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”

Country: 
Nigeria
News Date: 
25/03/2017
Summary: 

It is now glaringly evident, the sharp twist of the drifting to religious extremism in the case involving the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu is fast becoming, following the employment of aspects of the incompatible Sharia law by his trial judge, Justice Binta Nyako, in the argument against masked witnesses coming to testify against Kanu and other three defendants.

Country: 
Nigeria
News Date: 
25/03/2017
Summary: 

The Indigenous people of Biafra (IPOB), knows the entirety of humanity is aware of the ongoing genocide in Nigeria against Christians who in this case are predominantly Biafrans, but like the "fence-sitter" has decided to stay neutral and watch event as it escalates.

Summary: 

On March 22, 2017, Khalid Masood launched a terrorist attack that began on Westminster Bridge and ended in Parliament Square. The Islamic State (ISIS) claimed responsibility for the attack. In response, British Prime Minister Theresa May insisted that the London terror attack was a "perversion of a great faith."  In this video, David Wood shows that if terrorist attacks are a "perversion" of Islam, Islam has been perverted for nearly fourteen centuries, because Muhammad himself slaughtered unbelievers in the name of Allah.

Summary: 

There have been a couple of disturbing signs lately that the United Kingdom no longer aspires to haveone law for all, that instead UK Muslims are entitled to preferential treatment. Both signs take the form of extending special privileges to Muslim women in judicial proceedings.

The result may be to disadvantage non-Muslims vis-à-vis Muslims, while simultaneously institutionalizing the sexism of Sharia law against Muslim women.

Raping Muslims More Serious Than Raping Non-Muslims

The United Kingdom has chosen to allow rape of an “Asian” girl to be sanctioned more severely than a similar crime committed against a white girl.

Summary: 

WOMEN MUST WATCH The Reality COMING TO YOUR TOWNS. Men time to Man Up and SAVE The women .NEXT it WILL be YOUR Women !! WAKE UP

Country: 
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (the)
News Date: 
24/03/2017
Summary: 

A former Labour Party foreign minister has implied the government of Tony Blair was wrong to ignore the religious roots of Islamist terror, urging authorities to ‘take on’ the ideology to defeat terror. Kim Howells, who oversaw the work of MI5 and MI6 during the Blair and Brown years, said Islamist violence is distinct from other forms of terror and Western values such as democracy must be defended. “I was part of a Government that said: ‘Well, we don’t do God.’ But you can’t afford not to do God on this one, I think,” he 

Dear Mr Tugendhat.

Whilst I support your decision in the vote last night I’m puzzled as to the description of the provenance accorded to the ‘cult’ of ISIS in both the debate and the article you recently wrote for the Telegraph. If memory serves, you read Islamic studies at Canterbury university so it cannot come as a surprise to you that the actions of IS mirror very closely those of Mohammed when he was effectively exiled to Medina and from where he pursued a philosophy of war, rape, slavery and subjugation (dhimmitude).

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: 

In 2005 the Danish Muhammed cartoons sparked a heated international debate on the relationship between free speech and protection against religious discrimination. Whilst such tensions continue to be a source of conflict in the UN today, Marie Juul Petersen and Heini í Skorini look at what lies behind the actions of one of the key players in this debate, the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC).

“Freedom of expression does not justify in any way whatsoever the defamation of religions.”  The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), an intergovernmental umbrella organisation of 57 Muslim-majority states, was unequivocal in its condemnation of the Danish Muhammad cartoons, published in a press release a few months after the cartoons had been printed in the Danish newspaper Jyllandsposten in September 2005.

....

The OIC is also alarmingly quiet when it comes to discrimination, intolerance and outright persecution in the organisation’s own member states. No OIC countries have criticised Saudi Arabia’s ban on churches. Nobody has directed attention to the increasing violence against Hindus in Malaysia. Nobody has spoken out against Egyptian newspapers for printing anti-Semitic cartoons. Nobody has criticized the many victims of the strictly enforced blasphemy laws in powerful OIC member states such as Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran and Egypt. Not even clear examples of discrimination of Muslim minorities in OIC member states can bring the OIC to speak. Sunnis in Iran, Ahmadiyyas in Pakistan and Shias in Saudi Arabia enjoy little protection against discrimination and persecution.

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.

Country: 
France
News Date: 
23/02/2017
Summary: 
  • "I am not ashamed of what I am. I am a Muslim, that is to say, submissive to Allah who created me and who by his grace has harmoniously shaped me." — Salah Abdeslam, a Belgium-born French national of Moroccan descent and the main suspect in the November 13, 2015 attacks that killed 130 people in Paris.

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.

Pages

Subscribe to Front page feed