Critics say move unfairly benefits Muslims

The drama is unfolding in Britain - a drama that contains elements that might have been borrowed from the theater of the absurd, making it uncertain whether we are dealing with a surreal farce or an all too real tragedy.

My question to the British people:

- Are you sure England is still your country?

- The people running your government, do they work for your welfare, or your despair?

- Do they get their votes from their constituencies or from Mecca?

- Your Members of Parliament, when they asked for your votes, did they tell you they’d make you  support with your tax money the sexual pleasures of Muslims with four wives? Add to this 3.4 average child per wife based on Muslim women's fertility rates. Now your taxes will be financing the benefits for 13.6 children plus four women plus the lucky Ali Baba, for a total head count of  18.6 per Muslim family. It would be more accurate to change your terminology from “family benefits” to “group, or tribal benefits.” And this is not the end of it. Three or four years down the road, Ali Baba could divorce his four wives, get a new set of four, and keep rolling the dice. And please don’t think for a second that I’m exaggerating, Muslims divorce faster than you count to three.

Is it exaggerating to call this subsidized sex? Or sex on the dole? I mean no offence, but it is a known fact that a prostitute works to support one pimp and not 18. Are the elected members of the British government treating their people to a lower standard than prostitution? Should we call it the Mecca standard?

This is not to say that polygamy and with its attendant social benefit scams are not practiced by Muslims in other Western countries one way or another. England is just perhaps the most egregious example.

It is also no secret that Saudi Arabia has the largest post retirement employment agency with the most rewarding benefits,  for services rendered by high officials from London, Washington DC, and practically every Western country. And many will oblige at the cost of turning their own populations into white slavery paying the Jeziah (extortion money paid by dhimmis) for the glitter of the oily dollar and a golden retirement plan.

 It’s an eye opener to check and see whose interests your former top politicians are taking care of right now.

No one said it better than Machiavelli, “Politics have no relation to morals”.

DUBAI (AlArabiya.net)

Men who bring more than one wife to Britain can claim extra benefits at taxpayers’ expense, British press reports said Monday, a move slammed by the Conservative Party as “totally unacceptable”.

Ministers have ruled that families with a husband and several wives will be officially recognized under the UK's benefits system – but only if the marriages took place in a country where polygamy is legal, as in some Muslim countries.

[ Could they also go on holiday with their women to a Muslim country to have them stoned or perform an “honor killing” where it is legal?]

If the polygamous marriage is valid, the amount payable is £33.65 (67 dollars) per wife per week. The families could also claim child benefits for every child and argue for greater housing benefit and tax reductions because of the need for bigger homes.

A government review concluded in December that allowing husbands to claim for their additional wives remained the “best possible” option, The Express reported, adding that the decision will chiefly benefit Muslim men, as Islamic law allows them to have up to four wives.

A spokeswoman for the Department for Work and Pensions said that there are fewer than 1,000 polygamous marriages in the UK and only a small percentage of these claim social security benefit.

Opposition

But critics attacked the decision as “totally unacceptable,” saying it offered preferential treatment to a particular group, and warned it could lead to demands for other changes in British laws.

“You are not allowed to have multiple marriages in the UK, so to have a situation where the benefits system is treating people in different ways is totally unacceptable and will serve to undermine confidence in the system," Conservative party spokesman Chris Grayling said.

“This sets a precedent that will lead to more demands for the culture of other countries to be reflected in UK law and the benefits system,” he told the Express, and accused the Government of trying to keep the December ruling quiet because the topic was so controversial.

Corin Taylor, of the Taxpayers’ Alliance, told the daily: “British taxpayers are paying a record amount of tax so the Government has a duty to make sure that every penny is spent properly.

“Polygamy is not something which British law allows and British taxpayers should not have to pay for extra benefits for second or third wives.”

The paper said that while a married man cannot obtain a "spouse visa" to bring a second wife into Britain, additional wives may be able to enter the country via other legal routes such as tourist visas, student visas or work permits.

A government spokesman told the Telegraph newspaper that the number of people in polygamous marriages entering Britain had fallen since the 1988 Immigration Act, which "generally prevents a man from bringing a second or subsequent wife with him to this country if another woman is already living as his wife in the UK".

But the Telegraph said officials have identified a potential loophole by which a man can divorce his wife under British law while continuing to live with her as his spouse under Islamic law, and obtain a spouse visa for a foreign woman who he can legally marry.
In Britain, bigamy is punishable by up to seven years in prison.