We want to destroy the British legal system in favour of Moslems, says Nick Fluck, President of the Law Society

Sharia law to be enshrined in British legal system as lawyers get guidelines on drawing up documents according to Islamic rules
The guidelines on wills could mean women are denied an equal inheritance
Adopted children could also face losing out under Law Society document
The move has been criticised as a backwards step by equality campaigners
By SAM WEBB
PUBLISHED: 10:00, 23 March 2014 | UPDATED: 23:53, 23 March 2014

Top lawyers have written guidelines for British solicitors on drafting ‘sharia-compliant’ wills which can deny women an equal share of their inheritance and entirely exclude non-believers, it was revealed today.
The Law Society, which represents solicitors in England and Wales, has written a guide on Sharia succession rules that will be used in British courts. It will mean that children born outside of marriage and adopted children could also be denied their fair share.
The guide states: ‘No distinction is made between children of different marriages, but illegitimate and adopted children are not Sharia heirs.
New guidance for lawyers on drawing up wills based on Sharia principles have been released by British legal experts.

The Sharia Council of Britain preside over marital cases at their east London headquarters

1491_Nick-Fluck-2

 

Mr Fluck flucking up Britain’s world renowned legal system.
New guidance for lawyers on drawing up wills based on Sharia principles have been released by British legal experts. Pictured, the Sharia Council of Britain preside over marital cases at their east London headquarters
‘The male heirs in most cases receive double the amount inherited by a female heir of the same class. Non-Muslims may not inherit at all, and only Muslim marriages are recognised.
‘Similarly, a divorced spouse is no longer a Sharia heir, as the entitlement depends on a valid Muslim marriage existing at the date of death.’

The Law Society claims the guide is simply to promote ‘good practice’ and ‘support members so they can help clients from all backgrounds’ – but the move has been criticised by equality campaigners.
Keith Porteous Wood, executive director of the National Secular Society, an organisation that campaigns for strict separation of the state from religious institutions and equality of religion before the law, says the move is a backwards step that undermines British justice.
Equality campaigner Baroness Cox said the Law Society document ‘violates everything we stand for’

Equality campaigner Baroness Cox said the Law Society document ‘violates everything we stand for’
He said: ‘The UK has the most comprehensive equality laws in the world, yet the Law Society seems determined to undermine this by giving approval to a system that relegates women, non-Muslim and children born out of wedlock to second class citizenship.
‘Instead of running scared at any mention of sharia, politicians of all parties should face these issues square on and insist on the primacy of democratically-determined human rights-compliant law.
‘Laws determined by Parliament should prevail over centuries-old theocratic laws. We should have One Law for All, not allowing any law to operate which disadvantages any sections of the community.’
Nicholas Fluck, president of the Law Society, said in a statement: ‘This practice note provides guidance to solicitors dealing with clients where Sharia succession rules may be relevant.
‘This is the first time such advice has been published and we hope it will assist solicitors with Sharia probate matters.
‘There is a wide variety of spiritual, religious and cultural beliefs within our population, and the Law Society wants to support its members so they can help clients from all backgrounds.
‘We hope this guidance will help solicitors assist their clients and go some way to forming an idea of good practice when it comes to applying Sharia succession rules within the legal profession.’
But Baroness Cox, who campaigns against religious discrimination against women, said the guidance was a worrying development.
She told the Sunday Telegraph: ‘This violates everything we stand for. It would make the Suffragettes turn in their graves.’
In the past she has spoken out about the growth of ‘Islamic courts’ resolving disputes.
She said: ‘No longer do we have a single legal code in our society.
‘Instead, alongside our own law, there is now effectively a parallel quasi-legal system operating within some Muslim communities.
‘Sharia law, imported from theocracies like Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia, first began to be used here in a strictly limited form, dealing mainly with narrow issues like Islamic financial contracts.
‘But as the Muslim population has grown and the pervasive creed of multiculturalism has become ever more powerful, so Sharia law has rapidly grown in influence within some communities.
‘There are now estimated to be no fewer than 85 Sharia courts across the country — from London and Manchester to Bradford and Nuneaton. They operate mainly from mosques, settling financial and family disputes according to religious principles.’

Read more:
Islamic law is adopted by British legal chiefs – Telegraph
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2587215/Sharia-Law-enshrined-British-legal-lawyers-guidelines-drawing-documents-according-Islamic-rules.html#ixzz3iiwYxZQH

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

29 Responses to “We want to destroy the British legal system in favour of Moslems, says Nick Fluck, President of the Law Society”

  1. sovereigntea says:

    Gove & Cameron are already destroying the legal system, abrogating common law the Sharia stuff is chaff to misdirect and distract from that slotting in nicely with the zio project of creating a clash of civilisations ie christian vs islam leaving guess who to cash in & profit. The Talmud is a clue.

  2. Neutrino says:

    Of course it’s the jooos what dun it.

    • ferryt says:

      Usually is old chap. See ST comment above.

      The Moslems have taken a hell of a bashing in our ‘free press’ over the last few
      years.

      The jooos. Not so much.

      I wonder why that would be?

      • Men Scryfa says:

        Don’t worry about any bashing in the newspapers. What about dishing out some of the real thing?

      • ferryt says:

        Well I’m a non violent extremist.

        I’m off for a crap now. I promise to wipe my arse with today’s Telegraph.

        How does that sound?

      • Men Scryfa says:

        Self-defence is the law.

        As far as the Torygraph is concerned go right ahead – just think of that p**k from there who refused to publish my piece on the PIE Papers. “Chief Reporter” my ass!

      • ferryt says:

        What is the collective term for c***s? I always used bunch. Satchel seems good.

        I haven’t bought a newspaper for years. Torah graph seems like a good in to attack though. Total MIx psyop. B’stards.

        What was your piece? I’d like to read it and I know a few t graph readers who’d be interested. What what!

    • RabbiT says:

      Has no impact upon jooos except as Sov observes to create disharmony in the joooish plan for multiculturalism given they traditionally do not integrate for any benefit to society except their own. Knowing probate law what I can see here is in fact damaging to the British system of established law not just trying to assist in the wishes of the Moslem community as in certain areas you can not have both and therefore it appears Sharia will be made to overrule existing legislation to the detriment of British family life. Again this will have no impact against those who own our government.

      That said, can’t be any worse than the current system where lawyers forge wills, the police aid and abet the criminals in the crime (in exchange for benefits) as do the courts, in order to ensure their chums in the legal profession get what away with what ever they want and family members otherwise receive nothing.

      • sovereigntea says:

        We need to reverse the hex and make Israel diverse & multicultural. A ferry from Calais to Tel Aviv via Kos would suffice.

        We could film the reaction in Tel Aviv and identify any potential racists. Of course being a higher form of humanity and chosen we should see non of that inferior sort of behaviour.

        According to dogma there were 12 tribes of Israel hence everyone in the world is entitled to the right of return on a promise. LOL

  3. Jennifer says:

    ‘There is a wide variety of spiritual, religious and cultural beliefs within our population, and the Law Society wants to support its members so they can help clients from all backgrounds.”.
    Well, isn’t that nice to know that they are thinking of us. So along with the Noahide Laws and Shomrim, and Sharia, we can look forward to them supporting Common Law, and the Law of the Land.
    I claim Irish Brehon Law on account of MY religious, spiritual and culural beliefs. That means I am entitled to six pints of ale with my dinner. It’s the law!

    • ferryt says:

      Hear hear!

      Nick can Fluck off as far as I’m concerned. Unless he writes in the six pints of real ale.

      • kingel says:

        1290 ‘the Edict of Expulsion’ was issued by Edward I. This Edict relates to the jews aka khazar zionists. The jews had ignored the 1275 ‘Statute of Jewry’ issued to curtail their extortionate USURY. So. in 1290 the King issued the Edict, banning jews from England forever. The Edict still stands, it has never been revoked !
        This means that the ‘Cestui Que vie’ Act of 1666, said to be “instituted” by “his heinous in Rome” & the khazar zionists was, in effect, compiled by “entities” who had NO LAWFUL RIGHT of ABODE in the British Isles and, therefore no RIGHT to formulate UK Law ! The ‘Cestui Que Vie’ act is therefore ….. TOTAL B/S !
        Everything IMPOSED on Indigenous British Sovereigns, over the past 350 years; under the “Cestui Que Vie” Act has been UNLAWFUL !
        The ‘Edict of Expulsion’ cannot be revoked for a number of reasons.
        The primary reason being that the Lawful owners of the British Isles are it’s Indigenous Sovereigns. This “ownership”
        is based on the Ancient Molmutine/Common Law of around 400 BC.
        “……….. AND NO ONE HAS ANY RIGHT TO IT BUT THE TRIBE OF THE CYMRY for they 1st took possession and before this time there were no persons living on it; but it was full of bears, wolves, crocodile and bison……..”
        NO FOREIGNERS have a right of abode in the UK without the consent of Indigenous British Sovereigns.
        In present day UK foreigners have been allowed to enter and, live in the UK, without the consent of the Indigenous British Sovereigns. This means their LAWFUL status is ILLEGAL ALIEN.
        The so-called “government” in the UK is ILLEGAL ALIEN khazar zionist and, everything they have done or, are currently doing is UNLAWFUL !
        Under the ‘Ancient & Current Day’ Molmutine Law Any foreigners allowed to live in the UK came (1) with the consent of the Indigenous British and (2) under the following provisions…….THEY HAD NO CLAIM OR PRIVILEGE IN THE LAND OF PRYDEIN (UK). They COULD NOT POSSESS THE RANK OF NATIVE CYMRY until the 9th of their lineal descendants.
        The so called “government” of the UK, ILLEGAL ALIENS using FAKE ANGLICISED NAMES, therefore possess no rights of any sort, within the UK.
        They certainly possess no authority to oppress or, direct the Indigenous Sovereigns of this once beautiful country.
        The LAWFUL Jurisdictional system of the British Isles is Molmutine Law/Common Law. The False Theatrical Statutes being “played out” in “courts” is an UNLAWFUL attempt to OVERLAY existing Common Law as, a means to STEAL all British Assets.
        “The Moslems want to destroy the British legal system…in order to favour themselves……” HA HA HA
        Which Legal System would they like to destroy, the FAKE Maritime Statutes or Molmutine Law ? ?
        They do not need to destroy the ‘Cestui Que Vie’ Statutes because, they have NO LAWFUL STANDING.
        If, they are planning to destroy ‘Ancient Molmutine/ Common Law’ they can’t !
        The RIGHTS held by Indigenous British Sovereigns under MOLMUTINE LAW are UNALIENABLE.
        Also, that “trifling” matter of LAWFUL ABODE in the UK in respect of Moslems ? Indigenous British Sovereigns have not authorised the “ingress” into the British Isles, of the Moslems, which means, THEY POSSESS NO LAWFUL RIGHT OF ABODE in the UK and, lack Lawful Authority to implement any Laws ! The “so-called” go-burn-mental politicians are ILLEGAL ALIENS and, have never possessed the “authority” to (1) make decisions for the Indigenous British and (2) disenfranchise the Indigenous British
        As for “his heinous in Rome” declaring the British Isles for himself and his DOG Lucy-fur”…….(1) One cannot, grandly declare ownership of other peoples …stuff ! and, (2) As “HIS HEINOUS” had/has NO RIGHT OF ABODE in the British Isles he, was/is in no position to make JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS !

        References:
        ‘the Falsification of History’ …book…john Hamer

        http://www.self-realisation.com/video/the-fraud-of-english-history-and-the-rise-of-uct/

  4. Men Scryfa says:

    I have got a law to propose. One which most real Britons will agree with passing,

    Its called the law of repatriation

    After we are done with that we can get rid of this guy at the Law Soc

    • sovereigntea says:

      If we return to Common Law as is only right and proper then the Law Soc private members club and its actors will be superfluous to requirements.

    • Hello MS, duel weapons preparations are completed, now to battle! Adam

      • Men Scryfa says:

        Excellent. Ian won’t stand a chance once his side arm misfires. I can then nonchalantly fire one round off harmlessly into the air whilst declaring:

        “Damn You! You impudent swine. I only wanted to see if you were stout!”

        Then I take him and his seconder to the nearest hostelry for ale and revels while you then accompany Jenny off for safekeeping.

        50 Guineas. Excellent work Sir!

  5. kingel says:

    You do not have to propose a new law, we already have one !
    It is called Molmutine/Common Law and was written around 400 BC. The RIGHTS enshrined, in respect of the Indigenous British, are UNALIENABLE.
    No foreigners have a right of Abode in the UK, unless their presence has received the CONSENT of the lawful owners of the British Isles, the Indigenous British !
    This ESSENTIAL and PERTINENT information has been imho, deliberately obscured/buried, by the ILEGAL ALIENS, the khazar zionists.

    http://self-realisation.com/video/the-fraud-of-english-history-and-the-rise-of-uct/

    http://www.ynetnews.com/article/0,7340,L-3302296,00.html

  6. kingel says:

    APOLOGIES Correction

    http;//www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3302296,00.html

  7. freebornman says:

    They are trying to puppet us with this bullshit. I can see them, Fagin-like, rubbing their hands under evil drooling grins, waiting for the bricks through curry-shop windows, the taxi drivers beaten to death, the reprisals from the muslims bringing about a civil war. They fed us the ‘muslim grooming gang’ meme, as ever a double edged attack, distract the mass-man from the child rapists who govern us, AND get the populace fighting amongst themselves. They’ve known full well about this problem for 15 years, but it has been brought to the fore now. Examine the mechanisms that allow this to happen. As I see it, there is a progression in English culture in the last 50 years. Extended family> Nuclear family> Dispose of ‘sperm donor’ when financially expedient. What brought this about? Relaxing the divorce laws in the 1970’s, relentless bombardment on our psyche from tell-lie-vision. Who dominates the legal profession? Who dominates the media? I don’t have a predjudice bone in my body, I take people as I find. And I find we are beset with a filthy, evil 1.5%. We did the right thing 700 years ago, Hitler (god bless) tried to do the right thing 70 years ago. My guess is we’ve got 7 years. Let’s do the right thing.

    • Charly says:

      Hitler did the right thing? You must be joking!

      • ian says:

        please elaborate.

      • Nike says:

        Joking, Charly?
        (“Je suis Charly”? – are you Charly? Really? I’m not “Charly”)

        What’s going on is way too serious.
        and there are people who still don’t know (or are just playing dumb)

        The questions we must be interested in refer to the alleged “six million Jews“ who allegedly were “gassed” in “gas chambers” in Nazi extermination camps.

        I’d like to ask the Zionist Satanists why lots of evidence to the contrary is being ignored? Why are the German people (not only the WW II generation) being slandered and vilified? Why are researchers of the alleged holocaust being persecuted and even incarcerated? Why are Zionists afraid of learning the truth? Why take Zionist Jews a leading role in genociding the white European race? What about Zionist Jewish racism and antisemitism (against semitic Arabs, ag. the Palestinians)?

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ba9QTLofiBg

        Holocaust – Antisemitism Tricks

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itmiffGBHoE

        Judea* Declares War on Germany March 24, 1933 – and ongoing
        *Zionists who claim to speak for world jewry

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BvRvNZo5Gk

        Ursula Haverbeck “The Greatest Problem of Our Time” w/ English Subtitles

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCvblLcz0-E

        Breaking the Spell

      • freebornman says:

        Quick clarification. He correctly identified the international banking fraternity as the enemy of the people. Issued reichsmarks as credit rather than debt, rebuilt a shattered germany, brought full employment, Time magazine man of the year, the german miracle, etc. They didn’t like that.

      • ian says:

        Yes freebornman I agree, I just wondered why he doubted you, as all you say can easily be proven. It backfired as the western puppet governments were used to make an example of Germany, so no-one else got any ideas about booting out the money lenders, but hardly his fault.

      • GNJ says:

        Hitler “correctly identified the international banking fraternity as the enemy of the people.”

        Really? The banks and wealthy industrialists brought him to power. Deutsche Bank certainly did well out of the Reich; it wasn’t until a few years’ ago that they admitted cramming their coffers full with the plundered money of millions of people the Nazis sent to death camps.

  8. Neutrino says:

    “let’s do the right thing” just about sums up the mentality of this whole website.

  9. Nollidge says:

    Diana Dors real surname was Fluck.Wonder if…

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.