Showing posts with label Sharia Law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sharia Law. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 15, 2017
Tuesday, September 22, 2015
GAME OVER XII: 51% OF AMERICAN MUSLIMS WANT SHARIA
61% SAY MUSLIMS SHOULD NOT BE GOVERNED BY AMERICAN LAW,
20% SAY VIOLENCE SHOULD BE USED TO ESTABLISH SHARIA LAW IN AMERICA
From the Center for Security Policy:
20% SAY VIOLENCE SHOULD BE USED TO ESTABLISH SHARIA LAW IN AMERICA
From the Center for Security Policy:
Overall, the survey, which was conducted by The Polling Company for the Center for Security Policy (CSP), suggests that a substantial number of Muslims living in the United States see the country very differently than does the population overall.
The sentiments of the latter were sampled in late May in another CSP-commissioned Polling Company nationwide survey.
According to the just-released survey of Muslims, a majority (51%) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.”
When that question was put to the broader U.S. population, the overwhelming majority held that shariah should not displace the U.S. Constitution (86% to 2%).
More than half (51%) of U.S. Muslims polled also believe either that they should have the choice of American or shariah courts, or that they should have their own tribunals to apply shariah.
Only 39% of those polled said that Muslims in the U.S. should be subject to American courts.
These notions were powerfully rejected by the broader population according to the Center’s earlier national survey. It found by a margin of 92%-2% that Muslims should be subject to the same courts as other citizens, rather than have their own courts and tribunals here in the U.S.
Even more troubling, is the fact that nearly a quarter of the Muslims polled believed that, “It is legitimate to use violence to punish those who give offense to Islam by, for example, portraying the prophet Mohammed.”
By contrast, the broader survey found that a 63% majority of those sampled said that “the freedom to engage in expression that offends Muslims or anybody else is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and cannot be restricted.”
Nearly one-fifth of Muslim respondents said that the use of violence in the United States is justified in order to make shariah the law of the land in this country.
Friday, January 30, 2015
"Voluntary" sharia law tribunal begins in Texas
Voluntary sharia law tribunal begins in Texas
Breitbart Texas confirmed Tuesday that “an Islamic Tribunal using Sharia law” is indeed operating in Texas. But not to worry: an attorney for the tribunal assures us that participation is “voluntary,” and one of the Sharia judges, Dr. Taher El-badawi, says it’s devoted only to “non-binding dispute resolution.”
This is how it starts. This is how it started in the United Kingdom. When Sharia courts were instituted there, Muslim and non-Muslim officials alike all assured the British public and the world that they would be voluntary, restricted to matters involving non-criminal matters, and subject to the British courts. Any areas in which British law and Sharia law conflicted would be referred not to the Sharia courts, but to the British courts.
That is not how it worked out. The Telegraph reported in August 2011 that “there are growing concerns” that the Sharia courts “are creating a parallel legal system — and one that is developing completely unchecked.” The Independent stated in April 2012 “some Sharia law bodies have been misrepresented by the media as being transparent, voluntary and operating in accordance with human rights and equality legislation. This is not the case. Many Sharia law bodies rule on a range of disputes from domestic violence to child residence all of which should be dealt with by UK courts of law.” Instead, “they operate within a misogynist and patriarchal framework which is incompatible with UK legislation.”
And in July 2013, the BBC (of all places) announced a video expose of the Sharia courts:
A BBC Panorama Documentary goes undercover in one of the 85 sharia courts operating as a parallel legal system in the UK, uncovering the extensive abuse of women, refusal to grant divorces, charging of the woman but not the man for divorce proceedings, and even the taking away of the woman’s children, and rulings contrary to British law.
Now this is coming to Texas. Sharia judge El-badawi said this about the Islamic divorces his tribunal would be dealing with: “While participation in the tribunal is voluntary, a married couple cannot be considered divorced by the Islamic community unless it is granted by the tribunal.” He readily owned up to how sexist the process is: “The husband can request the divorce directly from the tribunal. The wife must go to an Imam who will request the divorce for her.”
Update/Comment from Anonymous:
About that claim that Texas' shariah courts are simply "voluntary"...take a brief walk down the memory lane of shariah-creep in the UK:
Although not officially acknowledged in the UK in 2007, Sharia courts already operating in Britain in 2007
February 7, 2008, Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams:Sharia law in UK is “unavoidable” Dr. Rowan Williams told Radio 4’s World at One that the UK has to “face up to the fact” that some of its citizens do not relate to the British legal system. Dr. Williams argues that adopting some aspects of Sharia law would help maintain social cohesion.
It wasn't until early September 2008 that UK: first “official” sharia court finally open for business
One month later, Church of Scotland backs plans for sharia courts (10/10/2008)
Of course, political correctness kept any peeved and curious at bay...Britain’s sharia courts: “There is no outside monitoring, no protection, no records kept, no guarantee that justice will prevail.” (11/20/2008)
A couple of weeks later, in response to the controversy brewing over shariah courts in the UK, UK sharia courts not adopting Islamic law in its entirety — “We’re taking a bit of it, which is civil Islamic law” (Sept. 17, 2008)
By the end of June, 2009, 85 Sharia courts now operating in Britain
UKTelegraph: The concept of an “All-Party Parliamentary Committee on Islamophobia” was was hatched in late 2010
As shariah-creep increased it's pace and penetration of the UK justice system, questions by authorities began to meet resistance: Absurdity on steroids: Probe of Sharia courts in Britain ends because Muslims won’t cooperate (7/31/2011)
In March of 2014, Islamic law is adopted by British legal chiefs This is the first time that Sharia has become an element of British law.
By late 2014...New UK law would ban critics of Sharia from broadcasting, protesting or even posting messages on Facebook (10/31/2014)
BEWARE THAT SLIPPERY SLOPE!
Update/Comment from Anonymous:
About that claim that Texas' shariah courts are simply "voluntary"...take a brief walk down the memory lane of shariah-creep in the UK:
Although not officially acknowledged in the UK in 2007, Sharia courts already operating in Britain in 2007
February 7, 2008, Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams:Sharia law in UK is “unavoidable” Dr. Rowan Williams told Radio 4’s World at One that the UK has to “face up to the fact” that some of its citizens do not relate to the British legal system. Dr. Williams argues that adopting some aspects of Sharia law would help maintain social cohesion.
It wasn't until early September 2008 that UK: first “official” sharia court finally open for business
One month later, Church of Scotland backs plans for sharia courts (10/10/2008)
Of course, political correctness kept any peeved and curious at bay...Britain’s sharia courts: “There is no outside monitoring, no protection, no records kept, no guarantee that justice will prevail.” (11/20/2008)
A couple of weeks later, in response to the controversy brewing over shariah courts in the UK, UK sharia courts not adopting Islamic law in its entirety — “We’re taking a bit of it, which is civil Islamic law” (Sept. 17, 2008)
By the end of June, 2009, 85 Sharia courts now operating in Britain
UKTelegraph: The concept of an “All-Party Parliamentary Committee on Islamophobia” was was hatched in late 2010
As shariah-creep increased it's pace and penetration of the UK justice system, questions by authorities began to meet resistance: Absurdity on steroids: Probe of Sharia courts in Britain ends because Muslims won’t cooperate (7/31/2011)
In March of 2014, Islamic law is adopted by British legal chiefs This is the first time that Sharia has become an element of British law.
By late 2014...New UK law would ban critics of Sharia from broadcasting, protesting or even posting messages on Facebook (10/31/2014)
BEWARE THAT SLIPPERY SLOPE!
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
On The Front Page Of Today's Washington Post
The lead story doesn't come as a surprise to informed infidels:
More of the results of Obama's outreach to the Islamic world.
Islamic law comes to rebel-held SyriaMore of Obama's change.
ALEPPO, Syria — The evidence was incontrovertible, captured on video and posted on YouTube for all the world to see. During a demonstration against the Syrian regime, Wael Ibrahim, a veteran activist, had tossed aside a banner inscribed with the Muslim declaration of faith.
And that, decreed the officers of the newly established Sharia Authority set up to administer rebel-held Aleppo, constitutes a crime under Islamic law, punishable in this instance by 10 strokes of a metal pipe.
The beating administered last month offered a vivid illustration of the extent to which the Syrian revolution has strayed from its roots as a largely spontaneous uprising against four decades of Assad family rule. After mutating last year into a full-scale war, it is moving toward what appears to be an organized effort to institute Islamic law in areas that have fallen under rebel control.
Building on the reputation they have earned in recent months as the rebellion’s most accomplished fighters, Islamist units are seeking to assert their authority over civilian life, imposing Islamic codes and punishments and administering day-to-day matters such as divorce, marriage and vehicle licensing.
Numerous Islamist groups are involved, representing a wide spectrum of views. But, increasingly, the dominant role is falling to Jabhat al-Nusra, also known as the al-Nusra Front. The group has been designated a terrorist organization by the United States for suspected ties to al-Qaeda but is widely respected by many ordinary Syrians for its battlefield prowess and the assistance it has provided to needy civilians....
More of the results of Obama's outreach to the Islamic world.
Monday, February 11, 2013
Viagra Is Haram!
Pakistani Taliban members are threatening store owners to quit selling Viagra-type potency pills or “face the consequences,” according to a media report.Just in time for Valentine's Day!
The shopkeepers are also being warned against selling “obscene films,” Agence France-Presse reports. The warnings are being distributed via handwritten pamphlets, the outlet reports.
“Selling sex, drugs, vulgar films and obscene movies are against Sharia,” the pamphlets read, in the name of a Taliban official, AFP reported. “All those involved in this business are warned to quit this occupation and start a lawful business or face the consequences.”
The market of this latest Taliban target is located in Pakistan’s northwestern city of Peshawar. Threats against shopkeepers for selling products offensive to the Taliban are not uncommon; hundreds of music shops have been targeted and bombed in the past, AFP reports.
Oh, wait.
Valentine's Day is haram, too.
Tuesday, August 14, 2012
Great Moments in Islamic Women's Rights
MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD MINISTER IN "MODERATE" MOROCCO: “SOMETIMES THE MARRIAGE OF A RAPED GIRL TO HER RAPIST DOES NOT REALLY HARM HER"
From Atlas Shrugs:
Go read the whole thing.
From Atlas Shrugs:
Under the sharia a rape victim can escape punishment (for enticing her rapist, doncha know?) if her rapist marries her.
The left loves the Muslim Brotherhood; seems like they want to marry their rapists as well.
"MB-linked JDP Minister about the suicide of a Moroccan teenager forced to marry her rapist: “Sometimes the marriage of a raped girl to her rapist does not really harm her” Point de Bascule (thanks to Gisele)The Minister of Family, Bassima Hakkaoui, opposed modifying the Moroccan Criminal Code that allows a man guilty of rape on a minor to escape his sentence by marrying his victim.
Go read the whole thing.
Wednesday, August 08, 2012
OBAMA ADMINISTRATION PAVES THE WAY FOR SHARIA LAW
From Breitbart:
The most terrifying danger Americans face from a second Barack Obama term isn’t the economy, which is scary enough.
The most harrowing prospect is the Obama Administration’s passivity in the face of attempts to introduce aspects of sharia law into our legal system. Now there is strong and open evidence of the Obama administration collaborating with Islamist activists to ensure the path toward sharia law is accelerated.
Just last week, Thomas Perez, Assistant Attorney General of the Department of Justice (DOJ) Civil Rights Division, was asked this question by Trent Franks (R-AZ), a member of the House Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on the Constitution: "Will you tell us here today that this Administration's Department of Justice will never entertain or advance a proposal that criminalizes speech against any religion?"
Perez refused to answer. Four times.
And why would Franks target Perez?
Here’s why:
Last October, at George Washington University, there was a meeting between DOJ officials, including Perez, and Islamist advocates against free speech. Representatives from the Islamist side included Mohamed Magid, president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). The ISNA was an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding trial in 2008, as well as functioning as a Muslim Brotherhood Front. The leader of the Islamist attack was Sahar Aziz, an Egyptian-born American lawyer and Fellow at the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding, a Muslim advocacy group based in Michigan. At the meeting, the Islamists lobbied for:
- Cutbacks in U.S. anti-terror training
- Limits on the power of terrorism investigators
- Changes in agent training manuals
- A legal declaration that criticism of Islam in the United States should be considered racial discrimination
Aziz said that the word “Muslim” has become “racialized” and, once American criticism of Islam was silenced, the effect would be to "take [federal] money away from local police departments and fusion centers who are spying on all of us.”
And what was the response from Perez and the DOJ officials?
Nothing.
That’s right: no objection, no defense of our first amendment right to free speech.
Tuesday, November 09, 2010
Judas Priest!
CAIR succeeds in blocking Oklahoma's anti-shari'a law!
From Robert Spencer:
From Robert Spencer:
Hamas-linked CAIR is thumping its chest at this victory over the popular will, and says: "CAIR says the ballot measure would infringe on the constitutional rights of ordinary Oklahomans -- including the right to wear religious head scarves in driver's license photographs, choose Islamic marriage contracts, implement Islamic wills, or to be buried according to one's religious beliefs."
But in this CAIR is, yet again, lying. The Oklahoma law forbids lawmakers from legislating for Oklahomans as a whole using Sharia rather than American law. It does not forbid private individuals from getting married or writing wills in any way they wish.
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Posts for 31 Oct: Ashtiani's son and lawyer tortured, Khamenei's speech at Qom, "Islamization is no crime", Bibles desecrated in Malawi, Oklahoma's Sharia ban, Maldives' denigrating "vows exchange", Iraqi church-goers kidnapped
- Lawyer and son of condemned woman tortured: Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani‘s son Sajjad Ghaderzade and lawyer Javid Hutan Kian have been tortured since being arrested earlier this month.
- Khamenei's speech in Qom: he strongly criticized Iran’s enemies, saying they sought to denigrate its citizens’ religious faith, the key to Iranian success. He noted that even though the enemies attempted to sever the bond between the Iranian public and the regime, the participation of 40 million Iranians in the last presidential election showed the public’s support for the regime and Islam. The enemy’s scheme failed, and the riots that broke out after the election made Iran immune to the “social and political microbes” that threatened it. He added that, using the media, Iran’s enemies are trying to promote two ideas: Islam without clerics, and separation between religion and politics.
- Hamas: "Islamization is no crime", among other news. We have the right to control our life according to our religion, not according to your religion. You have no religion, you are secular,” said Zahar, who is one of the group’s most influential and respected voices
- Malawi: Bibles' desecration could signal new Muslim militancy, priests' worries. Although the school had made it clear that no Bibles were to be given to the Muslim pupils and that no one was obliged to take a copy, some Muslim youths created an uproar. They tore up the Bibles, threw them at their teachers and then threw torn pages on the streets. Some of the students denounced the Bible distribution to their religious leaders as an “insult to Islam” and claimed that they had been forced to accept a Bible.
- Oklahoma may ban Sharia Law. Voters in Oklahoma next week will be asked to consider an unusual ballot measure: whether the state’s constitution should be amended to outlaw Sharia, the sacred law of Islam.
- Maldives: Police arrest "celebrant" of degrading "vows exchange". Under Maldivian law non-Muslims are not permitted to marry in the Maldives, but many resorts offer ‘renewal of vows’ ceremonies. The men have not yet been formally charged, “but this is a very serious issue related to our economy,” (Police Sub-Inspector) Shiyam said.
- Iraq: Gunmen take church-goers hostage after killing 2 at stock exchange. The gunmen are demanding that the Iraqi government release a number of detainees and prisoners inside Iraqi prisons, saying the Christian hostages will be freed in return, according to the police officials.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Two from Her Royal Whyness:
The Telegraph:
Non-Muslims turning to sharia 'courts' in Britain to resolve disputes, claim
Growing numbers of non-Muslims are turning to Sharia "courts" to resolve disputes in Britain, it has been claimed. Up to five per cent of cases heard by the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal (MAT) involve people who do not follow the Islamic faith, it has been estimated.
The body operates court-like arbitration hearings in London, Bradford, Birmingham, Coventry and Manchester, mainly dealing with disputes between business partners and mosques.
Those who use the service agree voluntarily to submit to its adjudication but its rulings are considered to be legally binding and can be enforced in county courts under the 1996 Arbitration Act.
A separate body, the Islamic Sharia Council, has been operating for several years, hearing divorce cases with a panel of seven "judges" based in London.
But a report by Civitas, the think tank, published last month estimated that there are at least 85 sharia "courts" operating in Britain when unofficial hearings held in mosques are taken into account.
It led to claims of a "creeping" acceptance of sharia principles in Britain and followed controversy over remarks by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, last year that the adoption of aspects of Muslim law seemed "inevitable".
The MAT said that the greater weight attached to oral agreements in its hearings than the courts was making its service attractive to non-Muslims in Britain, who it estimates are now involved in one in 20 of its cases.
“We put weight on oral agreements, whereas the British courts do not,” Freed Chedie, a spokesman, told The Times.
He cited a recent case in which a non-Muslim man took his Muslim business partner to arbitrate in a dispute over the profits in their car fleet company.
“The non-Muslim claimed that there had been an oral agreement between the pair,” he said.
“The tribunal found that because of certain things the Muslim man did, that agreement had existed. The non-Muslim was awarded £48,000.”
=================================================================
The Independent:
Ten Saudis seek asylum after princess is allowed to stay
Chairman of home affairs committee welcomes decision to give sanctuary to woman with illegitimate child
By Robert Verkaik, Home Affairs Editor
Ministers are considering asylum applications for 10 Saudi Arabian nationals who claim they are at risk of persecution if they are forced to return to the Middle Eastern kingdom, it emerged last night.
The new cases were made public after The Independent revealed the plight of a Saudi princess who was granted asylum in Britain after she had an illegitimate child with a British man.
The young woman, who has also been granted anonymity by the courts, won her claim for asylum after she told a court that she faced execution if her husband found out about her adultery and she was forced to return to Saudi Arabia.
Immigration and asylum experts said last night that asylum cases from women fleeing the kingdom were very rare. But Keith Vaz, chairman of the Commons Home Affairs Select Committee, said of the case: "This is the kind of person that our asylum laws are designed to protect. A woman and her unborn child should under no circumstances be sent back to a country where it is likely that they will be harmed. I welcome the decision made in this case."
New figures released by the Home Office also showed that a further 15 Saudis were refused asylum by the Government last year. There are no details about the sex of each of the applicants nor for the number of asylum applications received this year.
Mr Vaz called for more information to be made public about claims from Saudi Arabia. He said: "This is a country with a questionable human rights record. It is important to make clear the number of people who are fleeing similar treatment."
The princess's case is one of a small number of claims for asylum brought by citizens of Saudi Arabia which are not openly acknowledged by either government. British diplomats believe that to do so would in effect highlight the persecution of women in Saudi Arabia, which would be viewed as open criticism of the House of Saud and lead to embarrassing publicity for both governments.
The woman, who comes from a very wealthy Saudi family, says she met her English boyfriend – who is not a Muslim – during a visit to London. They struck up a relationship after he gave her his telephone number in a department store. She became pregnant the following year and worried that her elderly husband – a member of the royal family of Saudi Arabia – had become suspicious of her behaviour, she persuaded him to let her visit the UK again to give birth in secret. She feared for her life if she returned to Saudi Arabia.
She persuaded the court that if she returned to the kingdom she would be subject to capital punishment under Sharia law – specifically flogging and stoning to death. She was also worried about the possibility of an honour killing. Since she fled Saudi Arabia, her family and her husband's family have broken off contact with her.
The woman has been granted permanent leave to remain in the UK after the Immigration and Asylum Tribunal allowed her appeal. Keith Best, of the Immigration Advisory Service, said that Saudi nationals who were in genuine fear of persecution had the right to claim asylum in the United Kingdom. He explained: "They may also be able to claim if they were subjected to degrading and inhumane treatment. I can see why these cases can be difficult for Britain when one considers the relationship with the Saudi royal family and the many military contracts."
One case already refused by the Home Office is that of Yahya Al Faifi who claims he was persecuted in Saudi Arabia for conducting trade union activities, where trade unions are illegal. He and his family fled to the UK before 2006. In 2004, Al Faifi organised a trade union in BAE Systems after the company announced it was cutting pay by 40 per cent. More than 500 workers turned up to the first union meeting. But Mr Al Faifi and two others were sacked by BAE Systems. For several months afterwards Mr Yahya, whose case has been taken up by the RMT in the UK, continued to campaign for workers' rights leading to his case being given considerable media coverage.
However, when he refused to give up, he received repeated threats and was told that if he didn't leave the country immediately "the safety of his family could not be guaranteed". He left Saudi Arabia with his family to seek sanctuary in the UK. But after his case was refused he now faces deportation.
Saudi women: Victims of oppression
*Women are not allowed to drive or ride bicycles on public roads in large cities. But they are allowed to fly aircraft, though they must be chauffeured to the airport.
In September last year, women's rights activists petitioned the King to allow women to drive all vehicles. There were also calls for Saudi Arabian women to be allowed to compete in international sporting events along with their male counterparts. According to Amnesty International discrimination has fuelled violence against women, with foreign domestic workers particularly at risk of abuses such as beatings, rape and even murder, and non-payment of wages. Concerns have been raised that discriminatory laws relating to marriage mean women
are trapped in violent and abusive relationships from which they have no legal recourse.
The Telegraph:
Non-Muslims turning to sharia 'courts' in Britain to resolve disputes, claim
Growing numbers of non-Muslims are turning to Sharia "courts" to resolve disputes in Britain, it has been claimed. Up to five per cent of cases heard by the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal (MAT) involve people who do not follow the Islamic faith, it has been estimated.
The body operates court-like arbitration hearings in London, Bradford, Birmingham, Coventry and Manchester, mainly dealing with disputes between business partners and mosques.
Those who use the service agree voluntarily to submit to its adjudication but its rulings are considered to be legally binding and can be enforced in county courts under the 1996 Arbitration Act.
A separate body, the Islamic Sharia Council, has been operating for several years, hearing divorce cases with a panel of seven "judges" based in London.
But a report by Civitas, the think tank, published last month estimated that there are at least 85 sharia "courts" operating in Britain when unofficial hearings held in mosques are taken into account.
It led to claims of a "creeping" acceptance of sharia principles in Britain and followed controversy over remarks by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, last year that the adoption of aspects of Muslim law seemed "inevitable".
The MAT said that the greater weight attached to oral agreements in its hearings than the courts was making its service attractive to non-Muslims in Britain, who it estimates are now involved in one in 20 of its cases.
“We put weight on oral agreements, whereas the British courts do not,” Freed Chedie, a spokesman, told The Times.
He cited a recent case in which a non-Muslim man took his Muslim business partner to arbitrate in a dispute over the profits in their car fleet company.
“The non-Muslim claimed that there had been an oral agreement between the pair,” he said.
“The tribunal found that because of certain things the Muslim man did, that agreement had existed. The non-Muslim was awarded £48,000.”
=================================================================
The Independent:
Ten Saudis seek asylum after princess is allowed to stay
Chairman of home affairs committee welcomes decision to give sanctuary to woman with illegitimate child
By Robert Verkaik, Home Affairs Editor
Ministers are considering asylum applications for 10 Saudi Arabian nationals who claim they are at risk of persecution if they are forced to return to the Middle Eastern kingdom, it emerged last night.
The new cases were made public after The Independent revealed the plight of a Saudi princess who was granted asylum in Britain after she had an illegitimate child with a British man.
The young woman, who has also been granted anonymity by the courts, won her claim for asylum after she told a court that she faced execution if her husband found out about her adultery and she was forced to return to Saudi Arabia.
Immigration and asylum experts said last night that asylum cases from women fleeing the kingdom were very rare. But Keith Vaz, chairman of the Commons Home Affairs Select Committee, said of the case: "This is the kind of person that our asylum laws are designed to protect. A woman and her unborn child should under no circumstances be sent back to a country where it is likely that they will be harmed. I welcome the decision made in this case."
New figures released by the Home Office also showed that a further 15 Saudis were refused asylum by the Government last year. There are no details about the sex of each of the applicants nor for the number of asylum applications received this year.
Mr Vaz called for more information to be made public about claims from Saudi Arabia. He said: "This is a country with a questionable human rights record. It is important to make clear the number of people who are fleeing similar treatment."
The princess's case is one of a small number of claims for asylum brought by citizens of Saudi Arabia which are not openly acknowledged by either government. British diplomats believe that to do so would in effect highlight the persecution of women in Saudi Arabia, which would be viewed as open criticism of the House of Saud and lead to embarrassing publicity for both governments.
The woman, who comes from a very wealthy Saudi family, says she met her English boyfriend – who is not a Muslim – during a visit to London. They struck up a relationship after he gave her his telephone number in a department store. She became pregnant the following year and worried that her elderly husband – a member of the royal family of Saudi Arabia – had become suspicious of her behaviour, she persuaded him to let her visit the UK again to give birth in secret. She feared for her life if she returned to Saudi Arabia.
She persuaded the court that if she returned to the kingdom she would be subject to capital punishment under Sharia law – specifically flogging and stoning to death. She was also worried about the possibility of an honour killing. Since she fled Saudi Arabia, her family and her husband's family have broken off contact with her.
The woman has been granted permanent leave to remain in the UK after the Immigration and Asylum Tribunal allowed her appeal. Keith Best, of the Immigration Advisory Service, said that Saudi nationals who were in genuine fear of persecution had the right to claim asylum in the United Kingdom. He explained: "They may also be able to claim if they were subjected to degrading and inhumane treatment. I can see why these cases can be difficult for Britain when one considers the relationship with the Saudi royal family and the many military contracts."
One case already refused by the Home Office is that of Yahya Al Faifi who claims he was persecuted in Saudi Arabia for conducting trade union activities, where trade unions are illegal. He and his family fled to the UK before 2006. In 2004, Al Faifi organised a trade union in BAE Systems after the company announced it was cutting pay by 40 per cent. More than 500 workers turned up to the first union meeting. But Mr Al Faifi and two others were sacked by BAE Systems. For several months afterwards Mr Yahya, whose case has been taken up by the RMT in the UK, continued to campaign for workers' rights leading to his case being given considerable media coverage.
However, when he refused to give up, he received repeated threats and was told that if he didn't leave the country immediately "the safety of his family could not be guaranteed". He left Saudi Arabia with his family to seek sanctuary in the UK. But after his case was refused he now faces deportation.
Saudi women: Victims of oppression
*Women are not allowed to drive or ride bicycles on public roads in large cities. But they are allowed to fly aircraft, though they must be chauffeured to the airport.
In September last year, women's rights activists petitioned the King to allow women to drive all vehicles. There were also calls for Saudi Arabian women to be allowed to compete in international sporting events along with their male counterparts. According to Amnesty International discrimination has fuelled violence against women, with foreign domestic workers particularly at risk of abuses such as beatings, rape and even murder, and non-payment of wages. Concerns have been raised that discriminatory laws relating to marriage mean women
are trapped in violent and abusive relationships from which they have no legal recourse.
Wednesday, July 01, 2009
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Sharia in the Hood
It's a beautiful day in this neighborhood,
A beautiful day for a neighbor.
Would you be mine?
Could you be mine?...
Taliban Reign Of Terror Inside
Pakistan
9:09am UK, Monday March 23, 2009
Stuart Ramsay, Chief correspondent in Pakistan
The streets are packed with traders and shoppers.
No mercy: Taliban enforcers hold a man down in the street and flog him.
Roads clogged with tuk tuk taxis, cars and lorries, but the word "Taliban" starts as a whisper then spreads through the crowds; black turbaned out-runners wield wooden sticks to clear a path and a convoy of four wheel drive cars and pick-up trucks pass though - the Taliban are back.
They are in charge. This time it is Pakistan.
It's a neighborly day in this beauty wood,
A neighborly day for a beauty.
Would you be mine?
Could you be mine?...
Taliban begin enforcing Islamic Law
Indian Express
Posted: Sunday , Apr 12, 2009 at 0255 hrs IST
Islamabad:
The Pakistani Taliban have begun enforcing Shariah in the Bajaur tribal region even as scores of militants consolidated their hold on Buner district, located 100 km from Islamabad.
Maulvi Faqir Mohammad, the militant commander in Bajaur Agency and a deputy of Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan chief Baitullah Mehsud, announced the decision to enforce Shariah in the region during a broadcast on his illegal FM radio station on Friday.
Mohammad also barred women from stepping out of their homes without male relatives, banned shaving of beards and warned people against availing assistance from the Benazir Income Support Programme, a Government project to provide financial aid to women.
During a 40-minute speech on radio, Mohammad said he and his fighters would spare no effort to strictly implement Islamic laws in the region. The Taliban have formed an “action group” to ensure the enforcement of Shariah and to punish people who violate their edicts.
I've always wanted to have a neighbor just like you.
I've always wanted to live in a neighborhood with you.
Saudi judge refuses to annul 8-year-old's marriage
(CNN) -- A Saudi judge has refused for a second time to annul a marriage between an 8-year-old girl and a 47-year-old man, a relative of the girl told CNN.
The most recent ruling, in which the judge upheld his original verdict, was handed down Saturday in the Saudi city of Onaiza, where late last year the same judge rejected a petition from the girl's mother, who was seeking a divorce for her daughter.
The relative said the judge, Sheikh Habib Al-Habib, "stuck by his earlier verdict and insisted that the girl could petition the court for a divorce once she reached puberty."
---
The girl's father, according to the attorney, arranged the marriage in order to settle his debts with the man, who is "a close friend" of his. At the time of the initial verdict, the judge required the girl's husband to sign a pledge that he would not have sex with her until she reaches puberty, al-Jutaili told CNN. The judge ruled that when the girl reaches puberty, she will have the right to request a divorce by filing a petition with the court, the lawyer said.
So, let's make the most of this beautiful day.
Since we're together we might as well say:
Would you be mine?
Afghan cleric defends 'rape' law
Rahim Faiez
Heidi Vogt
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
KABUL – A key backer of an Afghan family law that critics say legalizes marital rape and rolls back women's rights rejected an international outcry as foreign meddling yesterday and insisted the legislation offers women many protections.
The law, which applies only to the Shiite minority, says a husband can demand sex with his wife every four days unless she is ill or would be harmed by intercourse, and regulates when and for what reasons a wife may leave her home alone.
Could you be mine?
The Free World Bars Free Speech
By Jonathan Turley
Sunday, April 12, 2009; Page B03
---
Late last year, two Afghan journalists were sentenced to prison for blasphemy because they translated the Koran into a Farsi dialect that Afghans can read. In Jordan, a poet was arrested for incorporating Koranic verses into his work. And last week, an Egyptian court banned a magazine for running a similar poem.
----
Afghan journalist Sayed Perwiz Kambakhsh was sentenced to death under Sharia law last year just for downloading Internet material on the role of women in Islamic societies that authorities judged to be blasphemous. The provincial deputy attorney general, Hafizullah Khaliqyar, has been quoted as saying: "Journalists are supporting Kambakhsh. I will
arrest any journalist trying to support him after this."
Won't you be my neighbor?
Iran: Christian Convert Couple Arrested, Tortured, Threatened
Scarlett Crusader
LOS ANGELES, June 25 (Compass Direct News) – Security police officials in Tehran this month tortured a newly converted couple and threatened to put their 4-year-old daughter in an institution after arresting them for holding Bible studies and attending a house church.
A Christian source in Iran said that 28-year-old Tina Rad was charged with “activities against the holy religion of Islam” for reading the Bible with Muslims in her home in east Tehran and trying to convert them. Officials charged her husband, 31-year-old Makan Arya, with “activities against national security” after seizing the couple from their home on June 3, forcing them to leave their 4-year-old daughter ill and unattended.
Authorities kept them in an unknown jail for four days, which left them badly bruised from beatings, with Rad “very ill” and unable to walk, said the source. Rad was released on bail of US$30,000 bail, and her husband was freed on payment of US$20,000.
“The next time there may also be an apostasy charge, if you don’t stop with your Jesus,” a female security police officer told Rad during interrogation, according to the source. Under Iran’s strict Islamic laws, Muslims who convert from Islam to another religion can be executed.
A draft law before the Iranian parliament would make the death penalty mandatory for “apostates” who leave Islam.
Won't you please,
Won't you please?
The War Within Islam
Euronews
By Jim Hoagland
WASHINGTON -- "Leave me for the moment -- you can beat me again later," a 17-year-old woman begs between sobs in a video airing on Pakistan's private television networks and now posted on the Internet. But the local Taliban commander continues to flog her without mercy as a group of village men watch in silence.
These images were described in a recent New York Times dispatch, which noted that the alleged transgressions of the woman could not be definitively established. The range of possible violations of the Taliban's version of Islamic law -- from stepping outside her house without a male escort to having an illicit affair -- is appallingly vast.
The video, apparently shot on a cell phone and given to a human rights activist, is not surprising in itself. The brutal subjugation of poor, uneducated women in rural Pakistan and Afghanistan is widely if incompletely known in the West.
But the brief, blurry images are revealing.
Please won't you be my neighbor?
A beautiful day for a neighbor.
Would you be mine?
Could you be mine?...
Taliban Reign Of Terror Inside
Pakistan
9:09am UK, Monday March 23, 2009
Stuart Ramsay, Chief correspondent in Pakistan
The streets are packed with traders and shoppers.
No mercy: Taliban enforcers hold a man down in the street and flog him.
Roads clogged with tuk tuk taxis, cars and lorries, but the word "Taliban" starts as a whisper then spreads through the crowds; black turbaned out-runners wield wooden sticks to clear a path and a convoy of four wheel drive cars and pick-up trucks pass though - the Taliban are back.
They are in charge. This time it is Pakistan.
It's a neighborly day in this beauty wood,
A neighborly day for a beauty.
Would you be mine?
Could you be mine?...
Taliban begin enforcing Islamic Law
Indian Express
Posted: Sunday , Apr 12, 2009 at 0255 hrs IST
Islamabad:
The Pakistani Taliban have begun enforcing Shariah in the Bajaur tribal region even as scores of militants consolidated their hold on Buner district, located 100 km from Islamabad.
Maulvi Faqir Mohammad, the militant commander in Bajaur Agency and a deputy of Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan chief Baitullah Mehsud, announced the decision to enforce Shariah in the region during a broadcast on his illegal FM radio station on Friday.
Mohammad also barred women from stepping out of their homes without male relatives, banned shaving of beards and warned people against availing assistance from the Benazir Income Support Programme, a Government project to provide financial aid to women.
During a 40-minute speech on radio, Mohammad said he and his fighters would spare no effort to strictly implement Islamic laws in the region. The Taliban have formed an “action group” to ensure the enforcement of Shariah and to punish people who violate their edicts.
I've always wanted to have a neighbor just like you.
I've always wanted to live in a neighborhood with you.
Saudi judge refuses to annul 8-year-old's marriage
(CNN) -- A Saudi judge has refused for a second time to annul a marriage between an 8-year-old girl and a 47-year-old man, a relative of the girl told CNN.
The most recent ruling, in which the judge upheld his original verdict, was handed down Saturday in the Saudi city of Onaiza, where late last year the same judge rejected a petition from the girl's mother, who was seeking a divorce for her daughter.
The relative said the judge, Sheikh Habib Al-Habib, "stuck by his earlier verdict and insisted that the girl could petition the court for a divorce once she reached puberty."
---
The girl's father, according to the attorney, arranged the marriage in order to settle his debts with the man, who is "a close friend" of his. At the time of the initial verdict, the judge required the girl's husband to sign a pledge that he would not have sex with her until she reaches puberty, al-Jutaili told CNN. The judge ruled that when the girl reaches puberty, she will have the right to request a divorce by filing a petition with the court, the lawyer said.
So, let's make the most of this beautiful day.
Since we're together we might as well say:
Would you be mine?
Afghan cleric defends 'rape' law
Rahim Faiez
Heidi Vogt
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
KABUL – A key backer of an Afghan family law that critics say legalizes marital rape and rolls back women's rights rejected an international outcry as foreign meddling yesterday and insisted the legislation offers women many protections.
The law, which applies only to the Shiite minority, says a husband can demand sex with his wife every four days unless she is ill or would be harmed by intercourse, and regulates when and for what reasons a wife may leave her home alone.
Could you be mine?
The Free World Bars Free Speech
By Jonathan Turley
Sunday, April 12, 2009; Page B03
---
Late last year, two Afghan journalists were sentenced to prison for blasphemy because they translated the Koran into a Farsi dialect that Afghans can read. In Jordan, a poet was arrested for incorporating Koranic verses into his work. And last week, an Egyptian court banned a magazine for running a similar poem.
----
Afghan journalist Sayed Perwiz Kambakhsh was sentenced to death under Sharia law last year just for downloading Internet material on the role of women in Islamic societies that authorities judged to be blasphemous. The provincial deputy attorney general, Hafizullah Khaliqyar, has been quoted as saying: "Journalists are supporting Kambakhsh. I will
arrest any journalist trying to support him after this."
Won't you be my neighbor?
Iran: Christian Convert Couple Arrested, Tortured, Threatened
Scarlett Crusader
LOS ANGELES, June 25 (Compass Direct News) – Security police officials in Tehran this month tortured a newly converted couple and threatened to put their 4-year-old daughter in an institution after arresting them for holding Bible studies and attending a house church.
A Christian source in Iran said that 28-year-old Tina Rad was charged with “activities against the holy religion of Islam” for reading the Bible with Muslims in her home in east Tehran and trying to convert them. Officials charged her husband, 31-year-old Makan Arya, with “activities against national security” after seizing the couple from their home on June 3, forcing them to leave their 4-year-old daughter ill and unattended.
Authorities kept them in an unknown jail for four days, which left them badly bruised from beatings, with Rad “very ill” and unable to walk, said the source. Rad was released on bail of US$30,000 bail, and her husband was freed on payment of US$20,000.
“The next time there may also be an apostasy charge, if you don’t stop with your Jesus,” a female security police officer told Rad during interrogation, according to the source. Under Iran’s strict Islamic laws, Muslims who convert from Islam to another religion can be executed.
A draft law before the Iranian parliament would make the death penalty mandatory for “apostates” who leave Islam.
Won't you please,
Won't you please?
The War Within Islam
Euronews
By Jim Hoagland
WASHINGTON -- "Leave me for the moment -- you can beat me again later," a 17-year-old woman begs between sobs in a video airing on Pakistan's private television networks and now posted on the Internet. But the local Taliban commander continues to flog her without mercy as a group of village men watch in silence.
These images were described in a recent New York Times dispatch, which noted that the alleged transgressions of the woman could not be definitively established. The range of possible violations of the Taliban's version of Islamic law -- from stepping outside her house without a male escort to having an illicit affair -- is appallingly vast.
The video, apparently shot on a cell phone and given to a human rights activist, is not surprising in itself. The brutal subjugation of poor, uneducated women in rural Pakistan and Afghanistan is widely if incompletely known in the West.
But the brief, blurry images are revealing.
Please won't you be my neighbor?
Sunday, April 05, 2009
UK's Answer To Petition Against Sharia Law
In response to Pasto's post where it is mentioned re England leading the way in Sharia Law I have posted the answer that I received from the PM's office to a petition that I signed against Sharia Law. The answer arrived last week, my bolding:
Shari’a law is the code of personal religious law governing the conduct of Muslims. It can extend into all aspects of people’s lives – personal, religious, family, civil and criminal.
Shari’a law is not part of the law of England and Wales, and the Government does not intend to change this position. However, provided an activity prescribed by Shari’a law does not contravene the law of England and Wales, there is nothing to prevent people living by Shari’a law if they choose to do so. Muslims can, for example, wear traditional dress, and follow certain dietary rules; and they are, of course, completely free to worship in the way that they want.
There are a number of Shari’a councils in England and Wales. The Islamic community prefers to refer to them as ‘councils’ as they are not courts, have no judicial function, and do not deal with any criminal matters. On a private basis and where the parties consent, these councils deal with mediation and resolution of personal and contractual disputes. These councils are not part of the court system, although parties may find them useful in resolving litigation, as may be done with arbitration by regulatory bodies (such as ABTA). A Shari’a council could constitute an arbitration body if it is a tribunal that complies with the Arbitration Act 1996 (for example, that parties have given written consent to the Shari’a council to arbitrate.)
The decisions of Shari’a councils may be enforceable through the courts by virtue of the Arbitration Act. This provides that, where both parties agree to arbitration, the decisions of the Shari’a council will be enforceable if the requirements of the Arbitration Act are satisfied. However, council decisions may be challenged or refused enforcement in the same way and on the same grounds as any other domestic arbitration process so, if any decision by these councils were illegal or contrary to public policy, it would not be enforceable.
As the Jews and others also have their own arbitration processes for resolving disputes I see nothing to fear from this provided that this is where it stops.
Shari’a law is the code of personal religious law governing the conduct of Muslims. It can extend into all aspects of people’s lives – personal, religious, family, civil and criminal.
Shari’a law is not part of the law of England and Wales, and the Government does not intend to change this position. However, provided an activity prescribed by Shari’a law does not contravene the law of England and Wales, there is nothing to prevent people living by Shari’a law if they choose to do so. Muslims can, for example, wear traditional dress, and follow certain dietary rules; and they are, of course, completely free to worship in the way that they want.
There are a number of Shari’a councils in England and Wales. The Islamic community prefers to refer to them as ‘councils’ as they are not courts, have no judicial function, and do not deal with any criminal matters. On a private basis and where the parties consent, these councils deal with mediation and resolution of personal and contractual disputes. These councils are not part of the court system, although parties may find them useful in resolving litigation, as may be done with arbitration by regulatory bodies (such as ABTA). A Shari’a council could constitute an arbitration body if it is a tribunal that complies with the Arbitration Act 1996 (for example, that parties have given written consent to the Shari’a council to arbitrate.)
The decisions of Shari’a councils may be enforceable through the courts by virtue of the Arbitration Act. This provides that, where both parties agree to arbitration, the decisions of the Shari’a council will be enforceable if the requirements of the Arbitration Act are satisfied. However, council decisions may be challenged or refused enforcement in the same way and on the same grounds as any other domestic arbitration process so, if any decision by these councils were illegal or contrary to public policy, it would not be enforceable.
As the Jews and others also have their own arbitration processes for resolving disputes I see nothing to fear from this provided that this is where it stops.
Tuesday, March 03, 2009
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
They hate the color of Love
Sowdies see red over red this and every Valentines Day
Blood red? Fine. Love red? Fined [at the least].
- Bosch Fawstin
Blood red? Fine. Love red? Fined [at the least].
- Bosch Fawstin
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Throttle thy Enemy
What began by force will end by force.
Once we name the enemy, the truth about Islam will have a fighting chance to be known to all, including non-Muslim Muslims, and the personification of Islam, Mohammed, will finally be exposed as the evil man he was. The end of Jihad will then begin, followed by the outlawing of Sharia Law, which will finally put Islam in its place: as the chosen, personal, private belief of Muslim masochists who will be left alone unless they turn into sadists who can't keep Islam to themselves.
Monday, July 21, 2008
The UK Court And Shari'a Law
How will the court rule in the case of "EM," a divorced woman, and her eight-year-old son -- both of whom may be deported to Lebanon. The case comes before the House of Lords today and tomorrow, with a decision in a few weeks.
"How can the same government which champions equal treatment under British law now deport mother and child to face certain separation under Sharia?" states Alex Gask, of civil-rights organization Liberty.
See more at this posting by Raymond Ibrahim at Dhimmi Watch.
"How can the same government which champions equal treatment under British law now deport mother and child to face certain separation under Sharia?" states Alex Gask, of civil-rights organization Liberty.
See more at this posting by Raymond Ibrahim at Dhimmi Watch.
Friday, July 04, 2008
That STUPID Judge, Lord Phillips!
THE TELEGRAPH: Muslims in Britain should be able to live according to Sharia law, the country's most senior judge has said.
Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, the Lord Chief Justice, strongly backed Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, over his suggestion earlier this year that aspects of Sharia law should be adopted in Britain.
The archbishop's remarks sparked a national debate and led to calls for his resignation.
Risking inflaming that controversy again, Lord Phillips has said that Muslims in Britain should be able to use Sharia to decide financial and marital disputes.
The judge did add that only the criminal courts should have the power to decide when a crime has been committed and when to impose punishment.
But his suggestion that different religious groups should run their affairs according to different rules sparked warnings that community cohesion could be undermined. Muslims in Britain Should Be Able to Live under Sharia Law, Says Lord Phillips >>> By Christopher Hope and James Kirkup | July 3, 2008
The Dawning of a New Dark Age – Dust Jacket Hardcover, direct from the publishers (UK) >>>
The Dawning of a New Dark Age – Paperback, direct from the publishers (UK) >>>
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Monday, February 11, 2008
Archbishop blames himself and the media for misunderstanding
The Archbishop of Canterbury admits his choice of words were clumsily expressed. The bonus is that he has brought the subject of sharia and Islamification sharply into the public focus.
Another CommonSense Video.
Another CommonSense Video.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)