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: 

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 He wrote “the following four sections have been left untranslated (into English) because the issue is no longer current…” To his credit, he left the Arabic text in the book.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.

Summary: 

The Islamic State has given its own answer to the first question. In the fourth edition of its magazine Dabiq it aggressively promoted sex slavery as an Islamic practice, arguing that the practice conforms to the teaching and example of Muhammad and his companions.

Does this argument have any wider appeal than among Islamic State recruits? 

The reality is that many Muslim scholars have upheld the practice of enslaving captives of war. For example Islamic revivalist Abul A‘la Maududi wrote in his influential and widely disseminated tract Human Rights in Islam that for Muslims to enslave their captives was “a more humane and proper way of disposing of them” than Western approaches. Enslavement by Muslims, he argued, is preferable to the provisions of the Geneva Convention because of the value of this policy for fuelling the growth of Islam:

Islamic revivalist movements which look forward to the restoration of an Islamic Caliphate have repeatedly endorsed the practice of slavery in the name of their religious convictions. For example the (now banned) Muhajiroun movement in the UK announced in an article, “How does Islam Classify Lands?” that once a true Islamic State is established, no-one living in other nations (which it calls Dar al Harb ‘house of war’) will have a right to their life or their wealth:

“… hence a Muslim in such circumstances can then go into Dar Al Harb and take the wealth from the people unless there is a treaty with that state. If there is no treaty individual Muslims can even go to Dar Al Harb and take women to keep as slaves.”

It is a problem that the Qur’an itself endorses having sex with captive women (Sura 4:24). According to a secure tradition (hadith) attributed to one of Muhammad’s companions, Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri, this verse of the Qur’an was revealed to Muhammad at a time when Muslims had been ‘refraining’ from having sex with their married female captives. Verse 4:24 relieved them of this restraint by giving them permission to have sex with captive women even if the women were already married.

Abd-al-Hamid Siddiqui, a Fellow of the Islamic Research Academy of Karachi and the translator into English of the Sahih Muslim, commented on this tradition, saying: “When women are taken captive their previous marriages are automatically annulled. It should, however, be remembered that sexual intercourse with these women is lawful with certain conditions.”

There have been many cases reported across the centuries of Islamic armies using captive women for sex slavery, but is this any different from all wars? It is different in one important respect, that the mainstream of Islamic jurisprudence has justified and supported this practice on the basis of Islam’s canonical sources, including Muhammad’s own example and teaching.  Islamic sex slavery is religiously sanctioned ‘guilt-free sex’.

Country: 
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (the)
News Date: 
28/03/2017
Summary: 

Security sources have told Sky News that more than four hundred British jihadists who travelled to the Middle East to fight for terror organisations like Islamic State and the al-Nusra Front have returned home, and most have evaded the authorities. Former Scotland Yard Specialist Firearms Officer and author Tony Long told the broadcaster these fighters could pose serious problems for the British authorities. “These are combat-hardened soldiers,” he said.

Country: 
Australia
News Date: 
27/03/2017
Summary: 
  • Hizb ut-Tahrir spokesman Uthman Badar confirms support for killing ex-Muslims
  • 'Apostates attract capital punishment and we don't shy away from that'
  • Badar made the remarks at a public talk in Sydney's west on Saturday night  
  • The group is so extreme it is banned in Muslim-majority nations like Bangladesh
  • Men and women were segregated at the sharia law forum in Bankstown 
  • The matter has now been referred to the Australian Federal Police

This letter was sent by a supporter of Sharia Watch to their MP after Theresa May effectively exonerated Islam following the Westminster attack:

Dear xxxxx

Given that sharia law mandates establishment of a caliphate and offensive jihad toward non-believers until Islamic hegemony is globally secured, I am puzzled why you asked in Parliament, "Will the Prime Minister agree with me that what happened was not Islamic..."

Summary: 

Other examples of Islam’s inferior view of women can be cited. However, the above accounts are sufficient to conclude that under Sharia, “men are superior to women” (Q 2:228) and that “Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other, and because they [men] spend their wealth to maintain them [women]” (Q 34:4). Sharia then enjoins upon its adherents a profoundly un-egalitarian ethic, whereby women are deemed inferior to men.[30]

People who are endeared to the egalitarian-Western principles, particularly those who are Europeans, must fight the proliferation of Sharia ideas in their homeland. But in order to fight a fascistic and misogynistic ideology like Islamism, it is necessary for adherents of egalitarian-Western principles to first understand the motivations of Islamists.

And, make no mistake, the reasons that Islamists advance for just about everything they do, including their oppression of women, are based almost exclusively on their religious ideology. None of the sources cited above are exclusively political or social in nature—they are religious Islamic sources.

Country: 
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (the)
News Date: 
25/03/2017
Summary: 

Apostasy is not just something that scandalises people in far off lands. Harriet Alexander hears the story of a British woman whose life was turned upside down when she left Islam - echoing the plight of Meriam Ibrahim, who awaits a death sentence in Sudan for the same "crime".

Summary: 
  • Would we be allowed to ask who ISIS are inspired by?

  • Would they be allowed to say that the perpetrator was a Muslim?

  • Would they be allowed to say that there is a tradition of violence within the Islamic religion which has sadly permitted just such actions for a rather long time. Or would they have to lie?

Country: 
Pakistan
News Date: 
24/03/2017
Summary: 

Three more bloggers were accused of blasphemy on Friday in an Islamabad anti-terrorism court, while elsewhere in the city hundreds of security forces prevented a radical cleric from holding a protest to condemn another five bloggers, who were earlier charged with insulting Islam an offense punishable by death in this Islamic country.

Summary: 

“It is not an attack on free speech or the silencing of controversial ideas or criticism.”

It most certainly is. As I have pointed out many times, truth is the new hate speech. The enemies of freedom brand opposition to jihad “hate speech,” and now they’re working toward criminalizing it. They’re racing against time: as the jihad in Europe and the U.S. grows more aggressive, the truth of what I have said for years is becoming increasingly obvious. So they’re trying to clamp down hard and hang on to power, and keep on implementing their suicidal policies.

Summary: 
  • Jihadists seem to be leading an assault against freedom and against secular democracies.

  • Sunni Islam's most prominent preacher, Yusuf al Qaradawi, declared that the day will come when, like Constantinople, Rome will be Islamized.

  • It is Islam, not Christianity, that now saturates Europe's landscape and imagination.

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.