>
http://www.geertwilders.nl/
Does English law really owe a debt to Sharia law?
Why is it that in the UK there appears to be a determined effort to reduce everything in our history by making claims that it is due to the influence of Islam that this or that happened.
We have had the works of Shakespeare claimed as Islamic, we have heard that Australia was first discovered by Islamic traders, there have been multifarious claims that Islam gave birth to mathematics etc, etc , etc.
Even the most basic research shows that all these claims are without substance, it appears to me that anything which promoters Islam as being the root of our development is being put out to the general public.
The people who are doing this are, to my mind, finding ways of promoting Islam and making Islam appear acceptable because it is as they may claim "part of our history"
Here is the latest one, the question being asked is does English common law owe a debt to Muslim law - Sharia law.
Considering the huge debate and public interest in Sharia law in the UK is it any wonder an article such as this appears in the MSM, in this case the BBC - wow, now there's a surprise.
One thing is absolutely clear the British legal system which was based on common law bears no resemblance to the barbaric Sharia law that is being inducted into the UK at the moment, are articles such as this paving the way for a greater role for Sharia law in the UKFrom the BBC article
In London's historic "Inns of Court", barristers practice law in the shadow of the distinctive medieval Temple Church. But does English law really owe a debt to Muslim law?For some scholars, a historical connection to Islam is a "missing link" that explains why English common law is so different from classical Roman legal systems that hold sway across much of the rest of Europe.
It's a controversial idea. Common law has inspired legal systems across the world. What's more, calls for the UK to accommodate Islamic Sharia law have caused public outcry.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/7631388.stm
Note that the comments in the article were "a selection" which all strangely agreed with the beebs dhimmi view. Gosh, the muslims debated law in a building and so do our lawyers so our law must have come from mohammeds. since the article in the sunday times saying that sharia is now bieng enforced by british courts no one seems to have asked the obvious question, namely,what happened to the rule of law? wasn't this one of the founding principles of our law that everyone is treated the same, unlike Sharia which treats people differently depending on gender, religion etc. This also exposes the fatal flaw in the Multi cultural argument. The law is merely the enforcement of a culture. it seeks to do this by a system of rewards and punishments. However if you have more than one culture in a society then which culture do you enforce? you cannot have more than one set of rules if you want to maintain the rule of law. it looks as though this one will be following freedom of speech into the dustbin to make way for our "cultural enrichment" expect this process to become steadily more painfull for those of you who are non muslims (ie islamophobes)
Harry
Reply to this
I heard the BBC R4 show on which this article was based. It made the unlikely suggestion that we got our jury system from 'enlightened' muslims! So where are all these juries in the islamic world? Somehow the presenter also forgot to mention that in sharia law a non-muslim is worth less than a muslim, and the same goes for any female of any religion.
Reply to this
It's not the first time I've heard such ridiculousness. I remember watching a programme where the journalist wanted to find out about Jesus and Christianity. He traveled to the Middle East, his home to take examples and lo and behold, the Muslims referred to Christ as actually being a Muslim and not a Christian, even though the concept of Islam never happened for nearly 700 years after the death of Christ.
This is the thing about Islam. It is working its way into the UK, into the Establishments, taking hold of the media(most notably the BBC), gaining positions of power with which to plan their machinations of the Islamisation of the UK. Therefore, they will now start uttering the preposterous, knowing that we will see it as such BUT open it up to debate as we are now.
This whole concept of what Islam is doing by trying to alter history(remember many believe that the holocaust is just Jewish propaganda) is comparable to panic attacks. The way a 'good book' on Anxiety describes them is quite unique in that it states that imagine your body is a sailing ship and the captain is your brain and the crew are your nerves. What happens is that all of a sudden the panic buttons start going off and the captain asks what's going on. The crew says there's chaos outside yet the Captain can that all is clear. However the crew continue to panic and so eventually the CAPTAIN PANICS BECAUSE THE CREW ARE PANICKING".
By the above definition it means that this is what Islam is doing by making us accept that our past is actually down to Islam, when many people know it to not be true, but by continually discussing our history and telling us it is, to people actually start thinking "well they wouldn't keep discussing it if there wasn't some truth in it"?
By allowing Islam to grow in the UK, not forgetting putting Muslims into positions of power, we give them all the tools they need with which to destroy our society and bring in their own culture, laws and religious beliefs. In other words, it's nothing more than shear madness what we in the UK are actively allowing to happen.
Reply to this