The BNP might be having this success because, at last, the British people might be standing up to the Islamisation of the UK. The Brits might be taking seriously the predictions that their country will be the first Islamic country in Europe by the end of the century. While this might sound far-fetched, the loss of faith in their own values and heritage by successive British governments and authorities; their acceptance of Islamic demands; the promise by the heir to the throne, Prince Charles, to drop the title defender of the faith and adopt defender of faiths; Charles’s help with raising funds for mosques and his outward encouragement of Islam; amazing remarks about sharia law by the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the fact that some of the HQ‘s of terror organisations are allowed to exist in Britain, are all reasons why the electorate might be looking for a change.

Melanie Phillip’s “Londonistan” now is in its 11th edition, so it seems that more and more people are recognising what is becoming of the UK, following years of lax asylum procedure and the unfettered, even encouraged Muslim immigration by leaders who have some guilt complex about a long gone empire. Even terrorist acts by British-born Muslims against their own country don’t seem to have had any effect on their cultural and political suicide.

What is happening in the UK should sound alarm bells in Australia

Perhaps their success is more about Voter frustration with the choice now being offered to them.
As in Australia, the main political parties are the same shade of grey.. only minute differences seperate their "Policies ",nowdays the popularity of the " Leader " is more important than governance.
Governments play silly buggers.. as in " Utegate "..treating the public like mushrooms.
Notice that a "leak" or information by the AFP into Utegate is released immediately ,whilst we still await information on what happened with that explosion on that "Refugee" Boat, some months ago.
Games, thats all they are , Games in which the great unwashed, the Voters,come a distant last.
There is no way to escape this trend. I thought that Queensland is bad enough with this problem.. but I am shifting to Tasmania next Year... They have two parties that have exactly the same policies and a Loopy Party.. the BNP.. sorry The Green version..

I intend to vote against the sitting party down there.. whoever they are at the time.. what else can one do and stay sane ?

Before anybody gets too carried away with notions of a rising cultural change in Western society, they should remember that the BNP is a 1982 spin-off of the National Front - a whites-only, fascist organisation.

The BNP were created as a group of anti-Semitic Holocaust deniers who, before the increase in Islam in the UK, were against all coloured people of all religions. They're now spreading their web of hate wider and dragging in new members.

Basically, just a British version of the KKK.

There may be an increased number of disgruntled citizens over there who are protesting against the status quo but I can't see it as a rising tide that's going to unite the UK into a better society.

Thanks for being super-predictable, Leigh. Your scaremongering is worthy of the finest fringe-fascist manifesto, my congratulations.

But before you get too excited (and you can wipe the froth from the corners of your mouth; not a good look, really), you might profitably reflect on a few minor points.

These were elections to the European Parliament. At which this particular Party secured two seats.

The European Parliament is a bureaucratic jumble of vested interests, and bears only a passing resemblance to a representative body.

In this context, it is probably worth recalling that we sent Pauline Hanson, who is the closest Australian analogue, to our House of Representatives. A highly representative body indeed.

And her subsequent Party secured 12% of seats in the Queensland Upper House. Also a... no, won't go there.

(Incidentally, where are they all now, in terms of political power?)

It is one of the most attractive features of Democracy, and its fellow-traveller Free Speech, that events like these can occur.

Because along with the ability to speak ones mind, and to achieve electoral success in doing so, comes exposure. And once the reality, as opposed to the idea, of these people sees the light of day, their support, and consequently power, tends to recede.

Mind you, there will always be a nutty fringe in politics. We have a couple of noisy individuals bumbling around our own power structure, whose task is to harden the resolve of those around them. Not a bad thing.

But you wouldn't expect the world to cave in, just because we have a couple of "colourful characters" occupying parliamentary seats.

There will be plenty more eggs to crack before these sleazebuckets are booted out again.

But in the meantime, they represent no threat to the system, nor any opportunity for a lurch to all-out Fascism.

On the contrary, their only significance is to underline the magic of democracy. By allowing extremists to have a voice, it is able to ensure they remain visible, in all their ethical squalor.

Pericles

You nailed the topic perfectly with that post.

No more need be said.

Cheers

Leigh, surely you! Do not support the British National party!!

The British and EU laws will have the BNP having to answer to the public, and their response will be interesting.

No, Kipp. I do not support any political party.

Pericles,

Your personal smear against me does not change the facts. And the facts are these:

The BNP, be they right-wing lunatics or not, are of no threat to Britain. The British have always been against fascism, and successful crushed it (with the help of others) in World War 11. Their problems, ones in which they have readily co-operated, is the extreme left, the Left of the Church of England, and Islam.

The extreme Left – and I’m not talking about any mainstream party – have the downfall of Western society in mind. The Church of England has moved to the Left because of its guilt in believing that it was THE only faith has gone back to its ancient roots of hatred of Jews. Islam teaches hatred of Jews. The Left hates Jews. While these might have been unlikely allies in the past, they are now using each other. Only Islam will benefit in the long run. The Left will disappear when they have outlived their usefulness and the C of E is so guilt-ridden and aimless, it has already committed suicide and accepted relativism and the lie that violence and terrorism is not inherent in Islam theology. Even after the UK bombings (which they thought would never happen because they had bent over backwards to appease Muslims in the UK), they preached that the bombers should not be identified as Muslims, because Islam was a religion of ‘peace and love’. The same line the imams themselves preach, in London, while at the same time preaching death to Israel and non-believers.

The British have swallowed the lies of the Islamists in a pathetic attempt to protect themselves from atrocities carried out by British Muslims. Even when that proved to be useless in 2005, they were still bleating that the bombings should be treated as a crime, not jihad or terrorism – nothing to do with Islam, although all terrorists themselves claim they are murdering people in the name of Allah.

Soon, there will be warnings against travel to the UK.

Wow, Leigh...

>>Pericles, Your personal smear against me does not change the facts.<<

If you see my mild reproof as a personal smear, Leigh, you really ought to get out more.

You, on the other hand, feel perfectly entitled to smear entire sections of the population with intemperate abandon.

>>The extreme Left – and I’m not talking about any mainstream party – have the downfall of Western society in mind.<<

Nothing less than downfall, Leigh? Paranoid. But not particularly smeary, I guess.

>>The Church of England has moved to the Left because of its guilt in believing that it was THE only faith has gone back to its ancient roots of hatred of Jews.<<

Now *that's* a smear. (Apologies to Crocodile Dundee)

>>Islam teaches hatred of Jews. The Left hates Jews.<<

It gets even smearier, if that were possible

>>The same line the imams themselves preach, in London, while at the same time preaching death to Israel and non-believers.<<

Sorry, Leigh. When it comes to smearing, I am but a neophyte, compared with your good self.

>>Soon, there will be warnings against travel to the UK.<<

That's simply ridiculous. It does however serve the very useful purpose of underlining the intellectual effort you have put into the post as a whole.

What is it, Leigh, that scares you so much about other people?

Because you are clearly living in a bubble of fear, predominantly of your own imagining.

You have my deepest sympathy.

It must seriously suck being you.

Now, what was that about smears?

Lets get this straight, Zilka, the people who egged (and otherwise violently protest) the elected leader of a legal political party are the ANTI-Fascists?

Why is it that "anti-Fascists" find nothing to do except practice fascism?

Pericles,

For once I find myself in agreement with you. Wonders will never cease. :-)

Just a point though.

Once again we see the central role of free speech. That is why it is essential to resist ANY attempt to curtail free speech. That is why legislation such as Victoria's notorious "racial and religious tolerance act" needs to be opposed and even defied.

That is why the free speech rights of even Australia's infamous Holocaust denier, Frederick Toben, must be protected.

Leigh and Pericles.

You are right and not at all extremist, Leigh. I have said elsewhere that it's a shame that the BNP is the only party to have engaged with the truth on the threat to Britain from Islamization. I agree with them on Islamization and immigration.

The former UK Home Secretary Jaqui Smith was a politically correct prig in banning Geert Wilders (Freedom Party of the Netherlands) from visiting Britain. Wilders was interviewed by Monica Attard, ABC Radio National on 21 June. He wasnt'extreme or fascist at all.

Pericles is more "predictable" than you, Leigh. He represents all that is miserably politically correct and hypocritical, nihilist when it comes to identifying and defending values that are really important, devoid of a moral compass, and certainly devoid of any claim to be intellectually adequate let alone "superior". (Shades of Bronwyn Bishop - yap yap yap, delusions of adequacy.) I haven't discerned any worthwhile values in his postings, EVER.

I recommend the following reading:

* Nick Cohen - What's Left? How liberals lost their way (Fourth Estate, London, 2007)

* Ed Husain - The Islamist: Why I joined radical Islam in Britain, what I saw inside and why I left (Penguin 2007)

* Francis Wheen - How mumbo-jumbo conquered the world: a short history of modern delusions (Harper Perennial, 2004)

Oh, and for those who haven't read it right through yet, try

* The Koran.

If you're familiar with some of the original source material (the Old Testament), you'll marvel at how Mohammed's garbled, inaccurately plagiarized, repetitive and banal mishmash of violence and fearmongering could possibly pass as a guide to spiritual uplift of individual or society, or to peaceful relations between peoples.

I don't want people with that world view whiteanting Western civilization. We have serious problems, but it would have to be some doozy of a question if you thought that Islam was the answer, God save us. What Tardis brought them from the 14th century?

Pericles

I’m not smearing the extreme Left. It is a fact that they hate the Jews, as do the Muslims.

Islam preaches world domination. If you ‘got out more’ and read more you would know this. There is no denying what the Koran says. And, it’s no use waffling on about the Christian Old Testament and the ‘nasty bits’ in that to compare it with Islamic theology - which is the next thing people like you come up with. I don't have a religious bone in my body,but I know that other religions do not call for the slaughter of other creeds like the Islamist do. Other religions are not fighting a religious war as the Islamists are. I have to say though, that the C of E, always ambiguous at best about Jews, is starting to side with the Muslims against Jews. And no, I’m not a Jew either.

If you disagree with my comment about extremist imams and Muslim organisations in London and the UK as a whole, try proving me wrong any time you like.

Travel warnings against the UK are “simply ridiculous” are they? Time will tell; but I am much happier going to traditional Muslim country where Muslims are in the majority than to one where they in a minority and claiming victim status all the time.

Your “deepest sympathy” is another insult. I have only contempt for you and, quite frankly, I hope I’m around long enough to see people like you cop what’s coming to them from your Islamist friends.

stevenlmeyer,

Islam doesn’t allow free speech. Islamists are also holocaust deniers. Look about you, man. Arab Muslims were in cahoots with the Nazis. The Poms have been curtailing the free speech of their own people to save the feelings of Muslims.

Glorfindel,

Thank you for your post. "Londonistan" by Melanie Phillips is very interesting.

Leigh,

I am not deceived about the nature of Islam. I consider contemporary Islam to be the Nazism of the 21st century.

But neither am I deceived by the BNP.

To me the conflict between the BNP and Islam is simply a clash between two different flavours of Fascism. There is no question in my mind that a BNP governed Britain would be as bad as a Muslim governed Britain.

And yes I agree that the Poms have been restricting free speech in order to appease Muslims; just as Bracks did in Victoria with the so-called "racial and religious tolerance act".

That is why I keep returning to the need to defend free speech.

Zilka lists several answers to her question "How did a party with an overtly nationalist policy platform make its way into the European Parliament?". Of course, she didn't include the obvious that many Europeans are concerned about immigration and fear losing sovereignty to a totalitarian superstate. By denying these grievances, Zilka is galvanising support for radical parties. Even more so, when she hints at subverting democracy with "a voting system that needs to be reformed". Denial and suppression, yep that fixes everything.

Melanie Phillips: "No, the rot in our culture that has let in the BNP goes far, far deeper than that. It is because it has turned attachment to national identity itself into a crime. Anyone who objects to multi-culturalism is called a bigot; anyone who wants to curb immigration is called a racist; anyone who objects to the Islamisation of Britain is called an Islamophobe; anyone who wants to leave the EU and regain the power of national self-government is called a xenophobe; anyone, in short, who wants to retain Britain's national identity rooted in the shared particulars of religion, law, history, traditions and culture and its powers as a self-governing nation finds themselves ostracised as a pariah... If the shocked MPs now address those issues properly, the BNP will shrivel and die."
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/013401.html

Ed West: "This is not diversity or cosmopolitanism any more, it is a sweeping demographic change unseen in British history, and a utopian experiment as radical and reckless as Communism. And yet not one of these anti-BNP campaigns dares address this fact. Not once did any politician acknowledge that the reason the BNP have risen from a bunch of cranks and lunatics who could fit in a pub, into a nasty but electable party is because they are the only people even "having a debate", to use the political parlance, about immigration and demographics. By all means point out their political heritage and their lies and personality disorders, but address the issue as well."
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/edwest/blog/2009/06/08/the_only_way_to_beat_the_bnp_is_an_open_debate_about_immigration

Mark Steyn: "... in the room where they cook up European conventional wisdom, they could easily pin a sign on the door saying: “This Political Machine Creates Fascists.” ... politics evolved to the point where almost any issue worth talking about was ruled beyond the bounds of polite society... if the political culture forbids respectable politicians from raising certain issues, then the electorate will turn to unrespectable ones.

... Canada surely doesn’t need one more delicate flower shrieking “Racism!” at every affront to the multiculti pieties. That hypersensitivity is what’s helped deliver more and more of the European vote to “fringe” parties. You want to talk about immigration? Whoa, racist! Crime? Racist! Welfare? Racist! Islam? Racistracistdoubleracist! Nya-nya, can’t hear you with my two anti-racist thumbs in my ears! ...

What makes the Labour Party “mainstream” with 15 per cent of the vote and UKIP the “fringe” with 17 per cent? Nothing, other than the blinkers of the politico-media class. But if you want to drive the electorate toward the wilder shores in ever greater numbers, keep crying “Racist!” at every opportunity...

Things are not going to get any prettier in the next European electoral cycle... there is now talk of shutting down these parties by using the legal system (as was done in Belgium) or by denying them the public funding to which their share of the vote entitles them. Subverting democracy to suppress neo-nationalism doesn’t seem a smart move. But then if the political class were that smart it wouldn’t be in this situation. The problem in Europe is not a lunatic fringe but a lunatic mainstream ever more estranged from its voters."
http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/06/18/why-the-fascists-are-winning-in-europe/2/

James Delingpole: "The people who voted BNP are on the front line... In some areas of towns in the north--Bradford, for example--white people are made to feel that they don't belong any more... Unchecked--and almost worse--unassimilated immigration is a threat to all Western countries. And it's not "racist" to want to discuss this issue... It just means that you think."
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/013394.html

I think Pericles has nailed it here, yet again.

Our Leigh has become quite the Islamophobe lately, hasn't he?

Ditto with Glorfindel, who seems to be doing a fair bit of "yap-yapping" (to use his expression) on the subject himself lately.

While Australians of their ilk are capable of electing BNP-type idiots (e.g. Hanson), they tend to be temporary seat-warmers in Aussie parliaments. Mind you, as the GFC, Peak Oil and climate change mitigation measures start to bite, I wouldn't be at all surprised if another bigoted twat crawls out from under their rock to explot the dumb anger of Australia's racist underbelly.

CJ Morgan:

Pauline Hanson, a dead 'prophet', was a nuisance. She had little idea about workable solutions, and did herself no good by using apparently racist language to cover what was in reality more a frustration at how ruling elites have disregarded "little" people.

People with a high level of education and transferable skills - like you and me, CJ - are not as affected as the class she represents, by unemployment arising from structural change, and by withdrawal of services from regional areas. (I'm in Brisbane, previously Canberra.) Of course we ALL get the universal rapacity of the banks and the irritation of overseas call centres and cascading computer voice menus when we try and contact a large institution.

Pauline Hanson had no credible solutions to the nation's problems, but she did give voice to the discomfort felt by "battlers" who feel powerless in the face of economic and social change and angry at governing parties for ignoring them.

"As the GFC, Peak Oil and climate change mitigation measures start to bite", we'll see more than "bigoted racist twats" sounding off. There's plenty of right wing journalists and industry organization spokesmen and politicians of the Right *already* squawking about the end of civilization as we know it if we have the temerity to take any action at all that is precautionary about the future.

It’ll be interesting to see how our political process copes with this over the next few years. Personally, I hope to see some more Own Goals by the Libs. Will any more Dobby look-alikes come out of the woodwork?

I'm always delighted to cop abuse from the likes of Leigh and Glorfindel. It is confirmation that I haven't backslid into the fear and desperation of those with an instinctive fear of people "not like them"...

>>Pericles... represents all that is miserably politically correct and hypocritical, nihilist when it comes to identifying and defending values that are really important<<

By "really important", of course, Glorfindel means "my own brand of suburban white-bread Christianity".

It can't be a coincidence that the most vocal fearmongers are those who have been brought up to believe that their brand of piety is better than anyone else's brand of piety. As stevenlmeyer so astutely points out, this attitude is completely indistinguishable from the religious bigotry they purport to oppose.

And this is a familiar refrain, Leigh.

>>I have only contempt for you and, quite frankly, I hope I’m around long enough to see people like you cop what’s coming to them from your Islamist friends.<<

Extraordinary. You actually hope that you are proved right, just so that you can say "told you so" to people who don't share your fears. How sad is that?

The only thing sadder is that these fears will be a constant companion for you, right up until then.

I have read Londonistan, I am very familiar with the output of Mark Steyn, James Delingpole and others. And I know that they share your fears.

I feel very sorry for them, too.

What puzzles me most, though, is that the Leighs and Glorfindels of this world would like us to follow the same path as the Islamic countries that they profess to despise, and take action against people whose religion they don't approve of.

Incidentally, Glorfindel, your repackaging of Pauline Hanson into a mere representative of "the class she represents" is entirely unconvincing. You fail, for example, to draw the obvious parallel with the supporters of the BNP.

Which Party is, after all, the topic of this thread.

I remember reading a recent article in The Australian (apologies, I went looking for the link but I can't seem to find it) about racism and multiculturalism in Australia.

The vast majority of people believed Australia was a racist country (something I disagree with) but that only 6.5% believed multiculturalism is a problem.

A much larger percentage did believe it needed to be handled better, however.

Oh, and mark me down as one of those who thinks Glorfindel and Leigh's posts are way over the top.

Fortunately, the vast majority of Australians also agree.

I would imagine their would be no need for the BNP had broken Britain not giving up its heritage due to policies of the extreme left who claim to embrace democracy and are then violent when not elected. Selling your soul to the corrupt European Union is on the nose to many. I wonder why?

stevenlmeyer,

Thanks for the clarification. I don't like the BNP either. Now, I cannot understand why you were agreeing with Pericles.
I notice that one of the usual suspects is running to form, and proving the claim that anyone who has the temerity to criticise Islam is an 'Islamophobe'. That's just what the Islamists do to in attempt to make them seem the victims when, in truth, they are the aggressors. How many other groups do you know who preach the killing of people of other faiths? How many other groups do you know of calling for the death of Israel and the death of Jews in general? Even the Christian anti-Semites don’t go that far.

Pericles,

So glad you like to be abused. You should really enjoy life under Islam.

‘Extraordinary’ seem to be a favourite word of yours; you must really be out of touch with reality if you think that anything I have said is ‘extraordinary’. ‘Fear’ is another one you accuse people who have the guts to speak their mind. I suggest that people like you are so fearful of criticising minorities, protected under multiculturalism that you are crapping yourselves and are criticising your own people because you know that we are not going to kill you like the people you seek to protect would.

How brave is that!

It won’t help you though. You are an infidel just as I am, and nothing will stop the Islamists from sawing your little head off when the time comes.

In your third to last paragraph, you refer to the Islamic countries taking action “against people whose religion they don't approve of.” You are one crazy, mixed up kid, Pericles.

I’m sure you will stay as thick as you are, and that’s your right. And, when the time comes, you will stick your bum in the air and face Mecca with the rest of fools who think Islam is just like any other religion.

TRTL,

Your “most Australians” are also cowards, telling the pollsters what they think they should say. You belief in people is touching

Leigh: << ...nothing will stop the Islamists from sawing your little head off when the time comes. >>

Absolutely nothing Islamophobic about that! I suppose dear old Leigh regards such hysterical blathering as nothing more than "criticising" Islam.

It's a little late to apologize, Leigh, but thanks anyway.

>>So glad you like to be abused. You should really enjoy life under Islam.<<

There is a less-than-zero chance that I will ever be required to find out what life is like "under Islam".

But you have this overwhelming fear that "they" will take over at some point. This attitude simply fascinates me.

What is your plan, when they do? Become a martyr? Convert?

Do tell.

>>I suggest that people like you are so fearful of criticising minorities<<

Hardly. I have no problem at all in taking you and Glorfindel to task for your bigoted, shortsighted views.

>>you are crapping yourselves and are criticising your own people because you know that we are not going to kill you like the people you seek to protect would.<<

You are not "my own people", Leigh, of that you may be absolutely certain. "My own people" are thoughtful, caring and tolerant of others. "You people" are mindless, untrusting and intolerant of things you find alien.

And who, exactly, do you think I am protecting? Not terrorists, I can assure you. Unless of course you are one of those who believes that Muslim=Terrorist.

Are you?

>>you refer to the Islamic countries taking action “against people whose religion they don't approve of.”<<

One of the classic lines "you people" bandy around is "just try to open an Christian church in Saudi", as a justification for protesting against the building of mosques in Australia.

My point - that you did understand, even though you pretended not to - is that "you people" would like to wield exactly the same religious veto as those you protest about.

I've never quite understood the logic behind that. Unless, of course, you would like to turn this country into a form of "Christian Caliphate"

Is that your objective?

>>when the time comes, you will stick your bum in the air and face Mecca<<

There you go again, with your "when it happens" schtick.

It sounds very much as if you are looking forward to it.

Pericles: "There is a less-than-zero chance that I will ever be required to find out what life is like "under Islam".

You could be right, you know! I like this nice little story:

The Iranian Ambassador to the UN had just finished giving a speech and walked out into the lobby where he met President Obama. They shook hands, and as they walked the Iranian said, "You know, I have just one question about what I have seen in America."

President Obama said,"Well, anything I can do to help you, I will."

The Iranian whispered "My son watches this show 'Star Trek' and in it there is Chekhov who is Russian, Scotty who is Scottish, Uhura who is Black and Sulu who is Japanese, but no Muslims. My son is very upset and doesn't understand why there aren't any Iranians, Syrians or Lebanese or other Muslims on Star Trek."

President Obama laughed, leaned toward the Iranian ambassador, and whispered back, "That's because it takes place in the future."

Leigh, by the same logic, no poll is accurate about anything, nobody can know people's attitudes about anything, and everything is only a point of view.

Welcome to the world of post-modernism. Usually the province of hardcore lefties, it's quite happily embraced by the Right when it suits their ends.

Believe it or not, pollsters try to take these things into account. Of course, not all are accurate, but they're not completely useless either. You can accuse governments of being distracted and naive, but pretty ruthless corporates make use of polls too.

Cynicism at its extreme becomes naivete again, Leigh.

Glorfindel - I have to admit that is a very funny joke!

Nice one :)

It is quite clear from the posts of the "thoughtful, caring and tolerant people" that they are more interested in in winning arguments than pondering on the truth - or at least thinking that they might be wrong.

I know how hard it is for them; I was brought up in a Left wing household and had the usual doctrination that they have had. It wasn't until I matured and started to think for myself that I found out that conservatism and thinking for myself was the only way to go.

There are none so blind as those that won't see.

Back atcha Leigh.

It is quite clear from the posts of the "conservatives from socialist households" that they are more interested in in winning arguments than pondering on the truth - or at least thinking that they might be wrong.

I know how hard it is for them; I was brought up in a true blue Tory household and had the usual indoctrination into fear-and-loathing that they have had. It wasn't until I matured and started to think for myself that I found out that compassion and tolerance was the only way to go.

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

“There is a LESS-THAN-ZERO chance that I will ever be required to find out what life is like "under Islam".
LOL
Gee, faith like that must surely be heaven sent.

Perhaps.

But, writing in the Guardian two days ago, Denis MacEoin is less sanguine.

See: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/jun/29/religion-islam-sharia-britain

Muslim Council of Britain's spin doctor in chief, Inayat Bunglawala, accuses MacEoin and others of "demonising" sharia courts. He does not, however, deny the growing influence of sharia courts.

At the moment it is hard to see how this will play out. Strictly speaking the so called "sharia courts" in Britain act as arbitrators. In theory no one can be compelled to agree to have a dispute arbitrated by a sharia court.

In practice it may be hard for a vulnerable member of the community to refuse to submit to the judgement of a sharia court. As the proportion of Muslims in Britain grows sharia courts could be mainstreamed.

Trouble is, if sharia courts, and Jewish courts, why not Catholic courts? Or Christian courts? Where does this process end?

I am no fan of the judicial system either here or in the UK. What I think of the judiciary could not be published on a website accessible by the faint hearted. But I am uneasy about the rise of what are in effect parallel legal systems that make important decisions about people's lives.

Fortunately, Horus, faith is not a requirement.

>>“There is a LESS-THAN-ZERO chance that I will ever be required to find out what life is like "under Islam". LOL Gee, faith like that must surely be heaven sent.<<

On a purely rational basis, I figured that my chances of living to an age where any one of the following occurs is - that's right - less than zero.

- Australia becomes an Islamic republic. Heck, we can't even make the decision to become a non-Islamic republic, so there's no chance there.

- any other country I might decide to live in becomes an Islamic republic. That takes in all of Europe, both North and South America and a considerable portion of Asia. Demographically, it just ain't going to happen. Even Turkey, with a 98% Muslim population, is still a relatively free country, and one where I could live and work unthreatened.

- any country I might decide to live in, including Australia, is invaded and taken over by force, by Islamic forces.

You see, when you actually work out what needs to occur before the fate you see in store for me comes about, the chances are extremely slim.

And it won't come about either, stevenlmeyer, through the growth of sharia courts.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article3334760.ece

Beth Din operates - and has operated for centuries, apparently - on much the same basis.

"British Jews, particularly the orthodox, will frequently turn to their own religious courts, the Beth Din, to resolve civil disputes, covering issues as diverse as business and divorce."

As the cover of the Hitchhiker's Guide reminds us, Don't Panic.

Unfortunately, Pericles, your risk assessment modelling is flawed .You left option four off your list of possibilities:
-- While travelling overseas from A to B, you get accidentally or deliberately diverted to C, which turns out to be Club Taliban, or worse .

And I know it’s pedantic , but, there is a difference between
i) something happening in your life time, and
ii) something happening “at some point”--- so perhaps the jury is still out re Leigh’s case .

And in a similar vein, it does not necessarily follow that because Beth Din hasn’t, to date, result in anything sinister, the new Sharia courts wont either “at some point”.---so perhaps the jury is still out re Stevenlmeyer’s case also.

"Don't Panic, don't Panic Captain Mainwaring. They don't like it up em!´: Corporal Jones guide to threat management .

Horus, there's always a chance.

>>While travelling overseas from A to B, you get accidentally or deliberately diverted to C, which turns out to be Club Taliban, or worse <<

There's a chance a whole heap of things could happen, including a piano falling on my head as I walk down George Street.

But given the equation "number of kilometers flown" divided by "number of hijackings", and "number of times I walk down George Street" divided by "number of falling pianos", I prefer not to live in perpetual fear of either Club Taliban or a gravity-enhanced Steinway.

>>there is a difference between i) something happening in your life time, and ii) something happening “at some point”...so perhaps the jury is still out re Leigh’s case<<

Not at all.

"Leigh's case" was "when the time comes, you will stick your bum in the air and face Mecca", which quite specifically deals exclusively with what happens in my lifetime. If I stick my bum in the air and face Mecca after I'm dead, I suspect I will care less.

>>it does not necessarily follow that because Beth Din hasn’t, to date, result in anything sinister, the new Sharia courts wont either “at some point”.---so perhaps the jury is still out re Stevenlmeyer’s case also.<<

That's pretty thin gruel, as far as logic goes.

Of course, the Beth Din courts could turn feral tomorrow, and... do what, exactly?

These are voluntary tribunals. Those that front them are still protected by the full gamut of the law. To achieve what stevenlmeyer fears will be achieved, there needs to be a full takeover of the legal system, which requires a preceding democratic expression of the will of the people.

That ain't gonna happen in my lifetime either.

>>"Don't Panic, don't Panic Captain Mainwaring. They don't like it up em!´: Corporal Jones guide to threat management.<<

And as far as panic is concerned, the pessimism of the Leighs of this world is well suited to the Corporal Jones outlook, I would have thought.

For myself, I'm comfortable with Ford Prefect's assessment of Earth as "mostly harmless"