[JohnfAclambrJA]

In Britain Multiculturalism is a failure because it is an attempt, by the central state to insert different people together into cities and hope that they all get on. In fact the rise in taxes, economic downturn, debts and unemployment causes pressure on these populations to compete against each other and some people will be tempted and subtly encouraged by people in power to hate other sub-cultures. It is divide and rule. After the French Revolution, sections of the citizens were encouraged by the new humanist and atheist government to slaughter other citizens, the law was altered to make it legal. This is a possibility in all modern states.

Whenever Muslims are told to integrate they should question the person telling them:-

1) What do you mean and what would integration look like in practice?

2) Are all national cultures uniform even without immigrants living there?

3) Are national cultures fluid and ever changing or do they remain the same over long periods?

4) What are the core national cultural characteristics of Britain?

5) How are Muslims outside of the above 4 questions? (so for example if they say that one of the core cultural values of Britain is freedom, we can ask how are Muslim stopping this freedom? Do any of us go around forcing others to be like us? If we protest against certain ideas, cartoons or whatever we are protesting which is a Democratic right, we are not forcing anyone to conform, if some Muslims threaten people with death, that is something other fringe groups and even democratic governments do, so they are no better) (The Zionist State assassinates people and Zionists threaten cartoonists with death as well) .

National cultures in modern democracies are manufactured, it means people in power have used mass media technology and state education to invent a shared culture nationally. Sub-cultures exist everywhere, but they are ignored and only made into problems when someone somewhere wants to cause problems.

Islamic Shariah when it operated allowed non Muslims to live by their own religious laws. They were simply prohibited from money lending and charging interest in their economic transactions and they could not sell other prohibited items in the Muslim markets, and they paid Jizya tax. Islamic Shariah is not about chopping off hands of theives, stoning adulterers to death and forcing everyone to dress a certain way, it is about a people deciding and agreeing to live by the laws of Islam and having the laws apply on them and choosing to conform by them. It is not about a person in power forcing people who do not want to live by the laws to conform, this is tyranny. This is also a false position created by the haters...so they then talk about "we will not have shariah law", as if Muslims want to impose it on people who do not want it. This is such a stupid assertion in a real democratic country it would be dismissed as utterly ridiculous, but we live in countries were these idiots are given a platform as if they make any sense. How can a small minority of Muslims who live as minorities in inner cities ever gain power to impose Shariah Law on the majority? I believe the State created Muslim fringe groups who get media attention with their stupid assertions that they will now make parts of East London into a Sharia Law land, people like Anjum Chaoudry are deliberately doing so to create hostility and conflict.