If you'd like to republish any of my articles, you are welcome to do so. Please add a link to the original post on my blog.

Thursday, 16 October 2014

The Apprentice Gets the Sharia Treatment

The Apprentice 2014 candidates

You know that Islamisation has become a normal part of British life, acceptable and widely accepted, when one of The Apprentice BBC series' would-be tycoons, competing for the quarter-of-a-million pounds that Alan Sugar - now Lord - will invest in a new business idea, is a woman in hijab.

This is a high-profile TV program, and with the X-Factor one of the most popular. The new series has just started Tuesday 14 October.

Seeing this Muslima acting in a typically Western way - namely trying to make tons of money with little concern for anything else, as money is now our God -, discussing fashion issues with the other girls in her team - despite the fact that her market stall only sells "Asian" fashion, of which I suppose her headscarf is an example -, and simply - if you can take your mind off her Islamic headdress - appearing normal, will do wonders to make the British people view the presence of Muslims in their midst as an everyday occurrence, especially for those who don't yet have the pleasure to experience this phenomenon first hand in their streets or countryside. The soap opera East Enders has already done that, but then everybody knows that London is a different country.

Since sooner or later Muslims will be a majority in Britain and sharia will become the law of the country, the BBC, by trying to make us get used to it, is probably thinking that it's doing us all a big favour.


  1. Why insult Muslim women who wear the niqab (veil) by presuming that they are incapable of making a personal choice, and that they must've been forced to wear it? Those Muslim women who wear the veil do so because it is something that was practised by the Prophets wives, and thus for them it is religiously motivated. Whether you agree with them or not, is besides the point. It is their right to wear what they want!

    Where is the evidence to support the claim that Muslim women wearing the niqab have indeed been forced? Where are the surveys? Where is the independent research and study to support this presupposition? There isn't any! Some Muslim women genuinely wear the veil as it is something that was practised by the Prophets wives, and thus for them it is religiously motivated. Whether you agree with them or not, is besides the point. It is their God given right to wear what they want!

    There is far more evidence to support the view that non-Muslim women are pressured through cultural media such as magazines and movies to show as much flesh as possible, and to reduce themselves to mere eye candy for the opposite gender. As a result, we have far more impetus to discuss problems such as anorexia and other diet/image related health issues, but here we are talking and wasting time on a matter which concerns possibly a few thousand women scattered around the UK.

    Muslims account for less than 3% of the UK population, of which maybe 0.1% or less wear the veil. Given the extreme irrelevance of such a topic and the fact that there is no independent research to support the view that the veil is indeed forced upon Muslim women, I I am shocked at amazed at the amount of disproportional attention the veil receives in the press and at the level of Government. It is clear that this topic is nothing but a distraction to keep the public on the side of hate and prejudice against a segment of the UK population, and to keep their eye off the ball on more pressing matters such as the economy, foreign policy, health and other such matters which are more deserving of our attention!

    There is no law that prohibits the veil. Only your opinion opposes the veil. Therefore your logic is flawed. ALL men and women should be allowed to wear what they want in accordance to their beliefs. Of course, given certain circumstances such as the courtroom, in a bank or when going through airport security, it may well be arguable that the veil should be temporarily removed out of necessity. But an outright ban is nothing but extreme and unjustifiable.

    My own view, very strongly held, is that we shouldn't 't end up like other countries issuing edicts or laws from parliament telling people what they should or should not wear," Clegg said ISLAM has laid down a mandatory dress code for women. If there is freedom for women to go in "minis","bikinis" and almost naked,why DENY the modest women to cover herself as she does not to please herself but in obedience to Allah.Its blatant hypocrisy to talk of human rights and freedoms and deny this to Muslims


    2. Jimmy Savile, Gary Glitter and a whole bunch of MPs prove that your nonce antics are ingrained in your culture.

  2. The Muslims is only minimally covered with her face clearly visible, so who cares? It's when one can't see their face that we should take exception. Maybe she goes swimming in a g-string wearing the same headgear )

  3. All three Abrahamic religions share the same initial story of Caine and Abel. Brother killing brother. Therefore all religions know that killing one another began with the sons Adam. It's instilled in all three religions. Interestingly, there has been more killing in the past 100 years under democracy and freedom than all the religious wars put together since the advent of monotheistic religion. Which begs the question, had we been secular all along, then how much blood would have been shed? To this day, there are mass murders taking place in the name of freedom. A freedom which involves subjugating oneself to a lifelong mortgage and within the confines of a legislated state. The true freedom does not exists in both west or east. Its an illusion on both sides. To argue one over the other is mental masturbation.

    Islam is about 1500 years old - look back at Christianity at 1500 years old - the Inquisition,women burned as witches and the persecution and murder of Jews. Go forward another 100 or so years - kidnapping black Africans as slaves with tens of thousands dying on the journey to the Americas, Tasmanian natives hunted as game by sailors landing there. The UK forcing the opium trade on the Chinese in the 1800s whilst also claiming righteous Christianity.etc etc. Maybe we should stop being so self righteous and start talking from a place of humility where we recognise our own sins against humanity
    Western powers have deliberately fomented turmoil in the Arab countries. I'll bet Halliburton is making trillions hand over fist and is quite happy to let the rest of us spend our time complaining about how uncivilised Muslims and Arabs are. Lets take note of the uncivilised behaviour of our governments causing death and mayhem to hundreds and thousands by feeding fanaticism in the middle East so that distracts from their pillaging the oil.
    As a Muslim is refreshing to read yet another article on Islam be it good or bad. Usually when something is good, those who are not part of it try their hardest to make it look bad....however for me a moderate Muslim it has made me stronger, brought me closer to my religion and most importantly opened the doors for many curious non Muslims who would have never thought about Islam to use their intelligence and see for themselves what Islam is all about. Now you do get good and bad in all walks of life, but to label all Muslims as the same really does question ones intelligence and ability to think on their own. Keep up the good work to all media, it is very much appreciated.much appreciated

    It is OK for USA and its NATO allies to kill hundreds of thousands of Muslims in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, Libya and other parts of the world because they are ruled by dictators, undemocratic regimes and mullahs but if some one is declared an apostate, it is not acceptable to super powers. As long as hundreds of thousands of Muslims are killed because of the reason it defied western definition of democracy, human rights and social justice system is justified. But, when Sudan sentenced one of its' citizen because she defied her state's law is not acceptable. Islam totally forbids killing of an innocent life but when an Islamic state is threatened by internal rebellions, strives and conspirators plotting with foreign enemies to harm, it considers its right to defend itself from the enemies or any apostate who deliberately intends to weaken or break it up. Any state in the world would consider it its' right to sentence to death any of its citizen or a foreign enemy involved in conspiracy to harm its existence.

  4. How do you manage in churches? Mary is covering her hair, and must be offensive to you. You want Muslim women to integrate only if they dress as you see fit? Oh well, haters gonna hate.

    1. In Christianity, veiling is actually described in the Letters to the Corinthians as a sign of the subordination of women. By contrast, no such explanation of veiling is to be found in the Koran. Muslim women are therefore serving as a negative foil by which we can idealise ourselves, affirm our own progressiveness and block out the lack of gender equality in our own country.

      Living in the west, the hijab has become a potent indicator of identity with many non-Muslims viewing it as a political statement. However, it is pertinent to note that the hijab is, first and foremost, an act of worship that women engage in, and an act undertaken to seek the pleasure of one’s Lord.

      Now, after the Muslims women are involving more and more in the society, those people are trying to get them back to the ghettos by banning them from wearing the Burqa…And the other one who were saying that: Men are imposing the burqa to those women and are covering that by saying: it’s her choice. This argument is simply ridicules, it seems that she doesn't want to hear that someone wear it because of their spiritual journey, she definitely wants them to oppressed. And the French guy who were saying: We are banning it because of the dignity of the woman and gender equality ==> Since when the equality is used to restrict the liberty of free choices. Those people need to be reminded that this law is totally opposed to the universal human rights.

      Why is it that a Muslim woman cannot dress modestly without being labelled as oppressed, yet a Catholic nun can do the same without anybody blasting her. This whole skimpy dressed fashion is a 20th century movement. Why hasn't this new movement caught on in the religious circles of Christianity, why do the nuns cover themselves from head to toe. Do you consider the wives of Moses & Abraham or the mother of Jesus as oppressed because they weren't strutting around in bikinis? The difference here is that most followers of Christianity in the late 20th century delegated modesty to the pious ones only. Whereas Islam has maintained that modesty is for all women not just the church affiliated ones! The reason being that Islam does not change with time, its message is universal for all times. I am against anyone being forced to do something, but don't take this away from the millions of Muslim women (especially in the west) who dress modestly because they want to. And you will find within those families too some siblings wearing the head scarf while others not.