The United Kingdom has a lot of problems, but one of the country’s most pressing issues, according to its parliament, is an American presidential candidate.
This week in London, the House of Commons furiously debated the wisdom of banning one Donald J. Trump from entering the country. The arguments for doing so have ranged from The Donald being a “wazzock” to the man even promoting hate crimes all the way in the U.K. The Labor Party’s Shadow Home Affairs minister wanted Trump banned simply because he would empower the nationalist English Defense League.
The most supportive members of parliament for the idea of a Trump ban were arguably those of the Islamic faith. That shouldn’t be too surprising considering the thing which has drawn the most international outrage towards the real estate mogul’s campaign is his proposal for a temporary ban on Muslim immigration to the United States.
That idea served as the impetus for the British parliament taking up the idea of a Trump ban in the first place after more than 500,000 Britons signed a petition begging their legislative body to implement the measure.
“Hate crime is being inflamed and stoked by the words that Donald Trump is using,” said Muslim Labor MP Tulip Siddiq.
Another Muslim MP, Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh, couldn’t believe any of her colleagues would defend Trump’s right to travel to Britain on free speech grounds when his words, in her opinion, threaten “me, my family and my children.”
Siddiq also said she “draw[s] the line at freedom of speech” when it comes to the billionaire populist’s ideas. Oddly enough though, the Labour politician is the niece of Bangladesh’s autocratic ruler who has vowed to deport Muslim migrants from Myanmar from the country and has executed numerous political opponents.
“I learned everything about politics from her – social justice, how to campaign and how to reach out to the people,” Siddiq has boasted of her aunt, Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina.
Clearly, Hasina didn’t teach her niece much about avoiding hypocrisy as the British politico has not spoken out against banning her relative — who’s obviously far worse than Trump — from the country. (RELATED: UK Politician Seeking To Ban Trump Is Proud Niece Of Anti-Refugee Leader)
The whole spectacle in parliament should reassure Americans that it was right to declare independence from Her Majesty’s government nearly 240 years ago. Britain has had numerous honorable statesmen and political leaders over its long history — and all of them should be rolling in their graves at the sight of the current House of Commons.
Wasting so much time on Donald Trump seems like a major embarrassment for parliament, especially when many of its members were so eager to trample upon that cherished value of liberal democracy — free speech. Then again, the politicians were responding to the tens of thousands of citizens who wanted a Trump ban, so contemporary British society shares as much to blame in this sordid affair.
What may be the most head shaking element of the conversation is how the aggrieved politicos imagine the terrifying threat Trump poses by walking on their shores, yet ignore the brewing trouble within their own communities. Particularly in Muslim migrant communities.
From wanting sharia law to be enforced in the U.K. to child sex rings somehow finding a home in their communities, Muslim integration into British society seems like a far more pressing issue than a golden-maned man running for president.
The U.K. prides itself on its commitment to Western legal tradition and upholding the rights of man. However, 40 percent of British Muslims would rather have sharia law than Anglo-Saxon law handle their affairs. While British society historically views murder for any reason as wrong, one out of three Muslim students in the country think killing in the name of Islam is justified.
When it comes to support for the precepts of Islamic terrorism, these migrant communities also tout disturbing numbers. Twenty percent of British Muslims say they support jihadi groups like ISIS and there are more Muslims from the U.K. fighting for the Islamic State than in the nation’s own military. (RELATED: Media Outlets Desperate To Debunk Poll Showing 540,000 UK Muslims Have ‘Sympathy’ With Syrian Jihadis)
Not surprisingly, there’s a divergence of values between Britain’s Muslim community and the rest of society. For instance, the U.K. likes to pride itself on how friendly it is to LGBT rights and how it legalized gay marriage. However, a stunning zero (yes, zero) percent of the nation’s Muslims think homosexuality is socially acceptable.
Britain also has a very disturbing number of child sex rings popping up, and increasingly the men behind them are of Muslim origin. The most notorious case is from Rotherham. In 2014, it was revealed to the public that six Pakistani Muslims had abused over 1400 girls in their sex ring over the course of several years. Officials in the town had an inkling of what was going on well before they were brought to justice, but chose to do nothing because they didn’t want to look racist.
The authorities even arrested a father who was trying to get his daughter back from the sick thugs and punished a civil servant who was trying to put an end to the disgusting crime group with cultural sensitivity training. (RELATED: UK Social Worker Given Diversity Training After Exposing Pakistani Sex Ring)
Depressingly, Rotherham is not a lone outlier. Similar sex rings run by Muslim men have been uncovered in Bristol, Derby, Oxford, Rochdale and other locales throughout the country. But no dramatic debate like the one over the Trump ban has occurred on the floor of parliament on these horrifying crimes. (RELATED: The Migrant Rape Culture The Political Elite Wishes Were Fake)
The reason why Trump, rightly or wrongly, proposed his Muslim moratorium is due to the problems associated within these communities. The U.K. certainly has its fair share of issues among its Islam-practicing migrants — and banning The Donald is not going to make them go away.
Instead of trying to virtue signal to the world how “tolerant” they are, members of British parliament should do more to tackle the domestic threat to its historic liberal democracy.
It’s going to take a whole lot more than calling politically correct enemies “wazzocks.”
