Tuesday, October 29, 2019

Hugh Fitzgerald, Jihad Watch: Marriage Jihad


Hugh Fitzgerald: Marriage Jihad (Part One)

One of the many ways that Muslims manage to enter and settle in the West is by marrying a Muslim who is already living in the West as a legal migrant or even as a citizen.
One version is that where Pakistani-British men return to Pakistan to find a bride, most often a cousin, who will be unused to Western ways, unlike Pakistani-British girls brought up in the U.K. For the Muslim girl, this arranged marriage appears not much different from the arranged marriage her family would otherwise make for her to a husband in Pakistan. In fact, she will come out ahead, because when her new husband brings her back to the U.K as his wife, even though she may live in a Muslim neighborhood, she will have more freedom of movement than would ever have been possible in Pakistan. She may acquire a better knowledge of English, offered by the generous welfare state of Britain. She may then have the further possibility of being able to work outside the house, depending on how liberal her husband is, and how great is the family’s need for money. She and her children will receive medical care far beyond what would have been possible in Pakistan. Her children will receive educations superior to anything they could get in Pakistan.
And in this way, many thousands of Pakistani girls and women are allowed into the U.K. each year — no one seems to know exactly how many — as the wives, in arranged  marriages, sometimes forced, of Muslim men already living in the country legally, thereby helping to increase the number of Muslims in Britain.
A different kind of arranged marriage is that where Muslim girls and women, who are legal migrants, or citizens, living in the U.K., are sent abroad by their families to marry Muslim men, who can return with them, as their husbands, on spousal visas. In order to make sure the girls are unable to back out from the marriages that have been arranged for them, the men deliberately rape and impregnate the girls, a way to seal the deal, and to prevent divorce, for the girls have now been rendered of less value — except to these “husbands” — on the marriage market. Furthermore, it is believed that a pregnant wife makes the marriage more legitimate in the eyes of British authorities.
These husbands from abroad now find that they are often (though not always) given that coveted thing, a spousal visa, by the Home Office, that allows them to remain in the U.K. as husbands of women who are legal migrants or  citizens. The couple can now be recipients of all the largesse the generous British welfare state provides. Their family can receive free or highly subsidized housing, free medical care, free education, family allowances, and more. But the main thing the men wanted they now have: they are able, with these spousal visas, to remain in the U.K.
Not all the women involved in these forced marriages are reconciled to their dismal lot. Some of these women have tried to get the British government to halt the practice of giving visas to their putative “husbands.”
Women and girls raped after being sent abroad, then Home Office lets illegal husbands settle in UK.
British teenagers are being forced to marry abroad and are raped and impregnated while the Home Office “turns a blind eye” by handing visas to their husbands, The Times has found.
Officials received dozens of reports last year that women wanted to block visas for men they had been made to marry in countries including Pakistan, India, Bangladesh and the United Arab Emirates. In almost half of their cases the visas were approved, records show.
Yvette Cooper, chairwoman of the home affairs select committee, said she would demand answers from the Home Office over the findings.
Experts believe that there are thousands of victims in Britain as the vast majority are too afraid to come forward….
Thus, while recognizing the nature of these forced marriages, designed to help the husbands obtain residence in the U.K., and having heard the testimony of many of the women who have been forced into these sham marriages, and heard, too, their pleas not to give their “husbands” visas, the Home Office has nonetheless continued to approve visas for these men. Why? Is it because they don’t mind offending Muslim women, but are worried about offending Muslim men? Are there Muslims working in the Home Office who are used to the idea of arranged — and forced — marriages, and do not consider such marriages to be “sham”? Where is the justification for approving these visas for men who, at the very least, have been accused by their “wives” of having raped them, and whose main interest is clearly not the marriage itself, but the ability to receive the spousal visas that will allow them to remain in the U.K.?
These “marriages” have involved girls as young as 11 who were sent abroad from the U.K.  Sometimes they are “married” using Skype. As noted above, the deliberate attempt to impregnate these girls not only makes them less marriageable to others, so that they are more likely to stay in this forced marriage, but also to make their own “marriage” more legitimate to British authorities. Another consideration is that by having their daughters marry Muslim men from abroad, who expect strict adherence to Islam, the parents hope that will change the behavior of their daughters, if they give signs of becoming too Western in their ways:
“Imams in the UK and abroad have been conducting ceremonies using Skype – so girls can be married remotely before “being put on a plane and consummating the marriage at the earliest opportunity”, according to Freedom, a charity.
The marriage is often conducted with the promise of a visa to the UK for their new husband, it said.
The reason is to curb the behavior of their children when they become ‘too western’,” charity founder Aneeta Prem was quoted as saying by ‘The Sunday Times’.
“Once married, there is enormous pressure to get a spouse visa. The hope is the girl will visit (country of husband’s origin) and fall pregnant to make the union seem more legitimate before bringing the partner back,” she said.
To sum up:
Muslim girls in the U.K. are being sent abroad and forced to marry Muslim men, often much older, whom they do not know, and who have already been chosen for them, for three reasons. First, in order to make sure that their behavior remains islamically correct, and does not become “too western.” Second, so that the men they marry will be able to enter, and remain in, the U.K., on a spousal visa. Third, in some cases, these husbands-to-be pay the families of the girls for the right to marry them, mainly in order to get the benefits of that visa.


Hugh Fitzgerald: Marriage Jihad (Part Two)

As we noted in Part One, some Muslim men — in the U.K. that means mostly Pakistanis  — also go abroad to find a wife selected by family members. Often the girl chosen is a cousin of the man, unsurprising in a culture that places such value on cousin-marriages. Having been raised in a Muslim land, the girl selected will, it is believed, be suitably docile, meek and mild, not having been influenced, as Muslim girls in the U.K. have been, by Western ways.
As for the girl in Pakistan who has been chosen by her family to marry a cousin from the U.K., for her an arranged marriage was inevitable, and she may see little difference between an arranged marriage with someone in Pakistan or with someone in the U.K., but should  come to realize that there are benefits to living in the U.K. British law provides a limit to Muslim misogyny: the husband cannot “beat” his wife for her supposed “disobedience.” Her children will receive Western educations, rather than being limited by a school syllabus saturated with Islam. Polygamy is forbidden. A husband cannot divorce merely by uttering the triple-talaq; under British law, a wife has the same rights to divorce as does a husband. All of this improves the wife’s condition.
These cousin-marriages, however, weigh heavily on health care in Great Britain, for they result in many more children with congenial defects, that cost the NHS (National Health Service) huge sums for lifetime care. Shouldn’t those marriages be discouraged by the British government?
At the very least, why doesn’t the Home Office engage in an information campaign, to discourage those marriages where it is the girls and women who are sent to Pakistan to be married? It could threaten to prosecute the family members who force girls and women to enter into arranged marriages abroad. It could spread the word that any girls or women who fear being the victims of such an arrangement can contact the Home Office for support, which would include warning family members not to proceed with forced marriages. It could take a hard line on “sham” marriages — marriages, that is, where the girl or woman had no say in the matter, and where wives are forcibly made pregnant (i.e., raped), to legitimize the marriage in the eyes of British authorities.
The Home Office could declare its willingness to prosecute the “husbands” in these marriages for sexual crimes, should they continue to force themselves on their “wives” once they are in the U.K. It could announce, too, that it is prepared to refuse to grant spousal visas to the “husbands” in these marriages, but instead will either deny them outright or, at most, provide a short-term visa that will remain valid only as long as it takes to investigate the legitimacy of such a marriage, to find out if it real or sham, and whether it violates any British law as, for example, would be the case with an underage bride.
How can the Home Office determine which marriages are “sham”? It can take the testimony of the girls and women involved, who can describe every step in the process of the forced-marriage, from their being selected to marry, sight unseen, a Muslim man against their will, to the marriage abroad, and the quick, forced consummation of that marriage, and then the return of the couple, to the U.K. What was the difference in age between the girl and her husband-to-be? Was the girl raped, or was the sex consensual? If she was raped, was it done in order that she would become pregnant, to “legitimize” the marriage?
The demographic jihad proceeds all over Europe, with both legal and illegal Muslim migrants. The “marriage jihad” is a small part of this larger phenomenon. These marriages could be reduced if the Home Office is willing to brave charges of “islamophobia” and to stop handing out spousal visas, but instead to thoroughly investigate these marriages. How did the “husband” first make contact with the family of his would-be wife? How long did he know her before they were married? What payments, if any, did he make to her  family? Were those payments contingent on his receiving a spousal visa? These are some of the obvious questions. These marriages where young girls are sent abroad to marry men, including those who are much older, in order that those “husbands” may receive spousal visas that allow them to settle in the U.K., are especially deplorable. Muslim women should be able to count on the protections of the Home Office. At this late date, why, one would like to know, can’t they?
Hugh Fitzgerald
Hugh Fitzgerald is a student of history and literature, primarily of America and Europe. He admires Jacques Barzun, J. D. Salinger, and Alan Bennett, reads dictionaries for profit and pleasure, and finds particularly appealing the words “recompense,” “quondam,” “magari,” and “degringolade.”
By far the best way to reach him is through the good offices, in every sense, of Robert Spencer; Fitzgerald has an email account, the address of which is hughfitz123@msn.com, but almost never looks at it.
Before it’s too late for Western Europe and the United States, which gave birth to the traditions of freedom and equality of rights for all that shine today as lights in the entire world, this must be stopped. Therefore Jihad Watch seeks to bring public attention to:
  • The plight of the dhimmis, an immense but almost completely ignored ongoing scandal that continues in Muslim countries today;
  • The plight of women under Sharia provisions, similar to conditions imposed on dhimmis, in the denial of equal rights and dignity;
  • Slavery in Islamic lands, which continues today, justified by Sharia-‘s dhimmi codes;
  • The integral role of jihad and dhimmitude ideology in global terrorism today;
  • The license that academic and journalistic whitewashes of dhimmitude gives to radical jihadist enemies of human rights for all.
Jihad Watch fights to ensure that deeds done in the darkness for so long will not continue to be done. The light of world attention is anathema to the proponents of jihad and dhimmitude: we have seen in recent years that women sentenced to stoning for adultery, often victims of rape unjustly accused thanks to Sharia laws disallowing rape victims’ testimony, were freed following international outcry. Jihad Watch seeks to provoke similar, continuous and increasing outcry wherever and whenever the Sharia’s institutionalized injustices threaten dhimmis and women.
May the truth prevail.