Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Shari'a law and the hypocrisy of New Labour

Cranmer wishes to reproduce an insightful article by Dr Martin Parsons from ConservativeHome on the hypocrisy of Gordon Brown's criticism of the Archbishop of Canterbury, which exposes the extent to which Not-So-New Labour has been complicit in the incorporation of Shari'a law into the UK:

On Thursday Gordon Brown’s spokesman denounced Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams’ claim that the introduction of sharia to the UK was inevitable. However, Gordon Brown himself has been quietly seeking to appease certain aspects of the agenda of 'peaceful' Islamist groups in the UK - including what amounts to a partial implementation of sharia.

In the 2005 general election Labour’s share of the Muslim vote collapsed from its normally rock solid 85% down to around 70%. It lost safe Labour seats to the Lib-Dems like Rochdale (5,650 maj), Hornsey and Wood Green (10,600 maj) – not to mention losing Bethnal Green and Bow (10,000 maj) to George Galloway – and nearly lost several other Labour seats. This was partly due to a Muslim Vote card campaign run by the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), a Muslim umbrella organisation whose leadership was largely taken over by Islamists as soon as it was formed. Candidates of all parties were told to sign up to a range of Islamic issues – public funding Muslim schools, changes in UK foreign policy etc the MCB told Muslims told to vote against candidates who refused to do so. The MCB claimed it could swing the vote in at least 20 constituencies – as the Muslim majority was greater than that of the sitting MP – who was almost always Labour.

So whilst Labour’s record of appeasement may disappoint us, it perhaps shouldn’t surprise us. Labour has a similar relationship with Islamic organisations as it had with the trade unions in the nineties. It wants their votes – but doesn’t agree with all of their agenda. So, it appeases them by giving them some of what they want.

Labour’s appeasement of Islamism in the UK – including sharia:

1 Immediately after the 2005 election, which saw Labour share of the Muslim vote collapse – the government announced the incitement to religious hatred legislation. This was widely seen by Islamic organisations as the ‘Muslim blasphemy law’ they had campaigned 18 long years for since the Rushdie affair. Blasphemy against Muhammad is THE most serious offence in sharia – and carries the automatic death penalty in countries such as Pakistan.

2 August 2006 Ruth Kelly and John Prescott met Islamic leaders immediately after the Heathrow terrorist arrests. They were asked for a partial implementation of sharia for family law in the UK and Muslim festival to become bank holidays. Ruth Kelly then set up a commission to look into implementing the first.

3 June 2007 (Brown now Labour leader and as PM in waiting making joint decisions with Blair) – a government sponsored report on the teaching of Islam in British universities was published. One may well ask exactly what the Labour government was doing asking a senior member of the Islamic Foundation – the UK’s largest overtly Islamist group - to write this government sponsored report ON HIS OWN? The report recommended that non Muslims should be banned from teaching the main Islamic subjects in British universities! The PM publicly welcomed this report! (99)

4 Gordon Brown appointed David Milliband as the new Foreign Secretary. Almost the very first public statement Milliband made was to publicly praise Hamas – the Islamist terrorist group that is ideologically committed to the complete annihilation of the state of Israel – the ONLY state in the entire Middle East that even remotely resembles a liberal democracy.

5 In September 2007 Ed Balls - Gordon Brown’s chief lieutenant, and newly promoted to be Secretary of state for families, children and schools - offered state funding to Islamic schools – again part of the Muslim Vote Card agenda (However, many ordinary Muslims recognise Islamic schools as part of the Islamist agenda and won’t send their children to them).

6 September 2007 (remember Brown’s team had really seriously whipped up election fever now!) Des Browne, Labour’s part time Defence Secretary, told the Labour Party conference that we should negotiate with the Taliban! (Why exactly have 87 British soldiers given their lives and hundreds of others paid the ‘daily living sacrifice’ of the wounded and disabled?)

7 Des Browne ALSO told the Labour Conference that the future government of Afghanistan MUST include Islamic law. Actually apart from during the Taliban era, Afghanistan has since the early twentieth century had a western style constitution – with sharia courts having a much more informal, non constitutional role. As a former aid worker in Afghanistan, I KNOW that there are hundreds of thousands of people in the towns and cities of Afghanistan that DESPERATELY DON’T’ want government imposed Islamic law – they just want the Afghan constitution).

8 THEN – in November 2007 Treasury minister Kitty Ussher (and let’s not suppose anything significant has ever happened at the treasury since Labour came to power in 1997 - without Gordon Brown’s explicit say so!) announced a 3 month consultation on the Treasury introducing Islamic sukkuk bonds that are compliant with sharia. Now if we do that - we effectively create a whole area of government and economics that can ONLY be governed by Islamic lawyers and sharia courts – and guess what..?/ sharia forbids any non Muslim from sitting as a judge in a sharia court. Moreover, the commercial law aspects of sharia ALWAYS favour Muslims when there is any deal between Muslims and non Muslims. In fact this is a principle of sharia because sharia fundamentally assumes that Muslims – as the people in submission to Allah – must always govern non Muslims…).

9 Then in February 2008 (yes only a week ago!) – the Department for Work and Pensions announced that where there was a ‘valid’ polygamous marriage it would pay extra benefits. The government admitted this would mainly benefit Muslims (as sharia allows men to have 4 wives). Quite how a polygamous marriage in the UK could in any sense be ‘valid’ when bigamy is a criminal offence in the UK beats me…! but perhaps the government was intending to legalise bigamy to make it ‘sharia compliant’
So, Gordon Brown has been at it all along appeasing the agenda of ‘peaceful’ Islamist groups in the UK, who reject violence, but have stated they want to see a gradual move towards an Islamic state in Britain by means of a step by step alignment of British law with sharia.

Now what’s that word for someone who criticises someone else for suggesting something that they are actually covertly doing themselves……?

Conservative MPs rightly condemned Rowan Williams for his extraordinarily ill judged, naïve and wrong headed comments, but we must also hold Gordon Brown to account for the way he is playing fast and loose with the Islamist agenda.


Blogger ultramontane grumpy old catholic said...

Your Grace

Nothing now surprises me about this socialist/secularist government for which I have now developed a visceral loathing.

They seem to have made the decision 'better the turban than the mitre'.

What amazes me is that the government relies on a large number of my co-religionists voting for them.

This week we have had the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill passed in the Lords and it will go to the Commons under a Government three line whip.

Our Bishops will have to think carefully (fat chance!) about how they are going to they are going to pay the massive fines will be levied on the the Church if priests are charged with preaching that homosexual acts are sinful. And it won't be long before the first RC priest is banged up in gaol. Just like the good old days of Good Queen Bess.

If memory serves me right, Donald Soper the Methodist orator at Hyde Park and other corners once remarked that no Christian could vote other than Socialist, and certainly not Tory.

Har har bl**dy har! Christians voting Nu-labour? Turkeys voting for winterval, more like it.

12 February 2008 at 10:13  
Anonymous SpideredNews.com said...

Last Friday, 8 February 2008, George Galloway focused on the Archbishop of
Canterbury's comments
about Sharia law on his talkSPORT radio show ("The Mother of All Talk Shows").

You can listen to a recording of that 8th Feb show, as well as other radio shows, by
clicking :

12 February 2008 at 10:26  
Anonymous mickey said...

Your Grace,

"Revealed: Islamist extremists have penetrated the heart of Britain" - so states the Daily Mail, my authoritative source for all matters of factual journalism.

Evidently, the fifth column have also penetrated the Prime Minister's office (I was most careful to spell this word correctly!).

It is quite surreal, is it not, that a nation which held off the mighty Teuton hordes must now kowtow to a group of loopy, backward tribesmen most of whom can barely read or write. What would our forefathers have made of that?

12 February 2008 at 11:31  
Blogger Dave said...

Brown's a traitor.
Williams is a fool
Which of those carried teh death penalty?

12 February 2008 at 13:48  
Anonymous hear o israel said...

for those of us that can remember times when the christian mind in the uk was more concerned about the athiest and the agnostic , it just goes to show , that it is possible to elect your national suicide without realising it .

i was always fond of lord soaper namely in that is message of peace within the fear of the superpowers was so compelling, i suspect he would have loved nature also , but socialism has it weaknesses in that it can either be athiest agnostic or islamic christian, jewish.

it should never be forgotten that nu labour have not stood for freedom or democracy , and as each day goes on "i have in this hand a piece of paper" or in gordons case a blackberry/iphone only becomes more apparent . i am sure mr chamberlin was utterly conviced hitler was man searching for peace , i am also sure that hitler must have thought chamberlin was a niave old fool.

12 February 2008 at 16:14  
Blogger mongoose said...

I remember when I was a little bug encountering a red-in-tooth-and-claw, proper Trotskyite. True, they were fairly thick on the ground in those days. (This was, I guess, in the early days of Mother Thatcher. During the slaughter of the innocent manufacturer but before the saving grace of the war with the godless Argie. Galtierissimo, you will remember, was the Bin Laden of the day. But I digress, Your Grace.) Anyway, my Trot friend said that he and his like intended to impose upon the rest of us their vision, their laws and their societal structures. I asked if we couldn't have a nice election as we had had often enough in the past. No, he said, he was right and he had a duty to do this to the rest of us who understood not the ....? Well, the what?

Was he not trying to impose his religious views on us. It's a slippery slope to let the daft buggers in the door. Be attentive to your God-bothering if you must but it is nothing to do with the law of the land.

Be ye ever so mighty, Your Grace, the law is above ye or it should be. Didn't you have some unpleasantness yourself when some old broad decided to change the rules on you? Got your fingers burned, I heard.

12 February 2008 at 19:27  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Quite so, Mr Mongoose, quite so.

12 February 2008 at 19:33  
Blogger Homophobic Horse said...

"Anyway, my Trot friend said that he and his like intended to impose upon the rest of us their vision, their laws and their societal structures. I asked if we couldn't have a nice election as we had had often enough in the past. No, he said, he was right and he had a duty to do this to the rest of us who understood not the ....? Well, the what?"

Milliband the retard hasn't abandoned this idea.

Neo-Conservatism = Degenerate Communism

12 February 2008 at 21:24  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Interesting cartoon

I was repeatedly predicting all over the internet a year before Blair left everyone to clear up his mess, that we would soon miss him.

He may have been as much of a criminal lying dishonest destructive despotic establishment stooge as Brown. But at least he had the intellect and personality to pull it off, without embarrassing everyone.

Atlas shrugged

13 February 2008 at 05:14  
Anonymous USpace said...

Brown and Williams are both traitors, Brown is even more at fault. He didn't just advocate it, he spoke against it after already implementing it.

absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
help destroy your country

encourage barbarians
by stating they have a case

absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
escape Sharia law

enjoy life in free country
until Sharia comes there

absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
some religion must rule

no matter how evil
or primitive it may be


13 February 2008 at 16:10  
Blogger mongoose said...

uspace said "Brown and Williams are both traitors"

Treason doth never prosper. For it prosper, none dare call it treason.

14 February 2008 at 00:27  
Blogger dmk said...

Someone else clearly has an agenda in this too. Step forward the BBC


14 February 2008 at 12:21  
Anonymous najistani said...

The Bishop of Carlisle has spoken up in support of Christianity! He must be arrested immediately and charged with Islamophobia!!

After he has served his mandatory seven years sentence, the ArchDhimmi of Canterbistan might grant him forgiveness on condition he attends Islamic Awareness and Celebration of Diversity courses.

Now just in case you think the Bishop of Carlisle is some sort of fundamentalist nut, make sure you check out the spooky manifestation of 666 in the house of commons that follows this:

"A senior bishop has compared the Government to a demonic seven-headed beast for imposing its morality on society.

The Rt Rev Graham Dow likened the Labour administration to the beast which appears in the Bible's apocalyptic Book of Revelation.

Speaking at a General Synod... the Bishop said: "I happen to believe that our Government is moving into the realm of imposing its morality and it is therefore becoming a Revelation 13 Government rather than a Romans 13 Government."

Chapter 13 in the Book of Revelation begins: "As I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the names of blasphemy.

"And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat and great authority."

It ends: "Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six."

Bishop Dow, whose comments followed the Archbishop of Canterbury's controversial remarks on Islamic law, later claimed he was not calling members of the Government themselves as demons, but said the Book of Revelation was portraying the Roman Empire in those terms."


From http://www.assistnews.net/Stories/2008/s08010088.htm

"666 raises it’s ugly head in British House of Commons debate

By Michael Ireland
Chief Correspondent, ASSIST News Service
LONDON, ENGLAND (ANS) -- Whether or not you are a student of prophecy, a conspiracy theorist, or dabble in the art of biblical numerology, you may find interesting or disturbing the fact that a motion calling for the disestablishment of the Church of England has been listed in the British House of Commons as 666 -- the Number of the Beast.

According to Ruth Gledhill, Religion Correspondent of The Times, Labour Member of Parliament (MP) John Austin, who has repeatedly tabled Early Day Motions urging disestablishment, put down his latest motion last night as MPs debated scrapping Britain's blasphemy laws.

The motion appeared on the House of Commons order paper numbered 666, the number associated with the Antichrist in the Book of Revelation. Some scholars believe 666 referred to the Emperor Nero, Gledhill reported.

The King James Bible renders Revelation 13:8 as: "Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six."

Bob Russell, Liberal Democrat MP for Colchester and one of the signatories, said: “It is incredible that a motion like this should have, by chance, acquired this significant number. This number is supposed to be the mark of the Devil. It looks as though God or the Devil have been moving in mysterious ways."

Russell added: “What is even stranger is that this motion was tabled last night when MPs were debating blasphemy.”

According to Gledhill, the motion is unlikely to be debated. "But momentum for looser ties between Church and State is growing, as the support for the repeal of the blasphemy law illustrates. The blasphemy law favors Christianity and in particular the Church of England," she says.

Gledhill writes that although the attempt by Liberal Democrat MP Evan Harris to amend the Criminal Justice Bill was unsuccessful, the Prime Minister Gordon Brown has disclosed that he is consulting with the churches about its repeal.

A report by the Associated Press (AP) on Newsday.com says the beast of the Book of Revelation "intruded into the banter of the House of Commons" on Thursday when a motion calling for the disestablishment of the Church of England was numbered 666.

The last book of the Bible says 666 is the number of a beast that "had two horns like a lamb, and…spake as a dragon," and that "doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men."

The motion simply states: "That this House calls for the disestablishment of the Church of England" -- in other words ending its status as the country's legally established, official faith.

The AP report says that such motions rarely result in any action, but are used by members to publicize issues. Other members may sign the motion as an indication of support. By Thursday afternoon, the number of the signers was three.

The Church of England, created by King Henry VIII's breach with Rome, is the legally established faith in England. The monarch, by law, is obliged to be a member, and has the title of Supreme Governor of the church.

"Eyebrows were raised in the House of Commons on Thursday when a motion calling for the Church of England to be disestablished was listed with the number 666, symbol of the AntiChrist," says an Agence France Presse (AFP) report carried byYahoo!NewsUK.

"This number is supposed to be the mark of the Devil. It looks as though God or the Devil have been moving in mysterious ways," said Bob Russell, a Liberal Democrat MP among those proposing the motion for debate. What is even stranger is that this motion was tabled last night when MPs were debating blasphemy," he added.

The motion calls for an end to the formal link between Church and State in England -- embodied in the monarch, Queen Elizabeth II, who is both head of state and head of the Church of England.

The number 666 is referred to in the Book of Revelation in the Bible: "Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast for it is the number of a man; and his number is six hundred, three score and six."

"It is incredible that a motion like this should have, by chance, acquired this significant number," said Russell. "

15 February 2008 at 00:23  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The 'muslim vote' frightens me more than any amount of bombs they can plant, or deluded fools they can muster to kill themselves and whoever is standing near them.

Wholesale murder and destruction will inevitably result in a backlash against this atavastic theocracy.

It's ability to deliver a block voting group (which grows by the month due to high birth rate and unchecked immigration) to the party that will further its agenda is an insidious and more long term threat.

20 February 2008 at 11:02  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older