Stephen Coughlin, Part 2: Understanding the War on Terror Through Islamic Law

November 6, 2012 — xanthippa

This one video from the series stands out because it explains really, really well why we need to study and understand Sharia.

People do not act based on facts and reality – they act based on their understanding of what constitues facts and reality.

In this video, Stephen Caughlin uses documents certified as the most authoritative understanding of what Sharia is and how it is to be implemented.

Certified by whom?

By the highest Islamic authorities (scholars) in existence today.

Whether they reflect the true teachings of Islam or not, Muslims worldwide – including in the US, Canada and other Western countries – believe that this is what constitutes Sharia; they teach it through their Mosques and to children in Islamic schools and they work actively to bring it into reality.

Sharia is not religion – it is a political doctorine.

That is why we must educate ourselves about it.

Because not doing so imperils both non-Muslims and all non-Sharia adherent Muslims!

Posted in education, politics. Tags: , , . 1 Comment »

Because, you know, sometimes, words have two meanings….

October 10, 2012 — xanthippa

It drives me crazy when people engage in an honest discussion with me and, quite a while later on, we figure out that we are using the same words but intending different meanings for them!

It is impossible to have a meaningful exchange of ideas if we cannot define common labels to apply to those ideas.

This seems pretty basic and clear, but unless we are disciplined enough to define all terms prior to any debate or discussion, chances are we will fall into this trap.

And yes, of course, there are ‘weasels’ out there who intentionally twist words during the discussion in order to score cheap points.

And yes, of course, there are specific ‘weasel words’ some people use to intentionally obfuscate points and fudge discussions for whatever reasons they have.

But that is not what I am talking about.

I mean honest people, meaning to have honest discussions with each other, but not getting through to each other because the labels we use do not apply to the same ideas or principles – or apply to them in a different kind of a sense.

For example, the concept of what constitutes ‘murder’ is not universally understood the way we, in The West, define it:  the unnecessary killing of another human being during peacetime.

For example, the Yanomamo people of South America considered ‘murder’ to be the killing of any living being which was ‘of their village’.  So, the killing of a chicken or a dog that lived in one’s village was ‘murder’, but killing a human being who was not a member of their village was ‘killing’, but certainly not ‘murder’.

Now, the Yanomamo are matrilinear but patriarchal and so young boys go to live with their mother’s brother’s family – usually in a different village than into which they were born.  When such a child first arrives into the village, they are in great danger:  if the rest of the community does not accept them as ‘members of the village’ – for whatever reason – they will be killed (only click this link if you are willing to see this most vile and despicable practice!)

Brutal, but true…

Similarly, in ancient Rome, it was not ‘murder’ for a father to kill his children or cause them to be raised as slaves in unrelated families…

I suspect this Roman tradition is either the reflection of or the source of many cultural traditions where the father has absolute power over his family and it is not considered ‘murder’ for a parent to kill their offspring.

This is certainly the case under Sharia – Islamic law – which specifically states that a parent who kills their offspring is not guilty of murder.

This is important when we want to discuss the horrible, despicable practice of ‘honour killings’… it is not so much that all ‘honour killings’ are Islamic, but rather that the Islamic ‘honour killings’ are part of this tradition which is definitely seen as far back as Ancient Rome.

In most ‘traditions’, this is a cultural phenomenon only. It is something that can be altered through laws and education and, eventually, cultural change.  And, while this practice had been widespread at one time, it has been greatly reduced through these means among Sikh, Hindu and Christians groups that once practiced it openly.

In Islam, because it has been codified into Sharia and because most Muslims recognize Sharia as superior to man-made laws, it is much more challenging to combat this practice.

It is a bit tricky, but, please, let me explain…

As many of us have been shouting as loudly and clearly as possible, it is Muslims themselves who are the greatest victims of Sharia.

Because, under Sharia, anyone who is an observant Muslim is obligated to kill anyone they see as ‘apostates’:  those who have turned away from ‘true Islam’. So, if a child is seen as having left the true path of Islam, it is both obligatory to kill them as ‘apostates’ and it is not punishable, if it is a parent killing their offspring.

But, it goes further than that…

Under Sharia, it is not considered ‘murder’ to kill a non-Muslim – any time and under any circumstances.  ‘Murder’ is only the ‘unlawful’ (under Sharia) killing of a Muslim:  and it is lawful to kill a Muslim if he or she murders a Muslim, OR commits adultery, OR turns away from ‘true Islam’.

Just like Christianity, Islam demands that their religionists must ‘love’ god more than they love any family member, it is not difficult to see how what we, in The West, term ‘honour killings’ are believed (rightly or wrongly) to be not just permitted, but downright obligatory under Sharia.

Of course, there are some Islamic scholars (especially of the Shia schools) who believe that it is they, not the family, who should administer the ‘honour killing’.  But this is more of a dispute over power, not substance…

Please, keep the above in mind as you watch the following video, which supplies the relevant quotes from Sharia to support the above statements:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGtXO0MytmI&feature=colike

 

Posted in politics, religion, society. Tags: , , , , , , , . 1 Comment »

An urgent message from ‘One Law for All’ about child marriage in the UK

September 18, 2012 — xanthippa

This is the email I received from One Law for All, whose urgent message needs to be seen by as many people as possible (please, spread the word!):

Dear Friend,

We are writing to you today to ask for your urgent and immediate support.

As you may have seen in the papers recently, there is growing evidence that young children – some as young at 5 years old – are being “married” to older men in Sharia courts across Britain. This is increasingly being sanctioned by the Islamists who run Britain’s network of Sharia courts, and there is evidence that this practice is growing.

Recent Investigations

A recent undercover investigation by the Sunday Times found imams in Britain willing to “marry” young girls, provided this was carried out in secret. The imams had been approached by an undercover reporter posing as a father who said he wanted his 12 year old daughter married, to prevent her from being tempted in to a “western lifestyle”.

Imam Mohammed Kassamali, of the Husaini Islamic Centre in Peterborough, sanctioned the marriage, but stressed the need for total secrecy. He stated: “I would love the girl to go to her husband’s houses (sic) as soon as possible, the younger the better. Under sharia (Islamic law) there is no problem. It is said she should see her first sign of puberty at the house of her husband. The problem is that we cannot explain such things (the marriage) if the girl went tomorrow (to the authorities).”

Abdul Haque, who officiates at weddings at the Shoreditch mosque, east London agreed to carry out the formalities of the wedding. However, he told the reporter that he should “tell people it is an engagement but it will be a marriage”. He added: “In Islam, once the girl reaches puberty the father has the right, the parents have the right, but under the laws of this country if the girl complains and says her marriage has been arranged and she wasn’t of marriageable age, then the person who performed the marriage will be jailed as well as the mother and father”.

Earlier this year, it was also reported that at least 30 girls, some as young as 9, were “married” in sharia courts in one London borough alone.

Clearly, child “marriages” are an abomination; they are nothing short of religiously-sanctioned child rape and paedophilia.

Sharia proponents deceptively say that forced marriages are unacceptable under Sharia and that both bride and groom must choose to marry as if that is the issue at hand. Islamists have gotten away with years of misogyny against Muslim women under cover of “choice” and are now using similar language with regards children. Nonetheless, child welfare must take precedence irrespective of religious beliefs. This is something we must urgently remind the Government of. Sharia courts are a scandal and must be stopped.

Arbitration and Mediation (Equality) Bill

One important way to tackle this matter is to galvanise support for the Arbitration and Mediation (Equality) Bill introduced to the House of Lords last year by crossbench peer, Baroness Caroline Cox. The Bill is due for a second reading in October.

The Government has so far declined to support Cox’s Bill. They do not believe there is a parallel legal system in operation. They also insist that everyone has full right of access to the British courts. This is simply not the case. There are many with little or no English language skills, trapped by community pressure, who believe Sharia courts operate as real courts and who regard their decisions as legally binding. The idea that they can easily instruct a high street solicitor to help them access their full rights under UK law is far from reality.

The Government must be pressured into taking immediate action, including by supporting Cox’s Bill, and shutting down Sharia and religious courts. If child welfare takes precedence then the Government is duty-bound to take action.

Sign our new petition in support of Baroness Cox’s Bill; tell the Government that enough is enough! Please sign it now.

Help Us

Baroness Cox has said in the past that her Bill was inspired by One Law for All. To donate to our important work, please either send a cheque made payable to One Law for All to BM Box 2387, London WC1N 3XX, UK or pay via Paypal. We need regular support and also for supporters to commit to giving at least £5-10 a month via direct debit. You can find out more about how to join the 100 Club here.

If you shop online, please do so via the Easy Fundraising’s website. It won’t cost you anything extra but can help raise much needed funds for One Law for All.

We look forward to your immediate intervention in this matter.

Best wishes,

Maryam Namazie and Anne Marie Waters
Spokespersons
One Law for All
BM Box 2387
London WC1N 3XX, UK
Tel:  +44 (0) 7719166731
onelawforall@gmail.com
www.onelawforall.org.uk

Posted in politics, religion, society. Tags: , , , , . 1 Comment »

Tommy Robinson: State threatens to take away EDL supporter’s baby

July 4, 2012 — xanthippa

Posted in corruption, freedoms, politics, society. Tags: , , , , , , , , . 4 Comments »

Kevin Freeman: Economic Terrorism Against America

July 3, 2012 — xanthippa

I don’t quite know what to think about this longish video…

Ideas?

 

 

Posted in politics, war. Tags: , , , . Leave a Comment »

One Law For All: ‘Sharia law: neither equal not free’

May 31, 2012 — xanthippa

From an email from Miriam Namazie:

Update on Baroness Cox’s Equality Bill
One Law for All has been spending a lot of time recently working with Caroline Cox and her team in promoting the Arbitration and Mediation Services (Equalities) Bill. The aim of the Bill, which was introduced to the House of Lords last year, is to make arbitration services in the UK subject to equality laws and to bar any arbitration where parties are of unequal standing; for example, it would disallow arbitration providers placing greater weight on the testimony of one party over another, as is the case with sharia law where a wife’s word is worth only half of her husband’s. The Bill will also create a criminal offence and make it illegal for arbitration bodies to pretend they have greater jurisdiction than they do – in other words, preventing them from misinforming people that they must obey their rulings. It will also place a duty on public bodies in the UK to inform women of their rights under British la w.
The Bill is due for a second reading in the House of Lords this October. Many Peers have already pledged support but we need your help in persuading them further. If you have time, please write to any members of the House of Lords and ask them to consider the seriousness of this Bill and its need in maintaining a society where all people are equal before a single secular and democratic law. In your letter, you could point out to Peers that the Islamic Sharia Council and the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal both openly acknowledge that the testimony of women is given less value than that of men, that custody of children is awarded to fathers regardless of the circumstances, and that sharia family law permits, and therefore encourages, domestic violence and the abuse of women and children.  You can find out how to write to Peers here: http://www.parliament.uk/get-involved/contact-a-lord/lord/. You can read the bill here:  http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2012-13/arbitrationandmediationservicesequality.html.
‘Equal and Free?’, a book of evidence compiled in support of the Bill, can be found here: http://equalandfree.org/download-file/downloads/EqualandFree.pdf. It includes testimony from women who have been through the sharia family law system here in Britain, as well as charities and groups which work closely with these women. It also looks at other religious tribunals, such as the Beth Din, and the effect the Bill may have on arbitration more broadly.
Debates and Conferences
One of the issues of concern to those deciding whether to support the Bill is that it may represent an infringement on religious liberty. One Law for All maintains that the right to freedom of religion ends at the point where other people’s rights begin. Sharia family and criminal law represent a serious infringement upon the rights of women to receive a fair hearing and to live without violence or the threat of violence. We will be holding a debate on this issue in the coming months and will invite members of both Houses of Parliament to attend – further details will follow. For more information on other speaking engagements and events, visit: http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/category/events/.
Child Protection
As has been mentioned, sharia family law awards custody of children to fathers from a pre-set age regardless of the circumstances, and regardless of whether the father is abusive or violent. Again, the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal and the Islamic Sharia Council do not deny this fact.  It is also known that matters of child custody and contact are being increasingly heard by sharia bodies, increasing the isolation of Muslims in Britain and endangering the children of Muslim parents who may be excluded from the protections provided by British law – which places the wellbeing of the child as the paramount consideration in all questions of this kind. We have been pushing this message very strongly at the House of Lords; all Peers have now received a copy of ‘Equal and Free?’ which contains details of how sharia family law is flouting legal norms in matters of child protection, and the danger this represents &ndas h; it is creating a parallel legal system, based on religion, in the UK.
Support us!
December will mark four years since the establishment of the One Law for All campaign. A lot has changed in the public debate on Sharia law and equality as a result of our campaign. If you want to and can, please help us to continue our essential work. To donate to the work of One Law for All, you can either send a cheque made payable to One Law for All to BM Box 2387, London WC1N 3XX, UK or pay via Paypal.  We also need regular support and for supporters to commit to giving at least £5-10 a month via direct debit. You can find out more about how to donate or join the 100 Club here: http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/donate/.
Also, if you shop online, please do so via the Easy Fundraising’s website: http://www.easyfundraising.org.uk/register-supporter/?char=40474. It won’t cost you anything extra but can help raise much needed funds for One Law for All.
Finally, if you haven’t already signed up to the One Law for All campaign, please join the nearly 29,000 people and groups that have: http://onelawforallpetition.com/onelaw/onela300.php?nr=40155035.
Thanks again
Warmest wishes
Anne Marie Waters
One Law for All Spokesperson
NOTES
1. The One Law for All Campaign was launched on 10 December 2008, International Human Rights Day, to call on the UK Government to recognise that Sharia and religious courts are arbitrary and discriminatory against women and children in particular and that citizenship and human rights are non-negotiable.
2. For further information contact:
Maryam Namazie
Anne Marie Waters
Spokespersons
One Law for All
BM Box 2387
London WC1N 3XX, UK
Posted in freedoms, politics, religion, society. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , . Leave a Comment »

Catching up on what the pesky Islamists have been up to…

May 4, 2012 — xanthippa

Lately, my browser keeps crashing – because I have just way too many windows open.

But, I cannot possibly close them:  each one is about something important that had happened that I really need to blog about…  Except that – I am an exceptionally slow thinker and, as an Aspie, an even slower writer.  Sometimes, it takes me hours just to squeeze out 2-3 hundred words about what is going on in the world….

But, if I close the windows with the stories in them, I know so much other blogging-worthy stuff will happen, I will never get back to them.  So, until I deal with them, I need to keep the windows open!

Something has to give:  even though I’d love to write a full post on each and every one of these stories, I simply cannot.

So, I have closed most of the windows (ack!!!) and will take this opportunity to bring just a few (hopefully somewhat) representative ones with just a brief comment on each:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcShunfbJxI&feature=colike

OK – this one is not Islamic – it is tribal African, but it is an abuse of girls in an effort to make them ‘chaste’ by disfiguring them….breat ironing?  Really?  How can anyone do this to their child…..it makes my blood boil!  It’s right up there with FGM…which is why I am including the video here.

Posted in freedoms, politics, religion. Tags: , , , , , , , . Leave a Comment »

Shafia: a follow-up rant

February 1, 2012 — xanthippa
Now that I have ranted about the Sharia murders for a bit, I would like to offer you a rant on a slightly different aspect of this case…
THE most popular post I have ever written was about Aisha Ibrahim Dhuhulow.  OK, I have written several, but this one has been to slowed down over the years even though I wrote it up just days after Aisha (or, Aisho, in some spellings) was stoned to death under Sharia, for the crime of having been gang raped.  (As I could not find any picture of Aisha, I painted one.)
Clarification:  the Shafia murders were not, in any way-shape-or-form, Sharia killings!  Quite to the contrary – most pro-Sharia Muslims strictly condemn this ‘honour crime’.  What must be understood that ‘honour killings’ are culture-based (or, more accurately, a symptom of the tribal version of collectivist societies where individuals have not just no rights, but no identity of their own – only the clan/tribe has an identity and the people within it are treated as interchangable cogs), not religion based.  Indeed, most Muslim organizations in Canada, whether pro-Sharia or not, have condemned these murders as unacceptable – and that is a good thing.  However, it should not be misunderstood that under Sharia, these girls and women would have fared much better:  the outrage among the pro-Sharia crowd is because the family made the life-and-death decision rather than presenting their case to the Sharia courts and then submitting the children and women to the death sentence once the Sharia court pronounced them.  Plus under Sharia, these women and children would have been stoned, not drowned…  And, yes, they would not have escaped the death sentence, as one of them actually married without het father’s permission and the other 3 helped her, so under Sharia, they would have been sentenced to death by stoning or lashing.  The only disagreement here is between who has the authority to kill them:  their imam or their father.

What really, really got me angry was not only what had happened to the poor child, Aisha Ibrahim Dhuhulow (she had reported her rape to the authorities, not realizing that the regular Muslim authorities she had grown up with had been replaced by Al-Shabaab’s radicalized Sharia courts and that reporting she had been raped would earn her the death penalty by stoning), though that was horrific enough.
What added insult to the injury was how it was reported and treated by the ‘Western media’, lead by AP (whose reporter was an eye-witness to the stonitself).
The lead was:  WOMAN IS STONED FOR ADULTERY!
WOMAN?!?!?!?
IN WHAT UNIVERSE IS A 13-YEAR-OLD ‘A WOMAN’?!?!?
And now, in the Shafia case, the youngest victim, Geeti, was also 13-years-old…yet the headlines proclaim ‘4 women dead’!
Really?
13-year-old Geeti and 17-year-old Sahar were both minors. 
Children.
Not women!!!
Yes, murders of women are vile and despicable – all murders are.
But the murders of children – and murders of children by their parents – murders of children are extra vile.
Consciously or not, whether to minimize the impact for politically correct reasons or because they are having trouble wrapping their brains around the evil of it, by calling two children ‘women’, the crimes committed agains them are downplayed by the media.
Contrast that with how Omar Khadr is being portrayed by the media:  in order to whip up inflammatory feelings, the media are calling him a ‘child soldier’ – even though, under UN definitions, Omar Khadr (at 15) was neither a child, nor a soldier.
OK – Sahar was 17 and could be considered to be ‘a woman’ under some rules.  But, if the media treats the 15-year-old Khadr as ‘a child’ but treats the 13-year-old Geeti as an adult, I call it a double standard!
One which, I suspect, is strategically adopted by those who simply find suffering of Muslimas to not fit comfortably into their own world view, so they will do all that is in their power to sweep their suffering under the rug, turn a blind eye to and and, most importantly, not permit any objective discussion of it in the public square.
Yes, there is so much more I want to say about this, but I suspect that my rant would only get more ranty…so, let me just leave you with a paraphrased quote from one of my favourite philosophers:  a person’s a person, no matter how small, or female, or Muslim!
Posted in society. Tags: , , , , , . Leave a Comment »

When can raising charity money for orphans land you in a ‘re-education camp’?

December 14, 2011 — xanthippa

When you live in a land ruled by Sharia!

Zilla of the Resistance has the story.

(Check it out and have a listen to the music:  I rather like the tune I suspect is the ‘swing classic’ ‘Clementine’ done in Indonesian punk – a definite improvement over the original!)

Via:  BCF

Quite apart from this story, it is important for us, Westerners, to understand that in lands ruled by Sharia, ‘charity’ does not work the same way it does in our part of the World.

This does not mean that Muslims are not charitable people:  not at all!

And it does not mean that in countries with Muslim populations, people do not perform charitable acts for the sake of helping their fellow human beings, regardless of race or creed.  They do – and we have many stories of Muslim women helping Westerners (men, women and children) who were in Japanese prison camps during WWII!

Rather, as Sharia rules every single aspect of life of those unfortunate to live under its oppression, so it has very specific and rigid rules for ‘charity’.

Let me illustrate this with an example:  following the Tsunami a few years ago, people in Bengal (I refuse to use the new colonial name for the country) were upset that many Western charities got volunteers on the ground and started providing aid.  The Bengali fear was that these aid groups were there trying to steal their children…

Many in the West were perplexed by this:  why would the people there refuse aid, willingly provided without any strings attached?

Because right now, Bengal is under Sharia.  And Sharia strictly differentiates between ‘Muslim charities’ and ‘non-Muslim charities’.

It is forbidden, under Sharia, for Muslim charities to help non-Muslims – and for non-Muslim charities to help Muslims (though, to be honest, non-Muslim charities do face a lot of regulatory interference under Sharia and are thus prevented from being as effective in providing aid as Muslim charities are).  Therefore, when non-Muslim charities attempted to aid Muslims in Bengal, the response among the population was confusion and fear – and, ultimately, rejection of much help.  The problem was finally resolved by the non-Muslim charities simply giving the money and aid materiel to Muslim charities, who then operated on the ground…

Another ‘perplexing’ example came even more recently, during the terrible flooding in Pakistan.  Even as money poured into the county through Red Cross, there were appalling stories of whole non-Muslim families starving – even in regions where food aid was plentiful.  Again, people in ‘The West’ could not make heads-or-tails of this and many wrote these stories off as propaganda.

Not so.

The primary channel for the aid funds was The International Red Cross.

In Sharia countries, the Red Cross partners with its affiliated Islamic charity, the Red Crescent, and channels all aid through it.

In Pakistan, which is for all practical purposes governed by Sharia, the Red Crescent operates as an Islamic charity under Sharia does.  That means that Mosques are used as the centres from which the aid (from food on down) is distributed.

To most of us, this does not seem particularly odd:  Mosques serve as community centres, so they are centrally located and accessible.  Plus, they have the room to store the supplies to be distributed, so this would be a logical place to distribute aid from, right?

Plus, under Sharia, the Red Crescent is only permitted to distribute aid through a Mosque.  So, it is not just the ‘logical’ course of action, it is the only permitted course of action.  And the Red Crescent did make various statements to the effect that everyone who came to them for aid, received aid!

So, what was the problem that caused the non-Muslims to starve?

Under Sharia, a non-Muslim may not enter a Mosque!

Not being permitted to enter the place from which the aid from Western countries was being distributed, non-Muslims could either starve or convert to Islam…

I suspect there is a lot more about ‘charity under Sharia’ we just don’t know…

Posted in freedoms, opression, religion. Tags: , , , , , , , , . 1 Comment »

City of Toronto ‘multifaith’ prayer room

November 21, 2011 — xanthippa

BlazingCatFur got a tip:

‘The cab driver was mortified to see that prayer room, it is in no way shape or form inclusive or respectful of others, in fact it’s downright threatening to those who suffered at the hands of Muslims in their countries of origin.’

Living up to the challenge and went to investigate:

Head over to his site and check it out.

Of course, I maintain that prayer – under all circumstances – is demonstrably immoral and offensive and that not a penny of any taxpayer money must be permitted to go to anything even remotely related to religion(s).  No publicly funded prayer rooms, no publicly funded preachers and no praying in public.  That would avoid this all mess!

In somewhat related news, here is some advice from Mark Vandermaas over at VoiceOfCanada:

‘Our Western countries have become divided states, one part for the radicals and one for the majority of citizenry — and, by virtue of our free and fair society, they are both afforded the same rights.’

And, I know this is a few days old, but:  check out women’s rights under Sharia! (And, yes, this is precisely why we must not have a law banning the burka:  the moment the state is given the right to legislate how we dress, we are giving up our right and ability to protest against this.)

Posted in atheism, freedoms, politics, religion, society. Tags: , , , , , . Leave a Comment »
« Older posts
Newer posts »