Interview with Gavin Boby, a British lawyer, about preventing the construction of mosques via the legal system
Gavin Boby of the Law and Freedom Foundation prevents mosque buildings in the UK through the legal system. Citizen Times spoke with the lawyer about the political functions of mosques, the fusion of Islam and secular power and his plans to extend his legal approach concerning this issue to other European countries.
by Felix Strüning | Citizen Times
Citizen Times: Mr. Boby, you say propagating Islam is contrary to law in free societies. What does this mean?
Gavin Boby: It’s a public order issue. Islamic doctrine (The Koran, Hadith, and Sira) is filled with instructions to make war and violence against unbelievers. There is not the space to go into detail here, but the Koran alone calls 3 times for unbelievers to be killed “wherever they are found”. It sanctions the taking of unbelievers as slaves, 14 times. The language used is very reminiscent of annihilationist systems such as Nazism, e.g. that used by the chief henchman of the holocaust, Reinhard Heydrich, in his last will and testament to his wife.
You don’t have to be a lawyer to understand why this is unacceptable, because no society can survive that allows such incitement, and it will never be at peace. Imagine some former SS men wanting to set up a chapter house, where they could stand in rows and recite their book about killing and subjugating outsiders. They’d be shut down before you could say “politico-religious construct”. And they should be. A society that doesn’t will fail, and deserve to fail. The same problem exists where Muslim want to do the same thing.
Even politically correct people get this, which explains their desperate nonsense about the “religion of peace” and the “small minority”. And western nations got it centuries before we discovered multiculturalism. Foundational documents of Anglophone law – such as Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights, common law, The Declaration of Independence, the American Constitution – all have as an underlying principle the preservation of order – “the peace”, or “the King’s peace”. And they were right, because without public peace and order it is next to impossible for society to function in more than a limited way.
If you doubt that, try enforcing the fundamental right to religious diversity in Somalia. Civilisation’s first duty is to survive. Without that, other rights mean nothing.
You have fought successfully 13 campaigns against mosque planning applications in Great Britain. How do you do this?
Boby: First, by informing people about mosque planning applications:
- That the application has been submitted, and details of it;
- Where, how, and to whom to object;
- Letting them know that there is something they can do about it, that they can win.
Second, by making sure that frightened or self serving politicians realise that they are accountable for their decisions and should do their duty by their constituents. The tally is now 13:1, since we lost one a couple of weeks ago. To be honest, I thought we would lose when I took the case on. I just couldn’t resist going down fighting for the residents getting shoved around in their own neighbourhood. I’m not sorry we took the case on, even though we lost. These residents are the quiet poor who get the short end of the stick most of their lives, and taken it with gentle dignity. We gave them a chance, but I wish I could have won it for them. And how I wish we had been called in at the start.
Well, you lost one case. But tell us more about one of the major successes, please.
PHOTO: Gavin Boby at a speech in European Parliament, Brussels – picture: ICLA / EuropeNews.dk
Boby: We stopped a horrible one in Blackpool. This is the town of Charlene Downes, the 14 year old girl plied with drugs, pimped, raped, murdered, her body disposed of in the foulest way imaginable, and her killers rewarded with a government payout of £250,000 each. It is also the town of Paige Chivers, groomed, exploited, and ‘disappeared’ in Blackpool.
We hope that their families will take no offence if we offer the work that went into opposing this mosque as an inadequate tribute to their memory.
It was satisfying that, despite a despicable report from the Council officer recommending planning permission, none of the Councillors could bring themselves to vote in favour of it: you could hear the crickets chirp when the chairman asked if anyone wanted to vote in favour of it!
Why is itimportant to preventmosquesin particular?
Boby: Three reasons: strategy; residential amenity; and in order to confront the problem humanely.
First, strategy. A mosque has never been just a place of prayer and reflection. It is just as much a centre for socio political control.
It is modelled on the first mosque, Mohammed’s Medina mosque. This was established once Mohammed held dictatorial power: he had established no mosque during his first 13 years in Mecca. It was primarily a political office, used for the following activities:
- Jihad operations planned and directed, and commanders appointed.
- Despatching and receiving official delegations.
- Receiving pledges of loyalty.
- Conducting the affairs of the Islamic state.
- Appointing judges, tax collectors, state officials, and military commanders by Mohammed, and his successors Abu Bakr, Omar, Uthman and Ali.
- Drawing up contracts.
- Declaring Sharia law.
- Declaring the superiority of Muslims and the inferiority of non-Muslims.
- Teaching the supremacy of men over women.
- Pronouncing death sentences on those who had opposed Mohammed or spoken unfavourably about him.
Islamic doctrine requires Muslims to follow the example (Sunnah) of Muhammad (Koran, Sura 33:36). This explains why arms have been found in mosques in various capital cities, such as London and Munich.
Second, residential amenity for neighbours. Their experience will fall into 4 stages, depending on the severity of the Islamization of the area.
Stage 1 is the parking jihad. Don’t expect considerate parking by mosque-goers!
Stage 2 is the dominance stage. Or the “F-off Mrs, this is our area now” stage.
Stage 3 is the “You really should sell to us” stage. Residents will find men knocking on their door, with a few twenties and fifties in a plastic bag, suggesting it might be in their interests to sell up.
Stage 4 is the harassment stage. The stage where police say “We have no reason to suspect that a racial element to this crime, madam”. Most people leave before this stage.
It is not fair to jettison people to this, simply because they are poor, working class, or unused to lobbying authority.
Third, in order to confront the problem humanely. It is important to oppose the advance of Islam whilst we still have the opportunity to do so in a lawful and orderly way. This is crucial.
People often accuse us of creating trouble because we point out observable facts. The reality is that if these problems are not addressed in a civilised way now, forces far darker than me (many of whom are probably talking politically correct talk today) will take the opportunity to address them in very uncivilised ways once the power of governments has declined or collapsed.
Do you think the same legal procedure is possible in other European countries?
Boby: Absolutely! The details of legal procedure will differ, but the central elements – political authorities’ cowardice and self serving – is the same across the continent. This is what enables us to win: we call them on their cowardice.
Do you think that your approach will ultimately change the laws so that it becomes more difficult to build new mosques?
Boby: Eventually this will be the case. As Islamic areas grow, they are becoming places of Islamic law, operated by Islamic courts or Islamic “community leaders”, where the reach of national law recedes.
This will lead to society outside those Islamic areas seeking to restrict the influence of Islam on the rest of society. I don’t see how this hardening of existing divisions can be avoided. And the main focus will be on bridgehead mosques.
The danger is that this process will take place in some kind of social eruption, probably following a crisis of government finance, and that it will be instituted and enforced by widespread violence. This is why it is so important that the problem be faced now, by civilised and orderly people such as us.
In a speech at the European Parliament in Brussels, you said recently that the Islamic assumption that religious adherence means material, worldly success is the wide open backdoor. How can this be used to stop the Islamization of Europe?
Boby: This is not so much a method for stopping the Islamization of Europe, as the method for undermining the religion of Islam. The conflation of religious adherence with worldly success is the coding backdoor that the Islamic programmers left open. This is how Islamic doctrine rewards and finances the power holders in society: men treating women as servants; believers living off unbelievers via the jizya; power holders having religious status and the spiritual authority for self enrichment.
When Muslims have faced reversals, the standard explanation from religious ideologues (such as Abul Ala Maududi and Sayyid Qutb) has been that it was due to insufficient religious zeal. And that if that religious zeal is restored, then so will be the Muslims’ fortune. A sense of entitlement is can be a powerful motivator.
The key is to break that link, and keep it broken. Your religion is irrelevant to your material entitlement. Establish the principle that you reap what you sow (familiar to Christians, Jews, Hindus and Buddhists alike). Then Islam, which has little else to recommend it apart from brute force, will lose its attraction for people, especially the people who seek influence in any society. And Islam will dwindle.