Sunday, February 03, 2008

'Asian' cops in Britain aiding and abetting criminals

A disturbing report in the Daily Mail says that 'Asian' (PC code for immigrants from Muslim countries) cops in Britain are hindering the crackdown on "honor killings" and other quaint practices, and non-Asians are afraid to say anything lest they run afoul of Britain's ridiculous thought-crime laws.
Some Asians in the police and in Government jobs have been accused of blocking the crackdown against so-called honour killings.

It is alleged they are not only failing to help desperate women trying to flee abuse and arranged marriages but are actively encouraging punishment for those they believe are breaking traditional taboos.

Terrified victims who seek official help are even being tracked down by a network of Asian men working in Government departments and social services, according to a study written by the think-tank Social Cohesion.

One woman was found by her family after she signed on at a Jobcentre where a member of the Asian community was working.

The report also claims some Asian police officers actually return women to their abusive families or refuse to act against men enforcing 'traditional' roles.

Meanwhile, non-Asian officials and police officers are scared of acting against families who abuse their relatives for fear of being branded as racist, the report says.
So to summarize: Britain has a fast-growing immigrant population whose "cultural values" run counter to British law, is putting members of that immigrant population in positions of authority, and everyone else is afraid to do anything about it.

Isn't that just dandy.


darkpixel said...

Rules for thee, but not for me...

It appears the 'salad bar' approach to emigrating to the UK applies in medicine:

Female Muslim Medics disobey hygiene rules:

aDM said...

How can we not have Asian police officers though? We have to.

It's good this is actually being openly discussed.

'Texas Upholds Sharia'

Your media should be all over this. It's the only way to tackle it.

Eric said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Eric said...

In the Texas case, it seems the court ruled on a contract dispute, the terms of which were dictated by Sharia law and were agreed to by both parties to the contract.

The court upheld the terms of the contract as binding because both parties agreed to didn't rule that Sharia law was the law of the land.

aDM said...

Okay so why does that stuff get a general okay in the US but isn't ok over here. That's what the head of the CoE was talking about but it seems to have caused a shit storm on US blogs. The other case was the wedding case which is being rule on today ( i think). Noone has ruled that sharia is legal in those either. Im not sure i get the issues.

aDM said...

No I don't get it..:P You are still upholding sharia law eg as trumping your own laws. Surely that's the issue there and here. Marriage is also a contract, so that is where the issues arise and oculd arise if judges rules in its favour. We should not have any religious courts here - Jewish, Muslim or otherwise. Hopefully that wedding contract decision will come out today or tomorrow to enforce that. The point about Texas was that it did not enforce your own laws. It upheld sharia. Isn't that dangerous?

Eric said...

I'm not a lawyer, so I don't pretend to understand everything about the law. But in the Texas case, the court ruled that both parties had to adhere to the terms of the contract to which they had both previously agreed. That some of the terms of the contract happen to have been based in Sharia law, or US law, or Klingon law, is immaterial.

Terms of a contract can be made up on the spot, but if both parties agree to the terms, they're bound to honor them.

This isn't the same as codifying Islamic law in US law.