John B. Wells

[PB the Deplorable]

... And where is this "Sharia law" push happening in the U.S., other than in the fevered imaginations of writers on "Fox 'News?'"  Oh, do you mean the Christian fundamentalists in the U.S. Congress who want to mold U.S. law into the standards of Leviticus?-- because that's the same thing?   No?
I'll tell ya what, P*B: you find where in the U.S. there's a "demand for Sharia law" and I'll meet you there and kiss your posterior in public view.

Well, first off I was talking about the West in general.   It's progressing in different stages in different countries.  But we are all the target. 


I notice you didn't dispute anything else from my fairly long list.   I can go further - pull out a map of the world and circle the Muslim areas, from West Africa to the Phillipines.  Then mark where the 20 or so wars are that are going on in the world.   If you do it correctly, you will see these people can't get along with their neighbors or each other.  They are collectively a menace.   Or did you believe that 'Religion of Peace' crap?


Do you and Yp deny there are Sharia Courts set up in Britain?   In Canada?  Or all those riots and Sharia based demands in France awhile back?   Is none of this going on in Germany, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Australia?


Here in the US I guess we are a little behind the PC curve - we haven't yet thrown open the floodgates to poor Pakistanis like the UK did, or to the Algerians like the French did, or to the Turks like Germany.  There isn't a critical Islamic mass here yet - they are really not yet in a position to make threats and demands or stage riots.


The founder of CAIR, Omar Ahmad, is on record as saying 'Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant'.  And 'the Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth'.   Pretty hard to miss what he's saying with those statements.  He sounds pretty sure of himself. 


You know CAIR, right?  Counsil on American-Islamic Relations?   I guess I should say 'alleged' Terrorist ties?  The go-to Muslim organization for the media in the US?  Our, umm, non-Moslem President has them in the White House fairly often - the White House has acknowledged there have been hundreds of face-to-face meetings with White House staffers and CAIR members over the past 4 years.  What's up with that?  Who else gets that level of access?  But pay no attention, as long as they are voting correctly, right?

Plenty of ex-Muslims are trying to warn us of the danger these people represent, but few are listening.  Given what's going on everywhere else they are, I'm thinking the burden of proof is on them that they won't bring their violent culture of hate and death here.  I guess we'll have to wait and see.

[CrabbyOld Bat]

Our, umm, non-Moslem President has them in the White House fairly often - the White House has acknowledged there have been hundreds of face-to-face meetings with White House staffers and CAIR members over the past 4 years.  What's up with that?  Who else gets that level of access?  But pay no attention, as long as they are voting correctly, right?

Hmm. Let me see if I understand what you're saying, directly and indirectly. Bottom line: You hate and fear Muslims cuz they're all evil terrorists and trying to take over the world, correct?

If that's what you truly and firmly believe, I have a hunch nothing I could say would make you think otherwise. But please, please, please tell me that you don't really buy into the Obama-is-a-covert-Muslim-who's-out-to-destroy-the-United-States crap. 

[PB the Deplorable]

Hmm. Let me see if I understand what you're saying, directly and indirectly. Bottom line: You hate and fear Muslims cuz they're all evil terrorists and trying to take over the world, correct?

If that's what you truly and firmly believe, I have a hunch nothing I could say would make you think otherwise. But please, please, please tell me that you don't really buy into the Obama-is-a-covert-Muslim-who's-out-to-destroy-the-United-States crap.

'Good Muslins' are a threat.  'Bad' Muslims, ones that don't follow the worst of it are probably ok and likely want what most people want - peace and to live good lives.  So it's not a complete broad brush.  I keep going back to those people partying in the middle of those streets on 9/11 though.


I think Obama grew up in a peaceful Muslim environment in Indonesia, and is very naive about the intentions of some of these groups. 


Note though he did support the very radical Muslim Brotherhood's takeover in Egypt, and some other  similar groups in Libya, and those were mistakes.  The drone strikes confuse me - he seems Jekyll and Hyde-like with all  this.



Is he still a Muslim if he ever was?  Maybe.  If so I don't think he's a jihadist.   Is he a Marxist Liberation-Theorist like that church he attended for 20 years?   Dunno, possibly.   He sure seems close to CAIR.  We know very little about President Obama.

[CrabbyOld Bat]

Glad to see you're not using an all-encompassing broad brush re Muslims. At least you allow for the possibility of a few odd strands here and there. 

I respect your views and concerns about Obama but I don't agree with them. FWIW, I don't believe Obama was ever a Muslim nor do I think he's a Marxist, etc. I think the pastor of the church Obama used to attend was simply a rotten, bitter apple with an axe to grind. (I love mixed metaphors, don't you?) But I think the vast majority of church members (Obama included) were no more supportive, or even aware, of the pastor's craziness than naive parishioners are supportive of pedophile priests.

Amen.

[RealCool Daddio]

Glad to see you're not using an all-encompassing broad brush re Muslims. At least you allow for the possibility of a few odd strands here and there. 

I respect your views and concerns about Obama but I don't agree with them. FWIW, I don't believe Obama was ever a Muslim nor do I think he's a Marxist, etc. I think the pastor of the church Obama used to attend was simply a rotten, bitter apple with an axe to grind. (I love mixed metaphors, don't you?) But I think the vast majority of church members (Obama included) were no more supportive, or even aware, of the pastor's craziness than naive parishioners are supportive of pedophile priests.

Amen.

Oh, I like the way you think, COB.  Obama attended a radicals church = Obama is a radical.  Some Catholic priests are pedophiles = Catholics condone pedophilia.  Paper Boy visited counties known for sexual tourism ....

[PB the Deplorable]

Oh, I like the way you think, COB.  Obama attended a radicals church = Obama is a radical.  Some Catholic priests are pedophiles = Catholics condone pedophilia.  Paper Boy visited counties known for sexual tourism ....

Tough crowd tonight

[CrabbyOld Bat]

Tough crowd tonight

lol

I predict 2013 will be better. Happy new year, my friend!

[mombird3]

Happy New Year to all.

The discussion on here tonight is interesting. In light that a News story about a NYC woman that pushed a man onto the subway tracks Thursday  because she thought he was a Muslem. He died.That kind of hatred for people based on religion and he "looked" like a Muslem made her justify her pushing him. As a former NYC resident I was sickened by  this.

This kind of fear mongering caused hatred. The man was an Indian born resident of Queens NY. I know the subway line and have used that #7 line to go to Manhattan from Queens. Horrible death for the man. 

I was in Israel in 1980 on a vacation. The Arab and Israeli people live side by side. Very educational for us Americans. I enjoyed it. I went to Bethleham and Jeruselum. I thought Jerusalem was beautiful. That part of the world is amazing.

And the other night I thought Ron Simone's show as about the Jesuit Burial ground in Japan who clam Jesus lived and was buried there. I thought that was his topic for the night. Sorry.

[Yorkshire pud]

It's disingenuous not to recognize how fundamentalist Muslims clamor for special and unique legal and political status for Muslims anywhere in the world they gain a significant political voice, including the US. For example, perhaps Yorkshire Pud could tell us how certain Muslim areas of London are essentially officially off-limits to police, and the policy is that police will not enter without prior arrangement or special circumstance; or how the British judiciary has in some cases recognized a legal and judicial system entirely separate and distinct for British Muslims*.

*Bullshit! Where did you get that from, Alex Jones? BNP?

I don't live in London (Clue is in my name,) never have, and have no desire to. Where I live has a sizable immigrant population though..

No More Noory who does live in London (above) posted this:

I woke up to catch the beginning of the interview with Al Fadi, and for a while was surprised to find my attention being caught by what threatened to be an interesting Breather interview. I was wrong. Alarm bells went off when it became clear the guest had converted from Islam to Christianity (swapping insanities, not curing the disease, IMO) and is now some kind of pastor in some kind of 'ministry' or other. His agenda became clear as he peddled a one-track attack on his former religion by categorising all Muslims as devoted to killing all non-Muslims, and painted a picture of the UK as in thrall to Sharia law, which, as a citizen of that country's capital city, I can assure you is absolute nonsense. Particularly here in London, multi-culturalism is very much the air we breathe and I am very comfortable with it. But no Muslim can consider themselves above or outside the law of the land. The UK has also been very pro-active in attacking and prosecuting the perpetrators of so-called 'honour killings' which Al Fadi was making a big deal about. But it was enough to open the door for Wells to embark on one of his rants that frankly belongs more on Beck and Limbaugh than C2C, urging listeners to make 2013 the year in which 'political correctness' should be binned - basically using the whole interview to run a 'let's stop being nice to Muslims' line. I used to think Wells was just a pompous, tedious bore. I begin to think he may actually be a dangerous voice.

[Yorkshire pud]

Tough crowd tonight

You only say that because you're stymied with your profound and noticable ignorance; selective prejudice, oh, and an insular point of view. In your world (The parallel one) the population is all caucasian; eat steak so rare the cooking involves the cow having it's horns cut off and has it's arse wiped-the really macho don't bother with the latter; and believe there's a point to Russ Limbaugh. These virtues in themselves don't define you, but they sure do explain how you come to believe it's a tough crowd. Seriously; if you believe half of what you think, you should be more selective in which bollox you listen to and watch on TV; because it sure doesn't come from your interaction with the outside world.

[Juan]

Why is it so hard to discuss issues without resorting to personal attacks - particularly against a person you have never met and know very little about?

[Yorkshire pud]

Why is it so hard to discuss issues without resorting to personal attacks  - particularly against a person you have never met and know very little about?

It isn't; but when a debate is inputted with uninformed crap about a country he couldn't find on a map of the world let alone spent time in; I believe it's only right and proper to question the source and secondly to question the credentials of the source. Critical thinking doesn't seem to be a strong point.


It is also supremely ironic that this very site is dedicated to personal attacks on people that few on it have met or know little about. I've even seen comments that suggests the poster 'hates' George Noory..Hate? They can generate enough emotional energy to feel a compelling negativity to a personal level on a guy who hosts a radio show? Sure, criticise his style, delivery, presentation, content and execution...but hate him? Is that rational? I speak as one who to my knowledge has never hated anyone-and believe me, I have had cause to on a very personal level.

[PB the Deplorable]

It isn't; but when a debate is inputted with uninformed crap about a country he couldn't find on a map of the world let alone spent time in...

Yet you've shown yourself to be quite the expert on the US?

I assume you are talking about the UK.  In response to another poster, I mentioned Sharia Councils have been set up in the UK - is that true or untrue? 

I said there are so many Pakistanis now in the UK - implying a tipping point in demanding these Councils and other special treatment - is that true, partially true, or untrue?

[Eddie Coyle]

Happy New Year to all.

The discussion on here tonight is interesting. In light that a News story about a NYC woman that pushed a man onto the subway tracks Thursday  because she thought he was a Muslem. He died.That kind of hatred for people based on religion and he "looked" like a Muslem made her justify her pushing him. As a former NYC resident I was sickened by  this.

This kind of fear mongering caused hatred. The man was an Indian born resident of Queens NY. I know the subway line and have used that #7 line to go to Manhattan from Queens. Horrible death for the man. 

I was in Israel in 1980 on a vacation. The Arab and Israeli people live side by side. Very educational for us Americans. I enjoyed it. I went to Bethleham and Jeruselum. I thought Jerusalem was beautiful. That part of the world is amazing.

And the other night I thought Ron Simone's show as about the Jesuit Burial ground in Japan who clam Jesus lived and was buried there. I thought that was his topic for the night. Sorry.

Gee, you never seem to mention some key facts about the suspect in the NYC subway murder. Erika Menendez, who has a history of mental issues, is the second subway dweller in a month to push another rider to their death. A black male did the first, a hispanic woman did this one. Do you think they were influenced by right wing radio fear mongering? Please.

           The Arabs lived sided by side with "Israelis" in 1980 ? The way you phrase it shows your prejudice. Let me guess your definition of "Israeli"...uh, they have to share YOUR faith.

          The Arabs lived side by side with Israelis, the way blacks lived side by side with whites in 1840 Alabama. Has anything happened between them since 1980? Nothing of substance in '82 or '87 or '96 or 2000 or '06?

[Yorkshire pud]

Yet you've shown yourself to be quite the expert on the US?

On no...I don't consider myself anything of the sort. However, I have several close friends who live in several states (Both American and ex pat British), and have been over the US. And I read a bit too...

I assume you are talking about the UK.  In response to another poster, I mentioned Sharia Councils have been set up in the UK - is that true or untrue? 

It's untrue, both me and another UK poster have told you that.

I said there are so many Pakistanis now in the UK - implying a tipping point in demanding these Councils and other special treatment - is that true, partially true, or untrue?

What do you mean by 'so many'? On a point of order regarding all immigration I'd say that as an island we're over crowded..currently 70 million on a landmass slightly smaller than Michigan and immigration across the board should be restricted far more than it is. However, because the UK is part of the EU, we're also signed up to their legislature. That includes freedom of movement to work where any citizen of the EU wishes to (similar to someone in FL moving to work in CA). Political expediancy means no big political party will either address it or (as many in the UK want) hold a referendum to our continued membership in the EU--a withdraw would probably tear up the agreement of free movement of labour throughout Europe..Now...the UK  (together with Germany and France) is one of the richest countries in the EU..and a net contributor to the 'pot of money'. Naturally this has caused great anger and frustration when the likes of Greece, Italy, Spain and Portugal have in the past lived off the fat and basically not contributed to their respective countries' in tax revenue, and now are reaping the rewards of abject poverty for those at the bottom of the pile (tax avoidance by the richest in those countries continues now as it always has)...

The upshot is that Germany is now the sugar daddy of those countries--The UK escaped the meltdown of the Euro currency because we never changed pound sterling to the Euro..The jury is stiill out on whether the Euro will eventaully collapse and the respective countried will go back to their original currencies, or if there will be a 'two tier' Euro with the poor and rich countries.

We have a different political landscape to that in in the USA..we have many more political parties, right across the political hues (Including Greens!)... naturally the far right want to deport all/most immigrants (yes, on skin colour!) and regain what they feel 'they' have lost in identity. Whenever one far right party holds a demonstartion, the far left hold one too..with a huge police cordon to separate the two..

So in answer to your final question. It depends who you ask..

[PB the Deplorable]

... Sharia Councils have been set up in the UK - is that true or untrue?..

...  It's untrue, both me and another UK poster have told you that...

What do you make of these:

http://www.shariahcouncil.org/
http://www.islamic-sharia.org/

It looks an awful lot like a parallell legal system to me.  One NOT based on equal rights or any of the other lofty principles the British legal system claims. 

The claim can be made these are 'voluntary' on the part of the participents, but are they really?  Are women never forced by family or  the community to use them and abide by their decisions?  Children?  New immigrants who thought they were coming to a land of freedom?  Other people that don't wish to be ostracised by the community?  Is a separate track of religious law healthy in a democracy?  Are the other Brits so troubled by the legal system already in place that they think this is better for someone else? Are these institutions first steps to something else?

And more importantly, is this what we want in the US?

[Yorkshire pud]

 

What do you make of these:

http://www.shariahcouncil.org/
http://www.islamic-sharia.org/

It looks an awful lot like a parallell legal system to me.  One NOT based on equal rights or any of the other lofty principles the British legal system claims. 

The claim can be made these are 'voluntary' on the part of the participents, but are they really?  Are women never forced by family or  the community to use them and abide by their decisions?  Children?  New immigrants who thought they were coming to a land of freedom?  Other people that don't wish to be ostracised by the community?  Is a separate track of religious law healthy in a democracy?  Are the other Brits so troubled by the legal system already in place that they think this is better for someone else? Are these institutions first steps to something else?

And more importantly, is this what we want in the US?

Sharia law is not part of the UK legal system..period. It has no jurisdiction whatsoever. That someone volunteers to dispute resolution with it could be seen the same as a Christian can with Church law..which is the oldest legislature in the western world. Neither supplant common or civil law.

Do you want it in the US? I'm not a US citizen..you have 300 and something Million in your country..More than (I believe) 50% are of Hispanic origin, so it could be argued they should have a casting vote, no? In reality, we both know you won't have Sharia law written into your current legislature; So Obama serves tea now and again to Muslims; to extrapolate that do you suppose if he has an audience with the Dalai Lama, he has designs on making you all convert to Buddism? If Romney had been iinstalled as President, would you all be made to be Mormons? I would suggest that the US is too hidebound with religion. How is it rational that an invisible, unprovable diety is the crutch that politicians (all hues) hang their credibility on? Bush Jnr, even implied that 'God' had told him to invade Iraq! And this guy had the nuclear button.. Frightening.  Can you tell I don't have much time for any religion? 

[Sardondi]

Hmm. Let me see if I understand what you're saying, directly and indirectly. Bottom line: You hate and fear Muslims cuz they're all evil terrorists and trying to take over the world, correct?

If that's what you truly and firmly believe, I have a hunch nothing I could say would make you think otherwise. But please, please, please tell me that you don't really buy into the Obama-is-a-covert-Muslim-who's-out-to-destroy-the-United-States crap.

PB has never said anything remotely like that, and in fact has said precisely the contrary.

[Sardondi]

*Bullshit! Where did you get that from, Alex Jones? BNP?....

No, the BBC. Perhaps you've heard of it. I particularly like the piece entitled, "Growing use of Sharia by UK Muslims" http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16522447

Here's another from the Beeb, in which Justice Minister Bridget Prentice said decisions made under Islamic sharia law can have the force of law in English and Welsh family courts: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7690809.stm

Don't care for radio? Let's try the papers. from The Telegraph http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8686504/Sharia-a-law-unto-itself.html. I find this quote particularly informative: "Last month, Islamic extremists put up posters in the London boroughs of Waltham Forest, Tower Hamlets and Newham, warning residents that they were entering a “Sharia-controlled zone” where Islamic rules were enforced and gambling, alcohol and music was banned." Example below:




The Telegraph article goes on to say:

           "Certain decisions made under Sharia are already enforceable in British courts through the 1996 Arbitration Act, which allows any form of agreement as long as both parties concur on the terms at the outset. This legal standing does not apply to the informal Sharia councils â€" but does apply to the Muslim arbitration tribunals that rule on commercial and civil disputes, a fact that is raising fears that they could begin to supplant the British court system.

Set up in 2007 by Sheikh Faiz Siddiqi, a qualified commercial barrister, there are now seven Muslim arbitration tribunals across the country."

Then there is the widely-known article on January 6, 2008, in The Sunday Telegraph by the then-Bishop of Rochester, Michael Nazir-Ali, who viewed with alarm the growing dual culture as well as legal system for Muslims and all others in the UK - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/?xml=/news/2008/01/06/nislam206.xml. Comment as well by the BBC the same day - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7173599.stm

Then here are two articles from the Daily Mail, First, July 4, 2009, is a look at how the Muslim courts operated under the quasi-legal auspices of the Islamic Sharia Council, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1197478/Sharia-law-UK--How-Islam-dispensing-justice-side-British-courts.html In addition to civil disputes, the sharia courts handle gang fights and stabbings as well, completely outside of the British criminal justice system. The article from August 7, 2011, is titled, "Muslims Demand Sharia Student Loans Because Paying Interest Goes Against Islamic Law" - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2028782/Muslims-demand-Sharia-student-loans-paying-goes-Islamic-law.html.

Don't care for the DM? Well here's a paper of which I'm sure you approve, The Guardian, and a lovely little article from June 13, 2002 titled, "In the Name of the Law" - http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/jun/14/religion.news, which addresses how widespread and entrenched is the use of Muslim community courts to resolve a growing percentage of Muslim civil, domestic and business disputes; in short all but those criminal matters which cannot be shielded from view by the British judicial system.

Maybe I missed something but I believe the cites provide a basis for each factual allegation I made. I have to say I am nonplussed at your outrage. Perhaps you didn't care for someone of another nationality discussing and commenting about political and cultural matters in your country, matters about which he could have had but second-hand knowledge at best. Well, do tell. (Chew on that one just a moment, will you?) But let's not be so hasty about calling "Bullshit", what do you say?

Now, next we have the matter of you implying I received information from what is in effect a nazi political party in the UK, which carried with it the further implication I was familiar with the BNP, searched for "facts" published at its website and even subscribed to its repugnant doctrines and beliefs.

That's a goddam lie, "mate", and I'd like to see you correct it. I've spoken before about how ready some of the the leftward commentators hear appear to be to resort to the ad hominem in their posts. They repeatedly confuse attacks on their beliefs as an ad hom attack, and use them as permission to unleash the hounds. Your post has not changed my attitude.

I have intentionally not engaged on many of the most ridiculous exchanges here, because it is tiresome and pointless. I didn't want to as well because it simply doesn't do any good to go around ready to mix it up on some silly board. But I'm not going to be called a liar or a nazi anywhere.

[CrabbyOld Bat]

PB has never said anything remotely like that, and in fact has said precisely the contrary.

Nothing remotely like that? He's said precisely the contrary?

So he said that he loves Muslims, doesn't fear them, doesn't think any are terrorists and he has no fear of them taking over the world?  And he said he has no doubt that Obama isn't a Muslim or connected to Muslim terrorists? 

Okay, thanks. Guess I missed reading those posts before I asked him (directly) to clarify his positions for me.  If I'm still misunderstanding how he feels about Muslims and Obama, how about if we let him clarify things himself this time? Thanks again.

[Juan]

Of course, under Sharia Obama is a Muslim.  His father was a Muslim, making Barack,Jr. a Muslim.  And under Sharia, it is unlawful to convert to another religion, so Obama is still a Muslim.
It's interesting to me that the same people who are outraged by comments unfavorable towards Sharia are the very same people who ignore Sharia and say Obama is not a Muslim - whether he practices the faith or not.

[CrabbyOld Bat]

Of course, under Sharia Obama is a Muslim.  His father was a Muslim, making Barack,Jr. a Muslim.  And under Sharia, it is unlawful to convert to another religion, so Obama is still a Muslim.
It's interesting to me that the same people who are outraged by comments unfavorable towards Sharia are the very same people who ignore Sharia and say Obama is not a Muslim - whether he practices the faith or not.

Hmm. Much of that seems to be incorrect according to snopes.com which dispels many of those claims and suppositions:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp

Furthermore, there seems to be some confusion as to whether all Muslims are governed (religiously speaking) by Sharia law or if only some are, depending on which sect of Islamic tradition(s) they follow.

The real bottom line to me, however, is that Obama has been a practicing Christian for decades and was never a practicing Muslim. So even the mere suggestion that he is a Muslim -- if only according to some people's technical interpretation -- seems at the very least grossly misleading and, I believe, is mostly put forth by members of the media who have ulterior motives in mind.

[Mind Flayer Monk]

These are arbitration decisions and appear to be mostly contract disputes.
If the arbitrator decides against you, you can still go to court and win.
You can still dispute the decision in a higher court.

One of the articles linked at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7690809.stm
in the first paragraph states
"Sharia, a set of principles governing the way many Muslims believe they should live, is not legally binding."

another says http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16522447
"But the informal councils have no legal powers and they cannot impose any penalties.

They deal with civil cases alone, but many Muslims are choosing to voluntarily accept rulings made by the scholars."

[Yorkshire pud]

No, the BBC. Perhaps you've heard of it. I particularly like the piece entitled, "Growing use of Sharia by UK Muslims" http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16522447

Here's another from the Beeb, in which Justice Minister Bridget Prentice said decisions made under Islamic sharia law can have the force of law in English and Welsh family courts: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7690809.stm

IF They're the same; I said earlier that Sharia law does not supplant common or civil law...

Don't care for radio? Let's try the papers. from The Telegraph http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8686504/Sharia-a-law-unto-itself.html. I find this quote particularly informative: "Last month, Islamic extremists put up posters  in the London boroughs of Waltham Forest, Tower Hamlets and Newham, warning residents that they were entering a “Sharia-controlled zone” where Islamic rules were enforced and gambling, alcohol and music was banned." Example below:

Yeah, and I can put a poster up saying that aliens are the district's arbitor of law..it doesn't make it so. You'll find it's done by the right wing militant muslim men who want to live in a primitive world..it doesn't mean it's going to happen. Yoou have extremist white men in the USA who really believe that all black people should be sent to Africa; do you think that will happen? Or is it just muslims you want to home in on?

The Telegraph article goes on to say:

           "Certain decisions made under Sharia are already enforceable in British courts through the 1996 Arbitration Act, which allows any form of agreement as long as both parties concur on the terms at the outset. This legal standing does not apply to the informal Sharia councils â€" but does apply to the Muslim arbitration tribunals that rule on commercial and civil disputes, a fact that is raising fears that they could begin to supplant the British court system.

Set up in 2007 by Sheikh Faiz Siddiqi, a qualified commercial barrister, there are now seven Muslim arbitration tribunals across the country."

But it doesnt supplant common or civil law..I know it's trite, but I have mentioned this before.

Then there is the widely-known article on January 6, 2008, in The Sunday Telegraph by the then-Bishop of Rochester, Michael Nazir-Ali, who viewed with alarm the growing dual culture as well as legal system for Muslims and all others in the UK - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/?xml=/news/2008/01/06/nislam206.xml. Comment as well by the BBC the same day - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7173599.stm

Then here are two articles from the Daily Mail, First, July 4, 2009, is a look at how the Muslim courts operated under the quasi-legal auspices of the Islamic Sharia Council, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1197478/Sharia-law-UK--How-Islam-dispensing-justice-side-British-courts.html In addition to civil disputes, the sharia courts handle gang fights and stabbings as well, completely outside of the British criminal justice system. The article from August 7, 2011, is titled, "Muslims Demand Sharia Student Loans Because Paying Interest Goes Against Islamic Law" - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2028782/Muslims-demand-Sharia-student-loans-paying-goes-Islamic-law.html.

Daily Mail....say no more! The Daily Mail's grasp of reality is as tenuous as that of trying to plait fog.

Don't care for the DM? Well here's a paper of which I'm sure you approve, The Guardian, and a lovely little article from June 13, 2002 titled, "In the Name of the Law" - http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/jun/14/religion.news, which addresses how widespread and entrenched is the use of Muslim community courts to resolve a growing percentage of Muslim civil, domestic and business disputes; in short all but those criminal matters which cannot be shielded from view by the British judicial system.  

Yes, as I said earlier, in the same way Christian Church law is used; It isn't compulsory.It's an option IF both parties agree...Look at is as a bar brawl where two guys are fighting over a woman. It's not the ideal way to settle things, but effective!

Maybe I missed something but I believe the cites provide a basis for each factual allegation I made. I have to say I am nonplussed at your outrage. Perhaps you didn't care for someone of another nationality discussing and commenting about political and cultural matters in your country, matters about which he could have had but second-hand knowledge at best. Well, do tell. (Chew on that one just a moment, will you?) But let's not be so hasty about calling "Bullshit", what do you say?

Sure, no problem..but I've previously explained that rumour, hyperbole and misinformation doesn't make it fact. And Sharia law isn't part of the UK (Scottish law is slightly different to English/Welsh law) legislature. It's a side line used in muslim civil disputes, ONLY by muslims and is superceded by Criminal law.

Now, next we have the matter of you implying I received information from what is in effect a nazi political party in the UK, which carried with it the further implication I was familiar with the BNP, searched for "facts" published at its website and even subscribed to its repugnant doctrines and beliefs.

Yeah, because it's the sort of thing that the BNP trot out as 'in a town near you'..I haven't done it, but I would guess googling 'Sharia law in the UK' will throow up an article by the BNP. Similarly I mentioned Alex Jones, because he's inclined to say things about the UK that have no basis in reality-memorably he said on air that children are routinely kidnapped from their parents by the government! What he forgot (I'm assuming he forgot) to mention was they were probably taken into care by social services because of abusive parents!

That's a goddam lie, "mate", and I'd like to see you correct it. I've spoken before about how ready some of the the leftward commentators hear appear to be to resort to the ad hominem in their posts. They repeatedly confuse attacks on their beliefs as an ad hom attack, and use them as permission to unleash the hounds. Your post has not changed my attitude.

Oh don't run away with the idea I'm left leaning; I'm not, mate.

I have intentionally not engaged on many of the most ridiculous exchanges here, because it is tiresome and pointless. I didn't want to as well because it simply doesn't do any good to go around ready to mix it up on some silly board. But I'm not going to be called a liar or a nazi anywhere.

No-one called you a liar or a nazi..well, I certainly didn't. Mate.

[Yorkshire pud]

I'm no fan of any religion (Although I'm interested in the philosphy of Buddism and the belonging to Earth as Pagans practice), so I'm curious as to what the reaction would be if the Vatican decided (hypothetically) decided to once again raise it's head and execute the heretics? And wreak all the terrible punishments and sanctions they once did--the Catholic church is probably (per head of capita) responsible for more injustice, death and poverty than any other religion, ever. Would there be the same almost hysteria as that being shown over Islam? 

[Juan]

Hmm. Much of that seems to be incorrect according to snopes.com which dispels many of those claims and suppositions:

It dispels many claims and suppositions, but it does not even address the one that I made.
I'm not arguing that Obama is a Muslim.  I don't care.  But to dismiss outright the idea that he is is equally wrong. Under at least one view, he is.  It's the same as some Jews who believe that in order to be Jewish, you must have a Jewish mother.

[Juan]

I'm curious as to what the reaction would be if the Vatican decided (hypothetically) decided to once again raise it's head and execute the heretics?

Nation states wouldn't put up with the intrusion on their power. Unless the Vatican cut them in on something.

[PB the Deplorable]

IF They're the same; I said earlier that Sharia law does not supplant common or civil law...

You told me twice Sharia Councils in the UK didn't exist at all.  You were quite expressive about it.

Now you admit they exist, but are voluntary.  Again, I ask:  Are they? 

Are women never forced by family or  the community to use them and abide by their decisions?  Children?  New immigrants who thought they were coming to a land of freedom?  Other people that don't wish to be ostracised by the community?  Can you be sure?  I won't even ask again if you think this is really such a good thing.

... Oh don't run away with the idea I'm left leaning; I'm not, mate...

ANYONE that says Barack Obama is 'Right-Wing', leans Left.  Far to the Left.  Just admit it.  Come on, man, you even tried to use a link from the World Socialist to back it up.

[PB the Deplorable]

I'm no fan of any religion (Although I'm interested in the philosphy of Buddism and the belonging to Earth as Pagans practice), so I'm curious as to what the reaction would be if the Vatican decided (hypothetically) decided to once again raise it's head and execute the heretics? And wreak all the terrible punishments and sanctions they once did--the Catholic church is probably (per head of capita) responsible for more injustice, death and poverty than any other religion, ever. Would there be the same almost hysteria as that being shown over Islam?

Of course - what do you think, that people would go along with it?   I really hope you know the answer to that.   

Only if that was happening the reaction to it wouldn't be 'hysteria', and what you call 'hysteria' over Islam isn't hysteria either. 

[Yorkshire pud]

Of course - what do you think, that people would go along with it?   I really hope you know the answer to that.   

Only if that was happening the reaction to it wouldn't be 'hysteria', and what you call 'hysteria' over Islam isn't hysteria either.  

I rest my case; yours I believe?

Especially when said others are making nukes and make periodic threats of destruction like the government of Iran, or when we see traffic stop in every major Arab capital and see all the people getting out in the middle of the street to celebrate when they hear the news about 9/11, or when we hear of 'honor' killings, stonings, amputations for petty crime, forced marriages of young girls and women of all ages, forced burka wearing and 'modesty police', purging and killing of anyone of a different religion where they are the majority, justifying rapes of anyone with a different religion, read about and see video footage of new incidents of terrorism somewhere in the world every single day, demands in our own countries that we move towards Sharia Law and that we stop celebrating our holidays because as newcomers here that's what theydemand

Naturally you've been up close and personal in the above instances and not simply depended on TV footage that might have an agenda-ratings perhaps? Have you actually met an Iranian? Spoke to one? I have. I knoow her well.

Have you actually been to an Arab country? I've been to three. Have you met and spoke to any muslims? I have; worked with them, and also have neighbours who are, latest neighbour moved in and came across to shake my hand and introduce himself and his family.

Have you been to Africa? I have. Three times, one of the most interesting, kindest, most gentle men I ever met was a man called Ali, a fisherman in the off season, taking tourists out in his glass bottom boat in the season at Mombassa. He was a muslim, and remembered me each time I re-visited. Second time I went, he spotted me from half a mile up the beach and ran over to shake my hand. Remembered mine, my wifes and daughter's name-a year after our first meeting. This man lived in abject poverty, but was reluctant to take any money from us as he considered us as friends.  It almost came to an argument a couple of times, and I had to force him to take the money.

I take it YOU speak from similar experiences and knowledge? Or do you simply refer to white supremiscist weekly with it's pull out and keep 'How to hate properly those not like you' suppliment.