Articles

ECHR Judgement Summary: "sharia law is incompatible with democracy and human rights"

Source: “Annual Report 2003 of the European Court of Human Rights, Council of Europe”

Summary: 

As I have said quite a few times before, it is simply wrong to say that Islam and Christianity have much the same view of war and peace. Judging from its founding texts, Christianity is a pacifist religion, for its founder rejected violence. Islam’s founder was a warlord.

As I have also said quite a few times before, the real issue is not violence or terrorism but theocracy. Islamist violence stems from anger that Islam’s theocratic potential is being thwarted. Again, it is Christianity that is different: its founding texts reject theocracy.  For many centuries this was obscured, but then it was gradually understood and put into practice – which entailed the invention of modern politics, as I explain in my new book God Created Humanism.

Summary: 

Nuh Ha Mim Keller translated Reliance of the Traveler from Arabic into English. In the section entitled manumission (which is about all of slavery, not just about freeing slaves as the title would suggest), Keller did not translate sections K32.1, 32.2, 32.3 and 32.4. He wrote “the following four sections have been left untranslated (into English) because the issue is no longer current…” To his credit, he left the Arabic text in the book. With the increasing importance of the Shariah throughout the world, it should all be translated. After all, it is not clear that groups like ISIS consider any section in Islamic Sacred Law “not current”.

I looked on the internet for a reliable translation of these portions of the Shariah but was unable to locate one. Therefore I asked for help from some Arab friends and they provided the following:

K32.1 Women and children of the land that has been conquered are considered booty of the war and they are considered slaves. Everything belongs to the Imam first and after he takes a fifth of the booty the rest is given to the soldiers who were involved in the war. If the slave becomes a Muslim this conversion does not set him free and he will stay a slave. Captivity is the absolute consequence of Muslims war with non-Muslims and is not exclusive to elementary Jihad or defensive Jihad, even in the presence of the prophet or Imam and with their permission. If Jihad was done without the permission of prophet or Imam, all the booty is given to the Imam.

K32.2 If the father and mother were brought as slaves all the children are considered slaves. Being a slave is inherited from parents to child. If the parents convert to Islam the children will still be slaves, and they belong to the owner of their family. The master can sell the children to someone else without the parents’ consent. Male slaves and female slaves are considered the property of their master and he is allowed to treat them the way he wants. The satisfaction of the slave does not matter. The slave is responsible to keep his/her master satisfied. The slave eats, drinks and wears whatever the master decides and must live where the master says. He/she should clothe him/herself the way the master decides and speak and behave the way the master says.
K32.3 The master who owns a woman slave can use her in any way for his sexual pleasure; he can marry her if he wants. In intercourse the satisfaction of the female slave is not important at all. The female slave does not have to be Muslim convert. Even if she is pagan the sexual intercourse is Halal (permissible). A female Muslim is not allowed to have sexual relation with her slave without marriage. The male slaves are considered “mahram (impermissible, taboo)”.  The Koran has emphasized this point. The Mola (Master) not only has the right to marry his female slave without her consent but he is also allowed to lend her to another man without her consent to have sexual intercourse without marriage. He also has the authority to marry her to one of his male slaves.

K32.4 The master is allowed to cancel the marriage of his male and female slaves without “Talagh (divorce)”. It is enough for the master to order them to separate and they must obey. The female slave does not have to hide her hair, neck and head while saying Muslim prayer “Namaz “. The Hijab of the female slave must be different from those of the wife and daughters of the master.

There are other portions which Nuh Ha Mim Keller did not translate, including e1.6, e1.18, e6.5, e7.7, e10.2, e12.4, e12.11-13, e14.4, e14.8, f2.4, f4.6, f4.13, f5.9, f6.4, f8.4, f8.8, f8.26, f14.7, h2.3, h2.8, h3.8, i3.7, k4.6, k5.8, k7.4, k16.4, k23.1, k24.1, l10.7, m3.5, m3.14, m6.4, m6.6, m6.11, m7.3, m10.11, m11.15, n3.6, n4.2, n4.4, n8.2, n8.4, n9.4, n9.12, n9.20, n10.1, o3.7, o3.11, o5.3, o12.3, o13.10, o19.2, o19.4, o20.3. We will translate these as we are able in the future.

Summary: 
  • The report implies that deradicalization, either in specialized centers or in prisons, does not work because most Islamic radicals do not want to be deradicalized.

  • Although France is home to an estimated 8,250 hardcore Islamic radicals, only 17 submitted applications and just nine arrived. Not a single resident has completed the full ten-month curriculum.

  • By housing Islamists in separate prison wings, they actually had become more violent because they were emboldened by "the group effect," according to Justice Minister Jean-Jacques Urvoas.

  • "Deradicalizing someone does not happen in six months. These people, who have not been given an ideal and who have clung to Islamic State's ideology, are not going to get rid of it just like that. There is no 'Open Sesame.'" — Senator Esther Benbassa.

  • "The deradicalization program is a total fiasco. Everything must be rethought, everything must be redesigned from scratch." — Senator Philippe Bas, the head of the Senate committee that commissioned the report.

Executive Summary

What are we to learn from the above? If we are wise, it will be this:

  1. There are individuals and organisations in Britain who seek much greater accommodation of, and adherence to, Islamic norms in our society

  2. Efforts to subversively introduce Islamic norms and practices to British schools have already been undertaken, and been successful

  3. The accommodation of Islamic norms etc. in British society will inevitably mean a loss of democratic free speech and an erosion of the rights and protections of women and girls

  4. The British public sector is shaped by state demands for tolerance, inclusion, multiculturalism and diversity. These are of the utmost importance in the mind of the state

  5. Many British teachers, including the profession’s largest union, have expressed anti-Western and anti-British sentiment and openly support the concept of multiculturalism

  6. Activist groups who seek the Islamisation of British schools, use the language of multiculturalism and diversity to advance their arguments and in doing so, successfully sanitise and legitimise notions that are wholly in opposition to the values of British society

The fact of the matter is that there is an ideological aim to Islamise Britain and the British state is lending a helping hand. In its consistent prioritising of “diversity”, the Government has ignored the detail and has little understanding of what this idea means in every day life. The British Government has effectively decided that religion is good, regardless of what it teaches.

If this problem is to be fixed, a complete political and cultural shift is required in Britain. Schools must return to teaching literacy, numeracy, the sciences, as priority, and teachers’ political leanings should have no bearing in the classroom. It is right that pupils learn about religion, but in the interests of truth, it cannot be that they learn a sanitised or moderated version that can be constructed and approved by those with their own agenda.

Teachers should be required to teach the values of Britain to children (to which we need to add equal rights between genders as a matter of urgency), regardless of their feelings, and to teach accurate history and current affairs. If Israel-Palestine is discussed, then the charter of Hamas should be included, as well as the genocidal intent of global jihadis against the Jewish state.

Furthermore, children should be reminded that they are British, and all of the positive things that this entails.

Most importantly, Government must move away from the notion that all religions are a force for good, and look instead at what is actually being taught. Government must be honest and open and when it sees problems developing, look at the facts without colouring them with multicultural dogma.

Parents have a right to know the culture in which their children are being schooled, and we all have a right to know how the minds of future generations are being formed. At present, they are being schooled in multiculturalism, unquestioning respect for all minority groups irrespective of their practices, and something close to disdain for their own history, identity and heritage.

British schools have numerous problems, but their utilisation as an advancement of jihadi ideology is a problem for us all.

Summary: 

Why does our government recoil “at the notion that we might actually want to scrutinize an ideology that fuels anti-American militarism”?[3] The purge of “Islam,” “jihad,” “sharia,” and other related words from our National Security documents, counter-terrorism training, and intelligence analysis is eerily reminiscent of the warning George Orwell described in his seminal work – 1984.[4] “The purpose of Newspeak was…to make all other modes of thought impossible…by eliminating undesirable words and by stripping such words as remained of unorthodox meaning”[5] This policy is the “Ostrich Complex,” a synonym for Jihad Denial Syndrome (JDS).[6] [7]

Both the Bush and Obama administrations have effectively ascribed to a “see no evil” policy when it comes to Islam.[8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] The problem is that “words convey reality,” and it is our duty as military officers to be connected to reality.[20] Our oath requires us to “…support and defend the Constitution of the United States, against all enemies, foreign and domestic…”.[21] Yet this administration has tasked us to focus on the euphemistic “violent extremists”, which aside from being woefully ambiguous, ignores those who may not meet the narrow definition of violent extremists – yet still meet the broader threshold of being enemies.[*][22]

Summary: 

The purpose of this article is to decipher the ominous, but heavily camouflaged language embedded within the English text of a recent scholarly document, published on the website of the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America (AMJA), which is entitled Post-Election Statement: Principles and Roadmap (aka the Roadmap).

As a 40-year specialist in the Strategy & Tactics of the Global Islamic Movement (GIM) and founding member of the Department of Homeland Security Customs and Border Protection (retired), my intention is to ‘pull out the threads’ of references in the Shariah-compliant Roadmap that are derived from the Quran and Hadith (and other academic sources), so that the general public sees more clearly that the AMJA is more than a simple ‘home-grown’ American Islamic organization.

In our opinion, the critics have failed to make the case that the jihad currently practised by ISIS and other groups is not sanctioned by Islamic texts. The critics have broken the very rules they accuse ISIS of not following when they try to make their case by ignoring abrogation and parts of Islamic texts that are inconvenient to their argument.

They have also tried to substantially misrepresent the way Islam was spread after the initial conquest of the Arabian peninsular as been by defensive wars and peaceful invitations to people to become Muslims. The historical record shows a very different picture.

Similarly with slavery, their claim that Islamic states have abolished it (under pressure from Western countries it must be said) is technically accurate, however slavery is still legal under Islamic Sharia law and it is still widely practised in several Islamic states. There is no will or movement in Islam that we are aware of to change Sharia law to abolish slavery and that such a movement is most unlikely to occur as Muhammad kept slaves himself and the Qur'an itself says that captured women may be used as sex-slaves:

[Quran (33:50) - "O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those (slaves) whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee" Also Quran (23:5-6) , Quran (4:24) , Quran (8:69) ]

Fatwa: https://islamqa.info/en/20802

Blog: http://abdullahsameer.com/blog/does-islam-allow-sex-with-female-captives-of-war/

The critics have also implicitly endorsed the principle of Sharia hadd punishments (Stoning, flogging, amputation) provided correct [Islamic] procedure has been followed. That these senior figures of Islam, many in the West, who purport to be moderate implicitly endorse such punishments rather than flatly rejecting is troubling.

The most troubling aspect however is that a multitude of senior Islamic figures are unable to make clear and unambiguous case against Islamic jihad and an Islamic caliphate that all, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, can clearly understand. The truth is that this letter appears to be mostly a public relations exercise designed to quiet growing Western fears regarding Islam. To that end, this letter is just another example of 'jihad by the pen' and one our governments have been quietly complicit in since 9/11 as this white paper on Reversing the Ostrich Complex makes clear.

As the article from 2013 by Tom Holland says - “It is not enough to engage with the jihadis solely on the battlefield. They must be defeated as well in mosques, and libraries, and seminar rooms. This is a battle that, in the long run, can only be won by theologians.” On the basis of this very serious effort by these critics of ISIS, we appear to be a long way from that happening, if indeed that case can be made in any unambiguous way?

Country: 
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (the)
News Date: 
21/07/2016
Summary: 

New figures on Female Genital Mutilation reveal there were thousands of cases reported in England last year - the equivalent of 16 cases every day. In the year to March, 5,702 women sought medical help for the complications of the mutilation, according to research which touches on the scope of FGM and its victims in Britain for the first time. Over half of the women and girls were from London, and some ac

Country: 
United States of America (the)
News Date: 
21/04/2017
Summary: 

Federal agents arrested a second doctor and his wife Friday in a widening conspiracy involving female genital mutilation and members of a Muslim sect.

Country: 
Australia
News Date: 
18/04/2017
Summary: 
  • A Melbourne man has pleaded guilty to marrying 14-year-old girl in September
  • Mohammad Shakir, 34, was initially charged with having sex with the child
  • But on Tuesday, the charge was withdrawn by at Melbourne Magistrates' Court
  • Instead, Shakir was charged with marrying a person not of marriageable age 
  • The ceremony was conducted at Noble Park by former imam Ibrahim Omerdi
  •  
Summary: 

Does Islam prescribe the death penalty for consensual sex? The religion that allows a man to keep sex slaves also requires the execution of consenting adults.

There were several times in Muhammad's life when he ordered that people be put to death when they had committed no crime other than "illegal" sexual intercourse.  The only unmarried sex explicitly allowed in Islam is between a Muslim man and his slaves.

Quran: Stoning is not prescribed in the current version of the Quran.  According to Muhammad's companions, a verse that did exist at one time ordering that adulterers be stoned, but it was forgotten. (See Additional Notes).

.....

According to Umar (Muhammad's companion and Islam's second caliph) "[Allah] sent down the Book (Quran) upon him (Muhamad), and the verse of stoning was included in what was sent down to him."  Umar went on to insist that "Stoning is a duty laid down in Allah's Book for married men and women who commit adultery when proof is established, or it there is pregnancy, or a confession." (Muslim 17:4194)
 
In other words, there was a verse in the original Quran narration that prescribed the stoning of adulterers, but it was left out of the compiling process in the years following Muhammad's death.  Umar's insistence on the stoning verse is recorded in other volumes that comprise the most reliable collection of Hadith, including Sahih Bukhari 8:817:  "I am afraid that after a long time has passed, somebody will say, 'By Allah, we do not find the Verse of the Rajam in Allah's Book,' and thus they will go astray by leaving an obligation which Allah has revealed. And the punishment of the Rajam is to be inflicted to any married person (male & female), who commits illegal sexual intercourse."  (Rajam refers to stoning).
 
According to a strong tradition (found in Sunan ibn Majah, Book of Nikah, Hadith no. 1934), Aisha also recalled the verse that prescribed the death penalty for adulterers.  It was written on a palm leaf that was in her home following Muhammad's death.  Unfortunately, a goat or sheep wandered into the house and ate the leaf (along with others) before it could be collected and merged into the hodgepodge of writings that became the Quran.

 

Country: 
Afghanistan
News Date: 
18/04/2017
Summary: 

The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) has warned the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) against pushing once more for a global blasphemy law. Ahead of a conference on combatting religious intolerance, the FIDH has sent out a strong warning against any attempt to ban "defamation of religion". The OIC is to host the conference from 3-4 June 2015, on the 2011 UN resolution about combatting "intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization" of people based on religion and belief. The resolution was aimed at challenging discrimination and "incitement to violence and violence against … persons based on religion or belief".

However, there are concerns among human rights and secularist groups that the OIC will use the conference to make another attempt for a global blasphemy law, or for other similar restrictions on criticising and discussing religion.

Summary: 

“The beatings must not be hard.” The problem with that is that “hard” is a subjective judgment. The mandate to beat one’s wife is in the Qur’an:

“Men have authority over women because Allah has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because Allah has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them.” — Qur’an 4:34

Muhammad “struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you?” — Aisha (Sahih Muslim 2127)

Pages

Subscribe to Front page feed

These links and any other content or links on this website are provided for information only. No warranty is provided regarding their accuracy, and no liability is accepted for reliance on them. Sharia Watch UK Ltd. is not responsible for the content of external sites. We do not necessarily endorse any or all of the views expressed on these external sites.