Sheikh Suhaib Hasan, of the Islamic Sharia Council:
“Problems such as knife crime would be resolved
if Britain implemented Islamic penal codes“
Here that Britain? That’s the sound of the long knives sharpening against the stone while the dunderheads in government allow this tomfoolery on their shores. What’s it going to take to make these politicians see the light, the very first stoning of a woman or a hand chopped off?
Those of you who might scoff at this, would be drummed out of any village in the UK 60 years ago, if you brought up the notion that one day Islamic sharia courts would be sanctioned by the British court system, with non-Muslim Brits participating in them. Here’s a comment to following article that the TT found very interesting, and to the point:
alex nevsky wrote: “the liberal and conservative brits on this comments board are, in the main, and as usual, saying, “when in rome,” well get it through your thick liberal multi-cultish heads; MUSLIMS DON’T BLOODY CARE! they have an agenda, and if liberals and conservatives don’t wake up, soon enough that agenda will be unstoppable, and you’ll all be very sorry. this is how islamification begins, and all you idiots can do is whine about “racists” like the bnp. so very sad. britain is such a laughing stock and complete JOKE.”
Andrew Jordan wrote: “The idea that English contract law does not recognise oral agreements is nonesense. I am very skeptical of the non-muslims claim. Both sides would need to agree on the ADR process, and there are plenty of secular ADR procedures to choose from which give flexibility without resorting to the vagaries of Sharia.”
Increasing numbers of non-Muslims are turning to Sharia courts to resolve commercial disputes and other civil matters, The Times has learnt.
The Muslim Arbitration Tribunal (MAT) said that 5 per cent of its cases involved non-Muslims who were using the courts because they were less cumbersome and more informal than the English legal system.
Freed Chedie, a spokesman for Sheikh Faiz-ul-Aqtab Siqqiqi, a barrister who set up the tribunal, said: “We put weight on oral agreements, whereas the British courts do not.”
In a case last month a non-Muslim Briton took his Muslim business partner to the tribunal to sort out a dispute over the profits in their car fleet company. “The non-Muslim claimed that there had been an oral agreement between the pair,” said Mr Chedie. “The tribunal found that because of certain things the Muslim man did, that agreement had existed. The non-Muslim was awarded £48,000.”
He said that the tribunal had adjudicated on at least 20 cases involving non-Muslims so far this year. The rulings of the tribunal are legally binding, provided that both parties agree to that condition at the beginning of any hearing.
Anti-Sharia campaigners, who claim that the Islamic system is radical and biased against women, expressed alarm at the news. Denis MacEoin, who wrote a recent report for the think-tank Civitas examining the spread of Sharia in Britain, said that MAT’s claims about non-Muslim clients “raises all sorts of questions”.
He added: “You really need to ask why. What advantages could that possibly have for them going to an Islamic court? Any [Sharia] court is going to be implementing aspects of a law that runs contrary to British law, because of the way it treats women for example.”
Another UK turkey (politician) voting for Christmas
Via: Johnny Rottenborough
UPDATE: Gaia tells the TT the following: “The ludicrous MP, Simon Hughes, is also gay!”
So there you have it folks, a gay politician pleading with the “brothers and sisters” to get involved in politics, the very same people who listen to clerics talk of throwing gays off of tall buildings.