Progress: Islamic law is to be effectively enshrined in the British legal system

This is a very worrying development. Proof, if proof were needed that there is no different between the Conservative Government and the Labour Government in their treason towards their own country. From the Telegraph. Note how quietly it is being done.

Islamic law is adopted by British legal chiefs

“This violates everything that we stand for, it would make the Suffragettes turn in their graves.”– Baroness Cox


Solicitors told how to draw up Sharia-style wills penalising widows and non-believers (Telegraph)

Islamic law is to be effectively enshrined in the British legal system for the first time under guidelines for solicitors on drawing up “Sharia compliant” wills.

Under ground-breaking guidance, produced by The Law Society, High Street solicitors will be able to write Islamic wills that deny women an equal share of inheritances and exclude unbelievers altogether.

The documents, which would be recognised by Britain’s courts, will also prevent children born out of wedlock – and even those who have been adopted – from being counted as legitimate heirs.

Anyone married in a church, or in a civil ceremony, could be excluded from succession under Sharia principles, which recognise only Muslim weddings for inheritance purposes.

Nicholas Fluck, president of The Law Society, said the guidance would promote “good practice” in applying Islamic principles in the British legal system. (Do read on)

Lady Cox said: “Everyone has freedom to make their own will and everyone has freedom to let those wills reflect their religious beliefs. But to have an organisation such as The Law Society seeming to promote or encourage a policy which is inherently gender discriminatory in a way which will have very serious implications for women and possibly for children is a matter of deep concern.”


  • Sharia to apply to non-Muslims in Aceh– Islamic apologists in the West routinely denounce as “Islamophobic” any claim that Muslims anywhere will apply Sharia to non-Muslims. Reality, as always, is different: Sharia asserts authority over non-Muslims, and in Aceh now, that assertion is becoming reality.–Continue Reading »

Because he can:

Oberlin College Allows Muslim Prof to Violently Threaten Female Professors

American Power Under Obama in 1 Photo

Samantha-Power-screams-at-Russian-ambassador-450x325In a word. Pathetic.

As bad as the Carter years were, they didn’t feature the complete and total collapse of American power. And if Hillary manages to crawl into the White House, it will be another 4 to 8 years of this.

Whatever your views on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, watching the United States be disgraced and humiliated by a bunch of leftist academics is the nadir of this administration.

The media, true to form, is captioning this as “Samantha Power chats…”. That’s not a chat.

A what?

Lodi Mosqueteer not worried about Islamic terrorism:

babbles about “backlash” and worries about his mosque instead…..

“… those isolated incidents tend to garner space on the front pages of newspapers from coast to coast. And therein lies the problem, Allie said.  Allie said the news media and some U.S. politicians “sensationalise the most trivial things.”

Hate crime, hate crime

hate crime hoaxFAKE HATE: Black Michigan Student Wrote Hateful Messages On Her Own Dorm Room Door

Well, this week we found out there was no hate crime. It was a hoax. The black student made it up to get attention. (GWP)

3 thoughts on “Progress: Islamic law is to be effectively enshrined in the British legal system”

  1. What this former legal hack finds particularly interesting about the British Law Society’s guidelines for the drafting of Sharia-compliant wills is this: the guidelines are taking lawyers and their clients straight back into the Nineteenth Century, if not even earlier. Bye Bye Information Age. Hello Industrial Age. In that glorious period of human history, married women could not even own property. Their property became the property of the husband on marriage, up until the passage of the Married Women’s Property Act in the late Eighteen Hundreds. Married women were then regarded as inferior, and incapable of controlling their own affairs. And back then, the word ‘child,’ or ‘children’ in a will meant only legitimate children. In those enlightened days, if a testator wanted to make provision for an illegitimate child in a will, he would have to uses devices such as the secret trust, to keep any youthful indiscretions secret from the family. It’s uplifting to see British Law going back to that magnificent period in Human History, that time of of Workhouses, Debtor’s Prisons, small children working fifteen hour days in factories, Victorian fathers forcing pregnant daughters out into the snow, not to mention the wonders of primogeniture. It is easy to see why it is all called ‘cultural enrichment’!

  2. What next for Britain? Legalising polygamy, female genital mutilation, hanging gays, chopping-off hands/feet of thieves, rape and grooming of young girls for sex, honour killings. forcing all females into wearing burqas and walking behind their men-folk and so on? The list is endless.

    Cameron’s wish for a future Moslem Prime Minister of Britain might occur sooner than he thought.

  3. Sharia “law” (crime) differs from our laws in that it is the exact opposite of real LAW.

    Our Law is based on negative rights; on the Golden Rule of Law’s simple “Do Not Attack First” principle.

    Islam’s sharia is based on the exact opposite – on what I call the slanderously brazen rule of chaos, or basically “It is our holy right and duty to our god to always attack all the infidels first!”

    From this “THOU SHALT KILL!” credo, they inflict distrust, stagnation, and barbarism on them selves and on everyone else.

    Our laws are based on “Everything is forbidden, except that which is specifically agreed to” (between individual humans); all life is regulated a socio-economic contract agreement principle, where rights only come with concommitant, corollary responsibilities, and one isn’t allowed to do anything TO or FOR another unasked; while theirs is based on the exact opposite, on “Everything is allowed, except that which is specifically forbidden” i.e: We can have rights without responsibilities. I can take all your stuff if you don’t notice &/or don’t have the force-of-numbers gangster strength to stop me; it’s all us-versus-them, and group-might-made “rights!” Because, after all, allah can do everything he wants, both to and for anyone, and the Qur’an says Muhammad says Gebril says allah says he wants us to give everything in the world – including what you only think is your stuff – to Muhammad.

    But in reality, extortion is always a crime.

    Islam’s Sharia is either compatable with our Western, morality-based law (in which case it is superfluous) or it is not (in which case it is illegal).

    There is only one universally accepted version of sharia crime (‘law’) and that is the original, Haneefite version as recorded in The Hedaya and used by the Ottoman Empire to rule all of islam for centuries; all moslems in all their countries are very aware of its simple might-makes-right and us-versus-them tenets and strictures.

    There is really only one Qur’an, one islam, and one sharia.

    And islam is inherently against ALL sovereign national countries (which it regards as only temporary man-made false idols, to be eventually destroyed and replaced by the global muslim Ummah, ruled by their theocratic Caliphate government) because since the Qur’an and subsequent sharia elaborations embody “god’s” perfect laws which are to apply to all mankind everywhere, why would anyone ever need any merely human legislators (even ‘democratically elected’ ones)?!

    So, since islam is a subversive anti-national and anti-legal entity, why on earth are any of its “muslim” members ever afforded any legal standing to promote their criminal treasonous sedition, before any of our courts of law?!

    Allowing foreign (sharia “law”) courts to exist in your country is to enable those foreign governments to govern in your country; it’s obviously TREASON.

Comments are closed.