Date: 6/18/2004


ISLAM IS LIKE SAND PAPER that rubs and rubs till the metal (NON MUSLIMS) fade away or VANISH.

Take a piece of METAL. Consider it as the country's NATIVE, or MAJORITY, religion. Then a trader or invader, loafer or "bad-ma'sh", brings in ISLAM, the sand paper.

He starts rubbing it on the METAL that starts to wear out down to the tiny core. It is then picked up and thrown into the deep well of oblivion. Like Buddhism in Afghanistan and Hinduism in Baluchistan, it is seen NO MORE. "ALHAMDULLILLAH." (Praise be to Allah!)

That will be the end of Secularism and Hinduism in LAHORE, until that METAL recovers its original size, becomes a GUN and comes around to HIT BACK the bully and “badma’sh” (“MALECHCH”) with vengeance.

It is a simple illustration of Islam's role in a NON Muslim society and that is what we have seen in HINDU India where Islam’s achievement is the wholesale destruction of temples and native values, way of life and dignity of native women since 712 AD, and that is what we are beginning to see in the West, too, especially in the United Kingdom right now.

There are occasional SET BACKS suffered by Islam in Britain, which send shock waves across the perennially sore and disgruntled Muslim world far beyond the national frontiers.

But like the water that is denied free flow, ISLAM’S mounting grievances find another outlet, another demand, another confrontation and yet another VICTIM to kill, or camel to ride.

The process of wearing down the nerve and resolve of opponents goes on for generations and centuries, or as long as the Koran is the "Word of God".

Every Indian, and there are a BILLION of us on earth, knows, to our cost, the "sand paper" that later became swords, sticks, daggers and guns and reduced our land by one third and our numbers by TWO MILLION in 1947. But the process is new for Europe that has had several centuries of life without being rubbed down and thin by the Islamic sandpaper.

Islam has made a powerful showing in the UK since 1962. At first they did not attract attention since they went about life like the others. After mosques and madrassas were established, they recovered breath and guts through increase in numbers, and the sense of separate identity. Now it was time to "test the waters".

The first demands came for HALAL food for Muslim children at school and exemption from PE (physical education) dress code. Muslim girls wouldn't do PE in shorts, nor in mixed classes.

Earlier, the morning in primary schools began with school assembly with hymn singing. Muslim parents objected and had these hymns taken out. Most took their children for separate assembly under a Muslim Maulvi from the local mosque. It was like the Muslims in India refusing to sing VANDE MATRAM.

Then came the demand for special dress for girls outside PE classes, in normal lessons at school. The Muslims were imposing segregation upon their own children while blaming the British for apartheid. Up to this point the British school authorities had been conceding, appeasing and surrendering.

Ultimately girls started wearing FULL BURQA like the Afghan females during the rule of TALIBAN. It is at this point that one particular brave school in LUTON said, "Enough is enough", and banned the separatist Muslim dress.

What happened next is seen in the following report.


16 June 2004.

............Muslim girl's dress claim rejected

A "devastated" 15-year-old schoolgirl is looking for a new school after losing her High Court battle for the right to wear traditional Muslim "head-to-toe" dress in the classroom.

Shabina Begum accused the head teachers and governors of Denbigh High School, Luton, of excluding her and unlawfully denying her the "right to education and to manifest her religious beliefs".

Dismissing her application for judicial review, Mr Justice Bennett ruled Shabina had failed to show that the "highly successful" 1,000-pupil comprehensive, with 79% of its students Muslim believers, had in reality excluded her or breached her human rights.

He said the school was entitled to limit Muslim students to wearing the shalwar kameez, consisting of trousers and tunic.

The uniform policy was necessary "to protect the rights and freedoms of others" who did not want to be like Shabina and wear a jilbab, a headscarf and flowing robe covering from head to toe.

The test case ruling has important implications for multi-faith schools across the country and echoes the controversy in France where politicians have voted for a ban on all "ostensible religious symbols" in schools, including the hijab, the headscarf worn by Muslim girls and women.

The Muslim Council of Britain described the High Court decision as "very worrying and objectionable".

In his ruling, the judge described how Shabina, whose father and mother are both dead, had "happily worn" the shalwar kameez when she entered the school at the age of 12 until autumn September 2002, when she and her brother, Shuweb Rahman, had come to the school and told assistant head teacher Stuart Moore that she would wear it no longer.

The judge said she had chosen not to return to Denbigh knowing that her refusal to wear the shalwar kameez meant she was unlikely to be allowed to attend.

If she had been excluded, it was for a refusal to abide by the school uniform policy rather than her religious beliefs as such, said the judge. Her family had also known of the school uniform policy before she followed her elder sister to the school, which was out of their catchment area. Her brother, Shuweb Rahman, told the court Sharia law required girls over 13 "to completely cover the body" except for hands and face, and the shalwar kameez was unacceptable because too much of the arms were left exposed and the tunic was not long enough. (Courtesy AOL News)

.............. ===============

If there is EQALITY in Islam then why did MOHAMMED not order his MEN to wear BURQA?

This case was nothing but “testing the British waters” to see any weakness or signs of appeasement.