THIS MP..IT' ABOUT TIME WE STOOD UP IN THE WEST AND SAID NO TO THESE MEDIEVAL VIEWS ON WOMEN FROM A RELIGION WITH NO TOLERANCE IF YOU DISAGREE WITH IT.

CLIFF

on August 15, 2009

at 07:38 PM

Report this commentHe was a guest therefore his behaviour was disgusting.

 

On the assumption that he knows the couple, if they're happy with their arrangements, who is he to criticise?

bob

on August 15, 2009

at 07:38 PM

Report this commentOne of the most fundamentally important and accurate articles in Britain today. The truth of this article resonates far beyond what this one thing means for Britain and her subjects. It is also logical that the submissionist liberal white ideologies will be the first to be strangled as soon as the ultimate agenda of the realities of creeping Islamism are properly explored, within the context of ceding Britain's rights, morals and ethical norms. An apposite fact which sadly will not be faced by submissionists, appeasers or islamic apologists.

 

The tide is turning- Arafat mentioned the ultimate weapon of the Arab world was the womb of the Arab woman. Well tough, chums, Catholics are better at it than you, and also the natives here won't take their natural bonhomie and generosity being ridden roughshod over much longer. Perhaps Islam should remember it is a guest in this country...

Alex

on August 15, 2009

at 07:36 PM

Report this commentPerhaps he should have politely declined the invitation, after a little homework first. How rude to behave like that having accepted the invitation.

Darkseid

on August 15, 2009

at 07:36 PM

Report this commentThe reason we bow to Muslim dictats is this.

 

We are a once proud and independant nation that had it's roots in the Judeo Christian faith and defended that faith with vigour courage and relentless energy to fight on the side of right.

 

Now, under 12 years of socialism, Political correctness (read cancer) and a desire to sell out everything that Britishness once meant, we are left with a perverted society, a Pandora's Box of pseudo religions with a destructive ethos and an undying effort on the part of politicians and groups with hidden agendas to replace The Faith with subversive Islam amongst other things.

 

I just came back from Normandy where I visited the graves of soldiers from USA and Britain who laid their lives down if protecting the UK from the very things that we are now welcoming into our midst.

 

I swore to apologise to the war dead on behalf of those who still care about the UK, yes I apologised to them out loud in the WW2 cemeteries of Normandy for what successive governments have done in recent decades that has reduced the war dead's sacrifices to almost nil.

 

It broke my heart then and it does now I'm back.

 

You reap what you sow. We have sown to the wind, we are reaping a whirlwind.......

Chris Williams

on August 15, 2009

at 07:16 PM

Report this commentWhy must we bow to the intolerant ways of ANY religion?

Richard T

on August 15, 2009

at 06:56 PM

Report this commentSadly, the Minister's actions illustrate how ignorant those who govern us are today. I know that if I went to a Muslim wedding, the women would be celebrating in a different room (or rooms) to the men. Why could he not have known this? Because he knows no history, has no knowledge of foreign cultures, and cares less.

 

I tend myself to find little wrong in selective segregation as a principle:- women are recognised thus not as necessarily inferior, but as other than men. Which is of course quite true. Men and women are not the same. Having said this, I do stress that I adhere to my culture, which is western, in which men and women mix freely on most occasions, and we recognise that men and women have equal rights.

I add another qualifier:- equal rights should not mean equal opportunities in all fields. I loathe the idea of female front-line troops. It is un-natural and it unmans the male fighters. I miss male-only clubs. Men and women need places they can go to escape each-other sometimes. There are no such places left in the western world anymore. (Except perhaps in a monastery and in a nunnery!)

 

Rob Dewar

on August 15, 2009

at 06:53 PM

Report this commentPost a comment

 

 

By submitting any material to us you confirm that you have read, and agree to, our terms and conditions

 

Your name *

 

 

Your email address *

 

 

 

Your Comment *

 

 

* = Required information

Advertisement

Ads by Google

World Religions News

Hinduism, Judaism, Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, Bahai & More

 

www.religiontimes.com

 

Muslims In Poland

Gaining Understanding And Respect Watch This Story Here.

 

www.russiatoday.com

 

InFocus Newspaper

Islam, Muslims, Terrorism, stories, American Muslim newspaper in Calif.

 

www.infocusnews.net

 

 

 

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/6034998/Why-must-we-bow-to-the-intolerant-ways-of-Islam.html