SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - PC at work again

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)

- - PC at work again (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=94243)

PC at work again

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770

Islam first. Human rights second, please.

Typical for modern times.

It was said that left parties throughout europe can expect to get up to 90% of the votes from Muslim communities for opening door and gate for Islam ineurope. It also was said that they often arrange real deals like that (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=93833)

Yes PC Madness controls the U.K. :nope:

When I click your link the story doesn't show. :-?

Is this the article that you were linking to?

Quote:

UK warned over handling of immigrants
By STEVE DOUGHTY, Daily Mail 22:00pm 8th June 2006
http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/200...06_228x172.jpg Britain is second only to the US in terms of numbers of foreign nationals settling on long-term residents' visas

Britain has been warned of the dangers of failing to integrate half a million Eastern European immigrants into the rest of society.
There are signs that people who have crossed Europe in recent waves of migration are failing to adapt to their new countries as successfully as their predecessors, an international economic watchdog said.
It called for Britain and other countries now absorbing hundreds of thousands of new arrivals each year to ensure their handling of immigration was 'welcoming but firm'.
The carefully-phrased report from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the Paris-based grouping of wealth Western nations, said Britain took in a 'historical record' 494,000 foreign migrants during 2004.
It stressed the scale of migration to Britain from Eastern Europe. More than 500,000 people, a majority from Poland, have arrived here since eight new Eastern European countries joined the EU in May 2004.
The OECD's International Migration Outlook shows for the first time how much bigger Britain's share of Eastern European migration has been than that taken by other EU nations, most of which tried to keep their doors closed to incoming workers from the new countries.
It revealed that while Britain took 480,000 workers recorded on the Workers Registration Scheme alone, Germany has accepted 12,562 Eastern Europeans - about 40 times fewer.
Holland - traditionally a haven for migrants - has taken just over 20,000 Eastern Europeans, and Sweden has accepted 12,731.
The OECD said: 'There are currently close to three million long-term immigrants entering OECD countries legally every year, and even more temporary movements, if international students are included.
'This does not count unauthorised movements,' it added.
Further migration, it said, 'will only be possible if past and current immigrants, who are more and more numerous, are seen to be integrating without difficulty in the host country.
'Immigrant performance on the labour market, however, for both past and recent arrivals in many countries and even for their offspring, is not as favourable as in the past.'
The report added: 'Letting in the right number of immigrants is another challenge: let too many in and some of them will have difficulty finding work; let too few in and labour market conditions may become tight.'
The analysts said that the loss of skilled workers was a serious problems for the countries from which migrants come, and that 'difficulties in integrating immigrants in some countries have led to restrictions on entry and stay and, at times, a public discourse on migration that is ambivalent. 'Countries that demonstrate and even-handed management of migration movements that is at once welcoming but firm, and in accordance with national needs, will be in a more favourable position to profit from the benefits of international migration.' The concern signalled by the OECD follows a warning last month from Trevor Phillips, chief of the Government's Commission for Racial Equality, of the possibility of riots and disorder involved Eastern European workers over the summer. Large-scale immigration was widely blamed for the success of the far-right British National Party in the May local elections, with Labour figures including Blairite minister Margaret Hodge pointing to the impact of migration on social housing and jobs and wages for the existing popultion of East London. The 'welcoming but firm' line taken by the OECD comes at a time when the Home Office and its immigration directorate appear to have fallen into chaos. One senior official told MPs he did not have 'the faintest idea' how many illegal immigrants are in the country.

No. Link works okay for me. It is an article by the Daily Mail, headline should read "Plans to outlaw enforced marriages shelved"

Daily Mail is the original, AL. JW just copied it. ;)

Don't worry. I tried the link again and it now works. Reading now.

Firstly forced marriages are not approved of or condoned in Islam. I'm really not sure how you concluded what you did from reading that article.

Quote:

But yesterday Home Office minister Baroness Scotland said no such crime would be created, for fear that it would do more harm than good by driving the practice further underground, with victims discouraged from coming forward for fear that their parents would be jailed.
In a consultation exercise almost half of those with experience of forced marriage were either in favour or partially in favour of a new law. But overall some 80 per cent of respondents believed new legislation would not be in the best interest of victims, with little support among police or prosecutors.

Don't you think it is possible that the Government didn't put the laws thru because of the opinion of those that enforce the law such as police and prosecutors and also don't you think they considered the victims of such crimes? Spare me your "Islam first" BS! You really are clutching at straws highlighting this article as another example of your liberal/lefty and Islam conspiracy theory.

Here you go read on.

Quote:

Plans to outlaw forced marriages shelved

By MATTHEW HICKLEY, Daily Mail 14:43pm 7th June 2006 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/i/commentIconSm.gif Reader comments (7)

Plans to make forced marriage a specific criminal offence have been dropped by ministers in the face of a backlash from Britain's Muslim community.
The Government unveiled its proposals two years ago amid great fanfare, suggesting that anyone arranging or encouraging a forced marriage - which is thought to blight the lives of thousands of young women from Britain's Asian community each year - should face jail sentences.
But yesterday the Home Office admitted it would not be pursuing the plans, and would instead encourage the police and courts to make use of existing laws.
The Muslim Council of Britain opposed the plan, claiming it would see children having to give evidence at their parents' trials, and could lead to the Muslim community being further 'stigmatised.'
Ministers have admitted they feared a new law would be 'resented as an intrusion into minority cultures and religions.'
But yesterday charities and campaigners voiced bitter disappointment over the U-turn, while critics accused the Government of grabbing headlines over the issue but failing to take real action.
Thousands of young - mostly Muslim - women are thought to be subjected to forced marriages each year, although the true scale of the problem is hidden behind a code of silence.
Many are forced to wed after being tricked into going abroad - often to visit family in Asian countries.
Even when cases come to light the police often struggle to press charges, while women who dare to rebel and run away typically become outcasts - often pursued by professional bounty hunters hired by furious families.
Extreme cases have led to 'honour killings' where young women have been murdered for bringing shame on their families.
A special Foreign Office unit has helped more than 1,250 people since it was set up six years ago, rescuing up to 200 a year from abroad, and helping them return to Britain.
Most cases involve South Asian countries but officials have seen examples from Africa, the Middle East, Eastern Europe and even the U.S.
Ministers first announced proposals 18 months ago whereby it would have become a crime to pressure anyone into marrying under duress, or to encourage or arrange for a person to travel abroad for the purpose of a forced marriage.
But yesterday Home Office minister Baroness Scotland said no such crime would be created, for fear that it would do more harm than good by driving the practice further underground, with victims discouraged from coming forward for fear that their parents would be jailed.
In a consultation exercise almost half of those with experience of forced marriage were either in favour or partially in favour of a new law. But overall some 80 per cent of respondents believed new legislation would not be in the best interest of victims, with little support among police or prosecutors.
The Muslim Council of Britain said criminalising forced marriage was not the solution, as it would lead to children having to take their parents to court.
Dr Reefat Drabu, who chairs the council's social and family affairs committee, told a recent conference that while forced marriage was a crime it could be dealt with by existing laws, warning that creating a new offence could become 'another way to further stigmatize our communities.'
Last night the children's charity NSPCC voiced its disappointment.
Head of Policy and Public Affairs Diana Sutton said: 'The coercion involved in forced marriage is abusive and a violation of children’s human rights.
'We know that forced marriage can have serious harmful consequences for children including physical, emotional and sexual abuse, kidnap, rape and self harm.
'In the most tragic cases it can result in murder and suicide. In the longer term, many women forced in to marriage suffer domestic violence, whose impact on children is now widely documented.'
Shadow Home Secretary David Davis said: 'The Government seems to be ignoring the views of the victims of this abhorrent practice. We remain to be convinced that ministers will use their existing powers to stamp out this degrading and vile practice.'
He said the Government's eagerness to launch a campaign even though the new law was later shelved suggested ministers were 'more interested in grabbing headlines than delivering results.'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/i/commentIcon.gif Add your comment | View all Reader comments (7)

7 people have commented on this story so far. Tell us what you think below.

Here's a sample of the latest comments published. You can click view all to read all comments that readers have sent in.
Typical. If this issue meant votes for politicians, you can bet your last penny some moron politician somewhere would be leading a protest march or cycling somewhere to 'show his solidarity'. These women are treated as objects and no politician has the backbone to make a stand. I weep, really I do.

- Mark, Jhb, South Africa
Forced marriage is an abomination and has no place in a western society.

This should have been criminalised but as usual our gutless government has caved in to pressure and this from a government that sets so much store on human rights! What hypocrisy!

- Jakman, Bognor Regis
I think that this issue is incredibly difficult to understand unless you have been there and experienced it first hand. Despite being kidnapped, taken overseas and forced into marriage I still love my parents. I have since made a new life for myself and whilst others may find it hard to understand, I wish my parents no harm despite the fact that I have not seen them for ten years. There is no way I would have chosen to prosecute them had the option been available.

The other people who have commented here clearly have no understanding of the complexity of this issue. I applaud the work of the Government's Forced Marriage Unit, who work tirelessly to help others who find themselves in my position.

- Annonymous, London

I think this issue has been in the news before.

Konovalov,

And you again are blind to the fact that another time the faction you want so hard to represent is involved and the vast majority of it remains silent and does not force it's word-leaders to step back when they opposed the law. I am not intersted so much in your personal interpretation of Islam. what counts is what Muslim community is doing (or not doin) in actual deeds. Deeds tell so much more than words. Sometime I wonder if you really have ever realized what you were into when becoming Muslim.

So tell us. Why do the speakers of Muslim mcommunities (in Germany as well, btw) oppose a law banning enforced marriages that staistically are overwhelmingly represneted in families from Muslim courtries, and why does the overwhelming majority of Muslims do not do anything about calling these leaders back and replace them, if it is true what you say and this is no Islamic issue? You onow as well as I do that there are many passages in the Koran that excuse and actively encourage that women should be treated as subordinates that must obey to males, must be beaten and controlled. If you try to reject that, I'll just need to stand up, get some papers, and simply copy over those verses and context that proove you wrong. It's only work, but no object of doubt.

By Islam's sick view of women it does implicitly excuse forced marriages very much.

The trouble is Skybird, the Government is a coward the law is a joke and PC madness is going around telling people to bend over backwards for them.

Quote:

Toronto-area Muslim community leaders were told the details of the most high-profile terrorism sweep in Canadian history.

Good Grief. :doh:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird

And what does any of this have to do with the article that you linked to? Seems to me like just another opportunity for you to arrogantly tell me that I am blind. Another opportunity to pontificate and tell me that you are all knowing and I'm some person led astray, unable to think for myself. You have called me blind, labelled me as under a spell as an explanation to why I am Muslim, day in day out you heap sh_t on my faith with thread after thread ad-nauseum. I now know why so many Americans here got sick of your USA, Bush bashing, and I told you so threads. A little less potificating from you wouldn't go astray you know. I'm not even going to bother entertaining your little diversion from the original discussion of this thread. Just do me a bloody damned favour and stop questioning my personel decisions that don't concern you and that quite frankly are none of your bloody business.

If you can't see what your statement (that enforced marriage is not approved by islam) and my reply pointing at Koran's understanding of women has to do with the newspaper article I linked to, then this is where discussion necessarily ends, for then we do not share enough common ground anymore to communicate, and obviopusly even do not speak the same language. Fact is the article, amongst other details, said that Muslim speakers opposed a law that was meant to outlaw forced marriages, and fact is that you have not or cannot answer my question why it is that Muslim communites allow these speakers to represent them and their interests if it would be true what you say and Islam does not promote forced marriages. Comparable questions about this contradiction I have asked repeatedly over the months, and not one time you were able or willing to answer it. You are trapped in a contradiction and deflect your anger of that on me. I fight for Islam being driven back in Europe, that is true, and both by content of slam'S teaching and by it's history we Europeans have very good and substantial reasons not wanting to see Islam playing a bigger and bigger role in Europe and in the world. you cannot dance on two parties at the same time. Either you want to be Muslim indeed, than your target must be global totalitarian rulerhsip of Islam as it is defined in it's own self-understanding and scriptures and has been prooven to be true in it's complete history, or you stick to the tradition of Western values and understanding of humanitarian philosophy, by which, I suppose, you had been raised and that you were educated in at school. You can't have both. Both is excluding to each other. Sitting over the Koran and learn its verses and Arabic will help nothing to change that, it will only funnel your thinking. As far as I am concerned, I am also getting tired as you of these constant irritations between you and me. I find your effort to be both - Western, reasonable humanitarian and Muslim, scripture-believing totalitarian - absurd. Let's avoid each other.

"As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master. This expresses my idea of democracy. Whatever differs from this, to the extent of the difference, is no democracy." Abraham Lincoln "Thereupon I concluded: As I would not be a dhimmi, so I would not be a Muslim." Ali Sina