The Rant

  The Introduction of Shari'ah in Family law in England is unavoidable.  So says the current Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams.   He says that we should not assume that all aspects of Islamic law are barbaric and that a "plural jurisdiction" would be acceptable.  (Speaking of "meekness and flabbiness" see article on Hitler below).  This reminds me of law during the middle ages in England, where you once had the secular and ecclesiastical courts.   Once you have granted the principle that Sharia law in England is to be considered acceptable and even inevitable, how do you prevent Moslems from stoning women for infidelity after they have been convicted in an Islamic court?   Or chopping off hands for theft?   Perhaps Islam will become the new "law and order" party for England.  After all, who are you, western snob, to stand in Judgment over the law of Islam, the word of Allah?  What makes you think you are better?  Not to mention that if you do c

Albert Speer, who was Hitler's Minister of Armaments, in his memoir gave some insight into Hitler's thinking on religion:  "Hitler had been much impressed by a scrap of history he had learned from a delegation of distinguished arabs. When the Mohammedans attempted to penetrate beyond France into Central Europe during the eight century, his visitors had told him, they had been driven back at the Battle of Tours.  Had the Arabs won that battle, the world would be Mohammedan today.  For theirs was a religion that believed in spreading the faith by the sword and subjugating all nations to that faith. Such a creed was perfectly suited to the Germanic temperament. . . . Hitler usually concluded this historical speculation by remarking, "You see, it's been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn't we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice fo the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compat