British universities determined to Islamisize the country

Its been a busy few weeks for Britains Islamists; a period of ups and downs (but with more ups than downs of course).

LONDON. Lets start with the good news as I so rarely have any to impart.

In early December, Jordan Horner, Ricardo MacFarlane and another who cannot be named, were jailed by a judge at the Old Bailey in London. The three were part of the self-styled Muslim Patrol which has been trampling the streets of east London recently attempting to impose sharia law on to local people. Specifically, they had harassed a young couple for holding hands; they drove alongside them shouting through a megaphone to Let go of each others hands. This is a Muslim area!

In another incident, they informed Clare Coyle that she was dressed inappropriately for a Muslim area, was a slag, and was thus destined for the hellfire.

Lastly, they are reported to have attacked a group of men drinking in the east end area of Shoreditch.

 

Horner was sentenced to 17 months in prison, MacFarlane to 12 months, and the unnamed 23 year old to 6 months. Their quest to bring sharia to the streets of London was put on hold for now at least. Elsewhere of course, the Islamic Sharia Council, the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal and others continue to impose sharia law on to the lives of women and children by running a de facto parallel system of family law, which utterly dehumanises women and blames them for the violence they face but nobody has seen fit to impose any criminal sanctions for this particular implementation of the rules of sharia.

Back on the streets of east London, Anjem Choudary and his cronies took to the streets to protest against the sale of alcohol in the area. The Shariah Project, a group of Islamists from Waltham Forest, described alcohol as the mother of all evils and stated that they were aware that sooner or later we would have to confront non-practising Muslims selling alcohol.

According to news reports, around 60 men and burka-clad women handed over warning letters to Muslim-owned businesses in the popular area informing them that they would face 40 lashes, in line with sharia law, if they continued to sell alcoholic drinks. Organisers had told The Times that they had planned their protest to coincide with the large number of Christmas parties which were to be held in the locality by office workers from the nearby financial district. Anjem Choudary told the crowd of Islamists, who held up banners stating Islam is the perfect system for all mankind, that sharia law should be enforced across Britain in full.

Elsewhere, Universities UK (UUK) the so-called voice of UK universities had issued guidelines saying that gender segregation, if requested by the speaker (knowing full well there are plenty of speakers who will make just that request) was perfectly ok with them. The guidance has caused a furore in Britain with a street protest last week, condemnation from government ministers, and even a word from Downing St. The Prime Minister was said to feel very strongly about the matter and doesnt believe guest speakers should be allowed to address segregated audiences.

 

The guidance had been issued following a report by the anti-extremist group Student Rights which monitored events organised by university Islamic societies over a year-long period and found that just over a quarter of them had explicitly promoted segregation by gender, or implied this would be the case.

Following condemnation from the Prime Minister, the Chief Executive of UUK Nicola Dandridge attempted something of a back peddle and insisted that Universities UK agrees entirely with the prime minister that universities should not enforce gender segregation on audiences at the request of guest speakers. However, where the gender segregation is voluntary, the law is unclear.

 

Dandridge seems a bit confused, here is the problem: voluntary segregation is simply not possible, or plausible. Take this example; if a room is segregated and I go in there and decide to sit with the men, will I be moved? If yes, then it is enforced. If I will not be asked to move, then the room is not segregated. Can we have some common sense here please?

Earlier in the year, renowned American scientist and academic Lawrence Krauss walked out of an event at University College London, where he was due to debate Gods existence with Hamza Tzortzis of the Islamic Education and Research Academy (IERA), when he discovered that the event was to be segregated by gender. The IERA denied they had tried to enforce segregation. Saleem Chagtai, head of PR at IERA, said I would classify segregation as people saying, youre a man you sit there, youre a woman you sit there. We understood that we could not enforce separate seating but we could facilitate it.

 

Attendees seemed to disagree that there were no efforts to enforce segregation; one of them wrote After having been told the event would NOT be gender segregated, we arrived and were told that women were to sit in the back of the auditorium, while men and couples could file into the front. After watching three people be kicked out of the auditorium for not following this seating plan, Dr Krauss bravely defended his beliefs of gender equality and informed event staff that he would not participate unless they removed the segregated seating.

On another occasion at Queen Mary University, its been reported that women were banned from speaking at an event held by the universitys Islamic society. Female attendees had been filed to the back of the room and were forced to write down their questions for the speaker, while the men spoke directly from the floor. In the University of Leicester, women too had been sent to sit at the back of the room.

 

In indulging this, we are witness to a simple example of incompetence on the part of UUK, as well as appeasement of the Islamist lobby, which appears to have blown up in Dandridges face. Heres hoping she is removed from her job post-haste and further requests by misogynists dismissed along with her. She had attempted to argue that Islamic misogynists would be denied their freedom of speech if they were forced to speak to unsegregated audiences. This is obviously absurd, but is important because it demonstrates the Orwellian use of the language of rights and freedoms being employed by Islamic societies to impose sharia in to the British public space.

Prominent journalist (herself a Muslim) Yasmin Alibhai-Brown told Omar Ali, the President of the Federation of Student Islamic Societies, that he was using democracy to destroy democracy, and shes absolutely right. Ali argued that Britain is a free country and therefore Islamic misogyny shouldnt be accommodated. It is this use of the language of liberty which has been duping and deceiving the public and convincing them there is no problem here and it is working. It has become increasingly important for us to challenge this duplicity.

 

Update: Universities UK now report that they have withdrawn their guidance and are seeking further legal advice.

Despite some minor setbacks, 2013 was another good year for the continued march of Islamism in to British society. The increased confidence of Islamic societies at universities, the capitulation of authorities, and the enduring use of human rights and freedom to undermine human rights and freedom carries on with little hindrance. Despite some welcome words from the Prime Minister, and growing media attention, there is certainly no time for complacency. What 2014 will bring is of course anyones guess, but my own is that there will most certainly be more of the same.

Did you like this article? Good journalism costs money but due to constant attacks on our website we cannot have subscribers at the moment. We therefore hope that you will support us with an economic contribution. To donate click here.


Did you like this article? Good journalism costs money but due to constant attacks on our website we cannot have subscribers at the moment. We therefore hope that you will support us with an economic contribution.
Print Friendly

Swedish