United Kingdom--Islamic extremists have called on British Muslims to establish three independent states within the UK.
The notorious Muslims Against the Crusades (MAC) group have named Yorkshire towns Bradford and Dewsbury and Tower Hamlets in East London as testbeds for blanket sharia rule.
The medieval 'emirates' would operate entirely outside British law, according to a document on the MAC website.
The MAC group, led by Abu Assadullah, was set up last year and has become notorious because of its violent protests, most provocatively burning poppies during the Remembrance Day silence.
Under the heading 'Muslims should set up Islamic emirates in the UK', MAC says: 'We suggest it is time that areas with large Muslim populations declare an emirate delineating that Muslims trying to live within this area are trying to live by the sharia as much as possible with their own courts and community watch and schools and even self sufficient trade. (Read more.)
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
British Muslims Call for Three Independent Muslim States . . . in the UK
It would be funny if it weren't so utterly sad. Every time we say something about Muslims wanting to establish Sharia in the West, we're called "racists," "Islamophobes," "bigots," "hate-mongers," etc. And yet, again and again, Muslims say they want Sharia in the West.
43 comments:
Considering what's happening in Dearborn, it will only be a matter of time before the Dearborn Muslims start demanding it. Considering the political prostitution that is prevalent in the Dearborn City Hall, I'm pretty sure Mayor O'Reilly will support their cause of Dearborn's secession from the United States.
It will not be surprising if, eventually, the Dearborn streets will be host to military troops. Baghdad, Kabul, Dearborn.
A Dhimmi is nothing more than a politician who prostitutes himself for the Muslims, whether his name is Roger Williams or John O'Reilly.
"Muslims Against the Crusades"
Well, that's a dumb name. Almost everybody's against the Crusades; what makes them think they're some sort of special "conscientious objectors," so to speak, for rejecting the Crusades?
I can think of a very logical solution that makes everybody happy: they should move to an Islamic country. Then they can have all the Sharia they want. Luckily there hasn't been much of this in the United States (trying to establish an independent state, that is); the U.S. has to worry more about evangelical politicians.
I have written to my MP about this several times and all I got back was some "freedom of religion" bs. Did you read the comments by muslims - do they know anything about islam or are they just lying I wonder.
the mayor of dearborn and the others remind me of "familiars" in vampire movies. they kinds kiss up to everything these vampires say and in the end they are the first ones to be killed when the vampires have power.
three Independent states ? Give them one they'l want all.
A new antichristian muslim website has opened up and they have a poll asking if the site offers good information on Christianity. I want to encourage people to go to the site and of course, vote NO ;)
http://unveiling-christianity.org/
the poll is on the left hand side. They also solicit responses. Witnessing time? :)
It's an ominous development. It may be the last providential opportunity for the sick liberal elite to take some survival steps when Muslim openly start practicing their cruel and criminal Sharia in selected ghettoes carved out specifically for this purpose. If this can’t wake up the perversely sick and arrogant British liberals, nothing ever will do. Anyway, the fall of many European nations including Britain is a certainty in future with or without Jihad! If Muslim’s immigration is not curbed and if they are not strictly forced to adopt family planning, existing Muslims are enough to force a demographic change with their rats like breeding culture. It is certain to provide them the required majority to democratically force Britain under Islamic Sharia rule. That will be the last election the minority British can ever hope to see. Thereafter, it will be desperate struggle to take care of their limbs and lives under Sharia rule!
I don't get it. Why three? What's the difference?
The reason that most Muslims emigrate is to convert their host country to Islam, by any means necessary.
The supposition that they are looking for a better life is unfounded.
In the Name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful.
{The Noble Qur'an [61:8] - Their intention is to extinguish Allah's Light (by blowing) with their mouths: But Allah will complete (the revelation of) His Light, even though the Unbelievers may detest (it).}
It looks like a case of divide and conquer. Just imagine if Christians did this in Islamic lands. Muslims wouldn't stand for it--in fact, they would most likely be either, silenced, jailed, or killed; so, why do they think that non Muslims would stand for it?
Yusuf Alamo said...
"I don't get it. Why three? What's the difference?"
Because they can't count to four.
Okay. Presuming you're right Joe, why so specific a number? What is so special about three? Why not two or one?
GEE Yusuf, I really don't know the answer to that question. Maybe (just maybe) they drop out of school just before they get to the part where they learn to count to four??
Judging from the Dearborn Arabfest videos (plural), other than four letter words, many of the Muslims demonstrated their lack of any command of the English language.
Judging from these videos, many of the Muslim youth dropped out of school immediately after learning to count to the number one as exemplified by their proud display of their educational accomplishments through the use of a single middle digit.
I would suggest that if Islam is to take over the world, it will take more than an army of pre-school dropouts to do so. In Great Britain their inability to count past three has certainly limited their aspirations.
If the kids on the Arabfest videos ever want to play baseball, they'll have to count past one if they want to score after hitting a home run. Can you imagine hitting a ball over the fence only to be held up at first base because you can't count to two?
Tragic!
because yusef, may be 3 is the highest number which they can count. ha ha ha ha
because yousef, this is allah's knowledge of mathematics. see these three videos. at least see the last one - 1) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3smk04Xt5mw
2)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WG6mUaMXCGA
3)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrwOJDro38k
"GEE Yusuf, I really don't know the answer to that question. Maybe (just maybe) they drop out of school just before they get to the part where they learn to count to four??"
Really? Muslims in U.K. drop out of school before they get to the part where they learn to count to four?
"Judging from the Dearborn Arabfest videos (plural), other than four letter words, many of the Muslims demonstrated their lack of any command of the English language."
Isn't Dearborn in the U.S.? Isn't this thread titled 'British Muslims Call for Three Independent Muslim States . . . in the UK'? How did a city in the U.S. get into this discussion?
"Judging from these videos, many of the Muslim youth dropped out of school immediately after learning to count to the number one as exemplified by their proud display of their educational accomplishments through the use of a single middle digit."
So, you're saying that Muslims in Dearborn are poorly educated and can't count past the number one because they kept giving Acts 17 the finger? OK, got it.
"I would suggest that if Islam is to take over the world, it will take more than an army of pre-school dropouts to do so. In Great Britain their inability to count past three has certainly limited their aspirations."
So, you're saying that Muslims in the U.K. are preschool dropouts and can't count past the number three?
"If the kids on the Arabfest videos ever want to play baseball, they'll have to count past one if they want to score after hitting a home run. Can you imagine hitting a ball over the fence only to be held up at first base because you can't count to two? Tragic."
Tragic? Yeah, it would be. If it were true. May Allah guide you (and all of us), ameen.
no no yusuf, allah doesn't need to guide us. because allah himself needs guidance to chastity - Matthew 5:27,28. and if allah guides us, we all will become sex hungry like muhammad. perhaps we will rape 9 years old girls and finally we will go to allah's prostitute quarter to 72 girls. we are not rapists. we have hearts. we believe 1:1 one man for one woman. oops sorry i forgot that allah doesn't understand mathematics - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrwOJDro38k
In the Name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful.
{The Noble Qur'an [39:60] - On the Day of Judgment wilt thou see those who told lies against Allah;- their faces will be turned black; Is there not in Hell an abode for the Haughty?}
"Isn't Dearborn in the U.S.? Isn't this thread titled 'British Muslims Call for Three Independent Muslim States . . . in the UK'? How did a city in the U.S. get into this discussion?"
Yusuf, Muslims and Islam are world wide - or haven't you heard?
"So, you're saying that Muslims in Dearborn are poorly educated and can't count past the number one because they kept giving Acts 17 the finger? OK, got it."
No Yusuf, if you viewed the video you will see a lone preacher, NOT affiliated with Acts 17, being harassed by the crowd*.
"So, you're saying that Muslims in the U.K. are preschool dropouts and can't count past the number three?"
I'm only suggesting a possible explanation to YOUR question, however, if the shoe fits . . .
I guess there is no room for sarcasm in Islam so I'm not surprised that you don't understand it.
_________
* http://www.answeringmuslims.com/2011/07/christian-preacher-harassed-and-bullied.html
Joe Bradley, you're so juvenile.
Okay, I'm going to give you a serious answer, Yusuf Alamo. Maybe MAC chose those particular regions because they are populated by a lot of Muslims or something, and there are only three regions like that. If there were four regions densely populated with Muslims, they would suggest four independent Muslim states. It's just a guess, but that's what I'm thinking.
GAP, while I may be juvenile and sarcastic, at least I have good comprehension skills and you didn't answer Yusuf's question any better than I did.
His question was NOT the reason Muslims selected those sites for autonomy, his question was why they selected three sites, "not two or one"*. While addressing a possible reason in your answer, you didn't address why they selected THREE sites which was the question.
I think the question is a bit odd, seeking an answer for which there is no readily discernible basis for explanation, prompting my sarcasm. Perhaps, in time, we will discover it's true nature.
__________________
*
Yusuf Alamo said...
I don't get it. Why three? What's the difference?
July 6, 2011 11:26 AM
Yusuf Alamo said...
Okay. Presuming you're right Joe, why so specific a number? What is so special about three? Why not two or one?
July 6, 2011 10:32 PM
Internet Islam this website is not new, ibn anwar already got refuted many times.
I think that if this keep going this was sooner or later will happen the same that happened to Jews here in Europe, for example here in Spain ppl is starting to get really tired of muslims since they don't adapt to the country laws, so now everyone is voting for Right Parties, the bad new is that voting for them makes life harder for inmigrants who did come hre to live at peace and get a better life, i feel so sad for them because most of it is muslims fault :(
Muslims can be Muslims without having to impose Shari'ah on non-Muslims. I can adhere to the prohibition against alcohol and pork consumption according to Shari'ah. The same applies for music, pornography, dating, etc. This is prohibited according to Shari'ah and a Muslim can choose to refrain from participating without any fear of it conflicting with the laws of western democratic societies. There are some who may bring up polemics against my reasoning such as the policies of corporal punishment for certain crimes committed according to the Shari'ah. For instance, were my son or daughter to engage in an intimate relationship outside the boundaries of marriage (May Allah protect us all from that, ameen), would it conflict with the laws of western democratic societies for me to disown him or her? The same rules apply to a spouse who commits adultery or for someone who apostates from Islam (astaghfirullah atheem). Banishment and divorce are perfectly legal alternatives within Shari'ah and neither one conflicts with the laws of western democracy. No one can force me to speak to (or be married to) someone I don't like. These are perfectly good alternatives already prescribed within Shari'ah which does not conflict with western democracy. Let's say (hypothetically) that I am living in the west and I have a daughter or son who refuses to dress as prescribed within the Qur'an and the Authentic Sunnah. First, I'm going to blame myself for perhaps not being a good Muslim example or for not properly teaching Islam to my daughter or son. Second, I'm going to pray that (inshAllah) my daughter or son is guided back to the straight path of Islam. Third, I can simply hate their actions within my heart if and when all else fails until they are of legal age so that I can relinquish them to make their own decisions without me having to take any responsibility for the consequences of their adult decisions. There are people that may not agree with this course of action but it fits perfectly within the boundaries of both Shari'ah law and western democratic law. As long as we don't break any of the laws here in the west, non-Muslims have to tolerate us just as much as we have to tolerate them. Part of the wisdom in Muslims having many children is the need for them to recognize that they may lose some of their children to disbelief (kufr). This is a hard reality, but one I have no problem in accepting because Allah guides whom He wills. This is one of the reasons why it is the duty of every Muslim (including the ones in the west) to marry as soon as possible and have as many children as Allah will permit them to have, so that even though we (Muslims) may lose a few of them to disbelief (kufr), we Muslims (inshAllah) will pray that the overwhelming majority of our remaining children adhere to the Qur'an and the Authentic Sunnah as strong Muslims, ameen. Praise be to Allah, we (Muslims in the west) don't have to hurt or kill non-Muslims. We can simply out-practice, out-marry, and out-breed non-Muslims. Look, civil unions between two people of the same gender has already been ruled legal within the state of New York. InshAllah, it is only a matter of time before men will be legally able to marry more than one wife here in New York. InshAllah, when that happens in New York, I can guarantee you that we Muslims (inshAllah) will breed faster than the LGBT community. InshAllah, many of the children or grandchildren of the non-Muslims on this website (inshAllah) will eventually either peacefully accept Islam on their own or marry Muslims and in turn have Muslim children. As President Obama said; "Islam is part of the fabric of America". Soon (InshAllah), it will be part of the fabric of your own households. May Allah guide all of us to the straight path of Islam and bless our Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alaihee wa sallam), ameen.
@ Internet Islam re poll on http://unveiling-christianity.org
Would be interested in others figures after they poll just to see if it is presenting a true result.
After I voted (and out of respect for all those of my history who fought hard for that right I will not belittle their sacrifices by indicating how I voted here but enshrine their achievement with non disclosure) the results stood at:
Yes 66.91% (279 votes)
No 27.1% (113 votes)
Needs Improvement 6% (25 votes)
Total 417 votes.
Now just as a footnote may I point out that I went back to the site via a proxy server (turbohide.com) to see if I could cast a further vote and when hitting the vote button nothing happened - just sat there so obviously there are smarts built in (yes I know about cookies thats why I cleared my cache, deleted cookies).
Thanks all
Romans10-9-11.com
This also means that non-Muslims living in Muslim lands should adhere to Shari'ah. It is only fair.
And for anyone confused about my previous post, I was referring to Muslims living in non-Muslim lands such as the U.K. and the U.S. I believe Shari'ah must be implemented to the fullest degree within the boundaries of Muslim lands.
"His question was NOT the reason Muslims selected those sites for autonomy, his question was why they selected three sites, "not two or one"*. While addressing a possible reason in your answer, you didn't address why they selected THREE sites which was the question."
I meant that maybe there were *only three* sites nearby that had conditions favorable for Sharia. Why pick only two or one if there are *three* sites where Sharia could work? I already explained that ("... and there are only three regions like that. If there were four regions densely populated with Muslims, they would suggest four independent Muslim states"). I guess you only read the first part ("Maybe MAC chose those particular regions because they are populated by a lot of Muslims or something").
and everybody please pay attention to what simple_truth said. the most important thing - muslims are trying to DIVIDE AND CONQUER. we all should notice that. study what happened in Malaysia. Once that was a Budhist country. study the case of Russia, I mean USSR. once they were united. now all are stans. kazakstan ujbekistan this stan that stan....... See what is happening in India. First they separated a part of India and made another stan - Pakistan. Now they are demanding for FREE KASHMIR. Kashmir is still in India but they are trying to separate it. now they are demanding western countries. They will try to make londonistan, hollandatsan, and finally entire europastan. JUST KICK THEM OUT before they kick others out.
and please watch this video and other videos uploaded by me - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Or_vXXydmVM
and please wake up
Well, Tower Hamlets is certainly favourable for sharia rule. In fact it's pretty much happening there to some extent already. That's the heartland of these "Muslims Against Crusades (but Hugely in Favour of Jihad)". Bradford has so many Asian residents that it's sometimes nicknamed Bradistan. And I don't know much about Dewsbury but I assume there must be a huge Muslim population there, too.
Why three? Well, I think the reason they suggested three sharia states is because there are so far only three areas in the UK which have a dominant enough Muslim population for it. And Tower Hamlets is in the south of the UK, in London, and Bradford and Dewsbury are both in the north. Presumably it would be difficult to administer all three areas as one when they are far apart from each other, since a sharia state on UK land would face opposition and hostility, restrictions on movement etc. I think the idea is that eventully the whole country would be under sharia anyway, so the division would be temporary. Each area would have to be as enclosed and self-sufficient as possible to survive at first. And presumably co-ordinating three separate areas as one state would be too much mental work for MAC members, who are mostly too lazy to work for a living and whose brains have probably turned to cat food from years untouched by logic or reason or accountability or empathy or post-adolescent development of any kind. They also have to channel a lot of brain power into actively stopping themselves from noticing the absurdity of their own hardline Islamic beliefs, like for example realising what an incredible coincidence it is that a law suited well to harsh 7th century nomadic desert conditions (funnily enough like those that existed in the time and place that Muhammad first got his revelations), just so happens to be Allah's perfect, chosen legal method for all times, places and people, including inner-city London over a thousand years later amongst a population who are hostile to it and have developed their own legal systems over hundreds of years of scholarship.
AND they have to put a lot of brain power into gaining recruits by making other people believe what they believe, too. And they have to constantly think up new ways to offend the majority UK population and draw negative attention to themselves and by extension, all UK Muslims, making life more unpleasant for everyone in the process. Which is a lot of work.
To: Yochanan
"Internet Islam this website is not new, ibn anwar already got refuted many times"
Where you get that information? I am very curious. I m Deaf and my primary language is American Sign Language. I m not speedy reader. If you answer me very well, then I maybe will not read this Internet. Thank you
Felipe Ramos
One day or another, the brits will kick them out. "For God and the Queen", No Surrender.
"Truth said...
and everybody please pay attention to what simple_truth said. the most important thing - muslims are trying to DIVIDE AND CONQUER. we all should notice that. study what happened in Malaysia. Once that was a Budhist country. study the case of Russia, I mean USSR. once they were united. now all are stans. kazakstan ujbekistan this stan that stan....... See what is happening in India. First they separated a part of India and made another stan - Pakistan. Now they are demanding for FREE KASHMIR. Kashmir is still in India but they are trying to separate it. now they are demanding western countries. They will try to make londonistan, hollandatsan, and finally entire europastan. JUST KICK THEM OUT before they kick others out."
Yes, this was the idea that I was trying to relay here.
Muslims are not satisfied with just living in a non Islamic area; they want to rule wherever they go. They are not really interested in learning to live in harmony with others as much as making enclaves for themselves until they can disjoint the rest of the non Islamic land. Of course, not all Muslims think this way, but if push comes to shove, even the more liberal ones will participate in the fruits of the destruction of the conquered civilization. In the end, Muslims will stick together to support one another, even if it means that they tear down the civilization they came to live in. Islam is their first allegiance, after all.
No Surrender.
The English are the new Irish.
Perhaps the housing of those Muslims who may, in the future, violently demand autonomy and Sharia law within enclaves in the United States are being addressed by the nationwide erection of FEMA camps.
http://tinyurl.com/3opqa8
yusuf almo, in your profile i saw that you like the movie - braveheart. but braveheart gives a message - FREEDOM. then why do you, being a muslim, like that movie ?? r u against SHARIA ?? don't you as a muslim want to dominate the entire world ??
in your movie list, there is another movie - corse of the golden flower. i can guess why you like the movie
Peace be unto you.
"yusuf almo, in your profile i saw that you like the movie - braveheart. but braveheart gives a message - FREEDOM. then why do you, being a muslim, like that movie ??"
Well, first off, the movie came out before I was a Muslim. I was in Junior High School when it came out. I've only been a Muslim for 3 years. Second, history is my favorite subject. When I'm not reading history books, I'm usually watching historical films or documentaries. I'm reading a book now called 'The Thirteenth Tribe' by Arthur Koestler. It's about the rise and fall of the Khazar Empire. So, yes, I enjoyed 'Brave Heart'. The film is very well written, acted, and directed.
"r u against SHARIA ??"
No, I'm not against Shari'ah.
"don't you as a muslim want to dominate the entire world ??"
No, it's my day off and (Allah willing) I plan on doing laundry.
"in your movie list, there is another movie - corse of the golden flower. i can guess why you like the movie"
I like the movie because it was dramatic and intense without being gratuitous. I've watched a lot of Chinese films over the years and they tend to overdo it. Especially Chinese Wuxia films. My favorite Wuxia film is 'Fearless' with Jet Li. However, I like Director Zhang Yimou and actors Chow Yun-Fat, Jay Chou, and Gong Li.
"Hero" was better than "Fearless."
Actually, you're right. 'Hero' is a much better movie. However, I still like 'Fearless' more.
Did you see 'Ip Man'?
Haven't seen it. I'd be shocked if Shamoun hasn't seen it, though. He's the biggest Bruce Lee fan ever. We walk into a bookstore, and he goes straight to the Bruce Lee section every time.
I prefer the old school kung fu movies (flying through the air and such), along with their modern counterparts (Crouching Tiger/House of Flying Daggers/Hero/Golden Flower).
Yusuf Alamo said:
"don't you as a muslim want to dominate the entire world ??"
No, it's my day off and (Allah willing) I plan on doing laundry.
This may be the first time a muslim has made me laugh out loud!!!
Of course, I like the discussion of kung fu movies....
Love it!!!
Good afternoon Yusuf,
You, previously, stated "Muslims can be Muslims without having to impose Shari'ah on non-Muslims". While this is true, it is merely a matter of practicality because Muslims living in non-Muslim lands have no choice. Pursuant to the Qur'an* they must lay in wait until they have either sufficient numbers or influence to replace the current system of government with Sharia. As we have read in this blog, there are those who test the waters and have been told by the Federal courts that the time for Sharia has not yet arrived.
As you state, those living in Muslim lands should expect to live under Sharia. For democracies, the Islamic goal is to populate the land with sufficient numbers of Muslims to make Sharia feasible through the acquisition of the legal system through the ballot, thereby utilizing the democratic process to further the Islamic plan for a worldwide Caliphate** which would be administered through Islamic law (Sharia).
You point out the many consequences for actions within Sharia which, for now, must be tempered by the Constitution since the Muslim population does not contain sufficient numbers within the USA to abrogate the Constitution and replace it with Sharia. Yes, it is reasonable and completely Constitutional (as well as sensible) to refrain from alcohol and pork consumption. It is, further, reasonable and understandable to avail ones self of the actions that you prescribe for breaches of morality however, the argument against Sharia and it's barbaric call to corporal punishment is not based in polemics, it is based in the reality of what the world witnesses in lands which are, in fact, Muslim and in which Sharia is fully implemented. Sharia in the West is a necessary aberration which is not representative of that which is practiced in Muslim lands.
While you may, personally, have a kinder and gentler view of Sharia your view is discordant with Sharia as practiced within Muslim lands. Muhammad's companions (Sahaba) and Muslim scholars agree - there can only be one world wide form of Islam and Islamic law (Sharia)***. Islam respects the age old adage that the one with the biggest sword wins the argument - which one do you think that will be?
__________
*Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war. Qur’an:9:5
**"God has promised those of you who have attained to faith and do righteous deeds that, of a certainty, He will make them Khulifa on earth, even as He caused [some of] those who lived before them to become Khulifa; and that, of a certainty, He will firmly establish for them the religion which He has been pleased to bestow on them; and that, of a certainty, He will cause their erstwhile state of fear to be replaced by a sense of security [seeing that] they worship Me [alone], not ascribing divine powers to aught beside Me. But all who, after [having understood] this, choose to deny the truth - it is they, they who are truly iniquitous!" [24:55] (Surah Al-Nur, Verse 55)
**http://tinyurl.com/4jlrmfs
***http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caliphate
Post a Comment