Date: 11 Oct 2009


HOME OFFICE RULES RELAXED. The media have reported that “Home Office will relax asylum rules to clear backlog of cases.” (The Daily Telegraph, London, October 10, 2009, p.1) “The government had pledged to deal with an embarrassing backlog of 450,000 asylum claims by 2011. However, officials realised that in the cases of 40,000 claimants, it was going to be too difficult to remove them from Britain because they came from countries with poor human rights records. These included Zimbabwe, Somalia, Iran and Nigeria.” Citizens of this country, whose lives will be adversely affected by such a large and sudden influx, and who will be footing the bill for their reception, upkeep, food & accommodation, and legal battles, would like to ask, Are all of them MUSLIM? If not what percentage are Muslim? Are they all SINGLE? If not, how many of them have wives and children back home? Are they all in the age group where they will take a partner in this country regardless if they already have one or even more wives abroad? Will that NON MUSLIM partner be converted to produce yet more Muslims? Are any of them fugitives from law in their own countries? If these countries have POOR HUMAN RIGHTS RECORDS then is it not up to these very citizens of those countries to go back to try to change the corrupt governments? Many of the countries receive billions of dollars aid from the USA, the UK and the UNO. Is it possible to ask the UNO to devise an Inspection system to find out and SHAME these ROGUE states who force their own human “wash” on to the UK shores? Is it possible to ask the UNO to monitor these governments in order to ensure good human rights record there? Why not send these TENS OF THOUSANDS back to any other ISLAMIC republic where human rights are "as per Will of Allah" and their own Koran? Should a Muslim have any objection if asked to depart from an INFIDEL land and return to a holy “MOMIN” (“BELIEVERS”) Land? Should these “slow working” GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS in the UK (like the snail paced Indian baboos) not be sacked or made to work harder in order to deal with the removal of TENS OF THOUSANDS of these asylum seekers? One would have thought that labelling a country for “POOR HUMAN RIGHTS RECORD” ought to be left to UNO and not to the UK Home Office or courts. Are the Government not aware of the fact that Muslims are not like most other minorities who are hardly visible with regard to explosions, suicide bombers and violence in streets? Is the Government not aware of the fact that if there is Muslim majority here any time then there will be SHARIA Law imposed on all by the Will of Majority? The followers of Islam in the UK at any future date will have NO objection if their own wives and daughters hide their faces behind hijab, burqa or veil but what about Mrs. Brown and Miss Blair, even Princess Anne? There is also a rule that the country of FIRST ENTRY in the EU should deal with the asylum seekers but not let these MEN move on to the UK and then apply for asylum here. Why is our Government not following that rule? We saw the ANTI MOSQUE demonstrations by the PATRIOTS in London and Manchester. Does the Government want these demonstrations to be more frequent, more intensive and held all over? How will that be for good community relations and what will be the impact on other minorities like the Hindus, the Jews and the Sikhs who are neither separatist nor violent, nor, indeed, SO RAPIDLY INCREASING? One need not be so “appeasing, accommodating and conceding” as to hand over the country bit by bit to the MUSLIMS and then end up seeing a Caliph sitting on the throne in Buckingham Palace. Is Pakistan not that integral part of INDIA where eventually the Muslim numbers got out of hand? Did EUROPE or AMERICA learn any lesson from India's violent break up? Given the rapid increase in MUSLIM numbers, whose job is it to ensure peace and harmony (and progress) in this country a couple of generations from now. 000000000