Category Archives: Sharia Law

Muslim women should be killed for marrying a non Muslim

Posted on by

Here is a recent ‘fatwa’ or religious ruling from Islam Q&A about what should happen to a Muslim women who marries a Christian etc. While it may not specifically say execute her, it is fairly clearly implied. Not hard to find out what should happen to apostates and that is how they will view her.

Thanks to Grace who has thick sturdy hip waders capable of wallowing through this much hate literature  on various Islamic sites for finding this.

What is the punishment for a Muslim woman who marries a Christian man?

How is a woman to be punished if she marries a Christian? How often is it carried out and in what countries is it most common?


Praise be to Allaah.

It is not permissible for a Muslim woman to marry a kaafir (non-Muslim), whether he is Jewish, Christian or an idol-worshipper, because the man has authority over his wife, and it is not permissible for a kaafir to have authority over a Muslim woman. For Islam is the true religion and all other religions are false. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And give not (your daughters) in marriage to Al-Mushrikoon till they believe (in Allaah Alone)” [al-Baqarah 2:221]

“And never will Allaah grant to the disbelievers a way (to triumph) over the believers” [al-Nisaa’ 4:141]

And the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Islam should prevail and should not be prevailed over.”

If a Muslim woman marries a kaafir when she knows the ruling, then she is a zaaniyah (adulteress), and her punishment is the punishment for adultery. If she was ignorant of the ruling then she is excused, but they must be separated, and there is no need for a divorce because the marriage is null and void. On this basis, the Muslim woman whom Allaah has honoured with Islam and her guardian must beware of that and must adhere to the limits set by Allaah, and they must feel proud of Islam. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Those who take disbelievers for Awliyaa’ (protectors or helpers or friends) instead of believers, do they seek honour, power and glory with them? Verily, then to Allaah belongs all honour, power and glory” [al-Nisaa’ 4:139]

Written by Shaykh ‘Abd al-Rahmaan al-Barraak

New video from the Mumbai attack. Graphic.

Posted on by

H/T jdamn and  beutifickid

Here is an article with the transcripts of the calls between the handlers and the terrorists for those that wish to read them:

Below is another source of the same documentary in case for any mysterious reason the yuotube one stops working:

Link: Terror in Mumbai complete

More on the various forms of Islamic oppression of women.

Posted on by

Sarkozi’s comments have at last opened a debate that should have happened in the free world (read non Muslim world) literally decades ago. I remember in the 1980s reading about men on motorcycles slaughtering women and school girls in Algeria at bus stops for not wearing certain garments.

At the time, I thought perhaps there was something wrong with nations that began with an A. Afghanistan, Algeria, Albania, Azerbaijan. It wasn’t until some years later I came to realize it has more to do with the fact that in all those nations people think in a manner that begins with an I.

ishr-burka

Phyllis Chesler, one of the very few feminist writers who actually is a feminist wrote a column today which I feel all need to read here.

A brief except:

“A 1994 fatwa legalized the killing of girls and women not wearing the hijab (which in Algeria consists of a scarf that hides the hair and neck and a full-length robe; veil is not an accurate translation); another fatwa legalized kidnapping and temporary marriage. … Muslim women do not have the right to work outside the home, become political leaders, or participate in sports. They should not wear makeup, perfume, fitted clothes, or mingle with men in public; they should wear the hijab, ‘which not only establishes the distinction between masculine and feminine, but underscores the separation between public and private’ …According to El Mounquid, the official FIS journal, the hijab distinguishes Muslims from non-Muslims; it is obligatory for Muslim women and not an individual decision.”

There is a specific and important point that urgently needs to be known and understood by people in the western world. Islam is simply not like Catholicism Judaism or any offshoot of either. Islam forces people to it. If you are a Muslim women you obey draconian rules which are tantamount to complete loss of freedoms and even personal identity in ways most of us cannot imagine. If you chose to leave Islam, you are killed where the numbers of Muslims are high enough to allow this with some impunity. Sharia courts which are rapidly growing all over the western world especially in the UK are NOT the same as Catholic or Jewish family law ones no matter what the gonadless premiere of Ontario claims when he eliminated them all in the interests of fairness. Certainly a lesser evil than allowing sharia ones but stupid in that it showed a lack of understanding of what Islam and sharia actually are.

One does not eliminate all things called showers merely because one culture at one time insisted on forcing other people into ones where instead of water they produced cyanide gas. The issue was the poison, not the name of the delivery system.

Al Queda threatens to attack France for resisting sharia law re: Burqa

Posted on by

AQIM threatens France over Sarkozy’s Burqa remarks

In a statement released on Tuesday through several jihadist websites and entitled “France, the mother of all evils,” Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) threatened France over President Sarkozy’s remarks last week that the “burqa is not welcome in France.” In the statement, Abou Mouss’ab Abd Al Wadoud vowed on the part of all the “mujahedeen in the Islamic Maghreb,” to “take revenge on France” and to target its “interests wherever they are.”

He also pointed out that the French President’s remarks, which he said were fuelled by hatred, signalled a “new war against our sisters who wear the Niqab.” He urged all Muslim to fight “this hatred with another one, more devastating.”

Pat Condell: Be my burka baby

Posted on by

Pat Condell, a fair-minded, well-spoken, intelligent, atheistic, witty asset to the secular world is the near-perfect proof of the existence of God. Watch and enjoy. Agree or no, his thoughts are worthy of your attention.

H/T jdamn & ControlGFK
H/T

Muslim conversion booth UK.

Posted on by

Just say the magic words and take away water and hey presto! You are a Muslim!

This would just be funny if they didnt kill people who converted away from the religion of peace. If I had an 11 year old son who came home and told me he converted to Islam by saying a few foreign phrases at a conversion booth on Bloor st. I would just laugh it off as if he had told me he had become a Martian by reciting the words: “I am a Martian Martian Martian yes am I” in Hienlienistani. It would mean nothing. He hasnt converted anything even as serious as imperial to metric. The issue is the idiots who believe he would have, and would threaten to, or would kill him for reverting back to his Christian or athiest or whatver he thought of himself as.

I found this video at a Danish site thanks to GOV.

Here is the Mail UK’s take on it:

This is the shocking picture of a young, white schoolboy being converted to Islam by a cleric linked to a radical Muslim hate preacher. Continue Reading →

No sane, free person would choose to wear a burka

Posted on by

In all the fallout that is likely from Sarkozy’s statement on the non-acceptance of the burka in France I thought I would post this article which was generously brought to my attention by Vlad’s exceptional commenter Proud Kafir.

I think it’s important in this discussion to consider a few counter-intuitive things. Some Jews did vote for Hitler and some black people fought for the South. I mention this because, in fact, many women may claim that they want to wear the burka. Well, some blacks did fight for slavery and some Jews thought Hitler would be good for Germany, what with the price of gifelte and all after Versailles. So perhaps it may be time to look past what each may think in terms of personal preference. We didn’t seem to have any problems with that when we banned tobacco smoking from all non-Arab establishments in the western world. What people wanted to do was of small consequence when the juggernaut of municipal and other legislative bodies decided that smoke was bad and was to be eliminated no matter what. Unless you are Arab, of course, in which case it is your culture and you can have your hookah and smoke it too — unlike having an ashtray at any Ontario bar.

The argument I like the very least is the one at the end of this article:

“Kanwar, a Muslim who has written eight books, including one on the sociology of Islam, echoes Sarkozy’s comments. “The burka is not mandated by Islam or the Qur’an and is therefore not religious and protected under the Charter.”

The idea of using some absurd holy book as a basis for determining what is legal or no in France or Canada or frankly anywhere at all including, but not limited to, Saudi Arabia, is repugnant to me and should be to anyone. Imagine Canadian legislators bringing in imams or rabbis or priests to argue a point of biblical minutia in order to determine the legality of some bit of barbarity which they wish to make acceptable in a democracy. Sorry. Democratic nations have laws based on secular principles and constitutional ones. These are the only sources that should ever be considered for making a thing legal.

This may seem like I am driving a zamboni across by own behind and in a way I am. I disagree with Sarkozy’s attack of the symptom and not the disease. Even so, a case can be made for it if no other course of action is politically feasible.

Eeyore for Vlad:

No sane, free person would choose to wear a burka

A while back I was asked to give a talk at my kids’ school about my December 2003 trip to Afghanistan.

As I waited to be introduced, I hid in an auditorium storage room wearing a burka I bought in that war-ravaged country, thinking I’d be out in a minute, maybe two. But the introduction took a lot longer than I had anticipated and by the time I came out to greet all those shining faces, I was very nearly hyperventilating from the oppression of it. I didn’t time my self-imposed confinement to the burka, but I probably wore the suffocating tent-like garment with mesh over my eyes for no more than 10 minutes. I told the kids I felt like I was buried alive.

I also told them that while in Afghanistan, I asked all of the many women I met there whether they liked wearing a burka. Not one said yes. In fact, they all said they hated it almost as much as they hated the Taliban.

It’s no wonder. The burka’s toll on these women was harsh. Many had lost most of their teeth and hair as a result of not having enough vitamin D, which comes from the sun. During the time of Taliban rule–from September 1996 to November 2001 –no portion of their skin, save their hands, was ever allowed to be exposed to sunlight. Think about the horror of that. The Taliban insisted that homes with women in them had to blacken their windows, lest a man pollute his delicate sensibilities by gazing upon the uncovered face of a woman behind the glass. Continue Reading →

Holy land: Christians in Peril. Pierre Rehov

Posted on by

This film is important for anyone who thinks Islam is some form of Judaism or Christianity. More likely, you may know someone who likes to use arguments of cultural or moral relativism when you try and discuss Islam with them. Please ask them over and play this for them in full screen.

There is no other group planning the ethnic cleansing and then ultimately the utter destruction of other faith groups than Islam. Take the time and watch this, then go to Pierre’s site and order his new film, ‘First Comes Saturday, Then Comes Sunday.’ This apparently is a common phrase/sentiment with Muslims meaning, first we deal with the Jews (who have their holy day on Saturday) then we deal with the Christians.

Thanks to KitmanTV who has tons and tons of excellent vids on this and other important subjects. Check his site often.

Enjoy:

Document contrasting western law with Islam. Very important and well done.

Posted on by

From Europe News DK:

H/T Grace:

I would recommend bookmarking this, or alternatively printing it out and after reading it leaving it behind on a bus or a bar somewhere so others might read it. This needs to be understood by as many as possible.

Is Islam Compatible With Democracy and Human Rights?

Institute for the Secularization of Islamic Society 22 June 2009

” Islam has never favoured democratic tendencies…” Hurgronje [277]

” The Democratic system that is predominant in the world is not a suitable system for the peoples of our region… The system of free elections is not suitable to our country” King Fahd of Saudi Arabia

At least King Fahd has had the honesty to admit the incompatibility of Islam and Democracy. Meanwhile Western Islamic apologists and modernising Muslims continue to look for democratic principles in Islam and Islamic history.

[A] Human Rights and Islam

Let us look at the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 and compare it to Islamic law and doctrine.

Article 1 ” All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood “.

Article 2 ” Everyone is entitled to all rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status “.

Article 3 ” Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person ”

Article 4 No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms ”

Comments: (1) Women are inferior under Islamic law; their testimony in a court of law is worth half that of a man; their movement is strictly restricted, they cannot marry a non-Muslim

(2) Non – Muslims living in Muslim countries have inferior status under Islamic law, they may not testify against a Muslim. In Saudi Arabia, following a tradition of Muhammed who said ” Two religions cannot exist in the country of Arabia “, non _ Muslims are forbidden to practice their religion, build churches, possess Bibles etc.

(3) Non-believers — atheists (surely the most neglected minority in history) — in Muslim countries do not have “the right to life “. They are to be killed. Muslim doctors of law generally divide sins into great sins and little sins. Of the seventeen great sins, unbelief is the greatest, more heinous than murder, theft, adultery etc..

(4) Slavery is recognised in the Koran. Muslims are allowed to cohabit with any of their female slaves (Sura iv.3); they are allowed to take possession of married women if they are slaves (Sura iv.28); the helpless position of the slave as regard his master illustrates the helpless position of the false gods of Arabia in the presence of their Creator (Sura xvi.77).

Article 5 No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Comments (1) We have seen what punishments are in store for the transgressers of the Holy Law: amputations, crucifixion, stoning to death, floggings. I suppose a Muslim could argue that these were not unusual for a Muslim country, but what of their inhumanity? Again a Muslim could contend that they are of divine origin and must not be judged by human criteria. By human standards, they ARE inhuman.

Article 6 Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

The whole notion of a person who can make choice, and can be held morally responsible is lacking in Islam; as is the entire notion of human rights.

Articles 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 deal with the rights of an accused person to a fair trial.

Comments (1) As Schacht has shown under the Sharia considerations of good faith, fairness, justice, truth, and so on play only a subordinate role. The idea of criminal guilt is lacking.

(2) Revenge for a killing is officially sanctioned, though a money recompense is also possible.

(3) The legal procedure, under Islam, can hardly be called impartial or fair, for in the matter of witnesses all sorts of injustices emerge. A non _Muslim may not testify against a Muslim. For example, a Muslim may rob a non _Muslim in his home with impunity if there are no witnesses except the non_ Muslim himself. The evidence of Muslim women is admitted only very exceptionally and then only from twice the number required of men.

Article 16 deals with the rights of marriage of men and women

Comment (1) As we shall see in our chapter on women, women under Islam do not have equal rights: they are not free to marry whom they wish, the rights of divorce are not equal.

Article 18 ” Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance “.

Comments (1) Quite clearly under Islam, one does not have the right to change one’s religion, if one is born into a Muslim family. Applying double standards, Muslims are quite happy to accept converts to their religion, but a Muslim may not convert to another religion, this would be apostasy which is punishable by death. Here is how the great commentator Baydawi (c.1291) sees the matter:

” Whosoever turns back from his belief, openly or secretly, take him and kill him wheresoever you find him, like any other infidel. Separate yourself from him altogether. Do not accept intercession in his regard “.

Comment (2) Statistics on conversions from Islam to Christianity, and therefore apostasy, are hard to establish for obvious reasons. There is, however, a myth that Muslims are impossible to convert. On the contrary we do have enough evidence of literally thousands of Muslims abandoning Islam for Christ from the Middle Ages to Modern Times; the most spectacular cases being, amongst others, those of Moroccan and Tunisian princes in the 17th century, of the monk Constantin the African. Count Rudt – Collenberg has found evidence at the Casa dei Catecumeni at Rome of 1087 conversions between 1614 and 1798.According to A.T. Willis and others between two or three million Muslims converted to Christianity after the massacres of the communists in Indonesia, in 1965, described earlier [chapter x] In France alone, in the 1990s, there are two or three hundred converts to Christianity from Islam, EACH YEAR. According to Ann Mayer, in Egypt conversions have been ” occurring with enough frequency to anger Muslim clerics and to mobilize conservative Muslim opinion behind proposals to enact a law imposing the death penalty for apostasy “[Mayer177]. Ms. Mayer points out that, in the past, many women have been to tempted to convert from Islam to ameliorate their lot.

Comment (3) Those who convert to Christianity and choose to stay in the Muslim country do so at great personal danger. The convert has most of his rights denied him, identity papers are often refused him, so that he has difficulties leaving his country; his marriage is declared null and void, his children are taken away from him to be brought up by Muslims, and he forfeits his rights of inheritance. Often the family will take matters into their own hands and simply assassinate the apostate; the family are, of course, not punished. [Gaudeul]

Article 19 ” Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinion without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers “.

Comments (1) The rights enshrined in articles 18 and 19 have been consistently violated in Iran, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. In all three countries, the rights of their Bahai, Ahmadi and Shia minorities respectively have been denied. All three countries justify their actions by reference to Sharia. Christians in these countries are frequently arrested on charges of blasphemy and their rights denied.

The rest below the fold: Continue Reading →

THIS: is sharia law. It is not just another form of Catholic family arbitration

Posted on by

Somalis watch double amputations: BBC


Witnesses estimated the age of the four men at between 18 and 25

Hardline Islamists in Somalia have carried out double amputations on four men for stealing phones and guns.

They have each had a hand and foot cut off after being convicted by a Sharia court in the capital earlier this week.

More then 300 people, mainly women and children, watched as masked men cut off their limbs with machetes.

The four men reportedly admitted to the robberies, but were not represented by a lawyer and were not allowed to appeal against their sentence.

Stratfor analyses Sarkozy’s burka ban. We analyze that.

Posted on by

Stratfor, the premiere geopolitical think tank rapidly growing in esteem and influence throughout the western world has done something interesting in terms of the ‘anti jihad’.

Typically, Stratfor looks at Islamic immigration into the western world as fundamentally no different than any other historical wave of immigration. They feel that negative reaction to Islam and the west is a consequence of shrinking economies and that there is no real difference in terms of effects on the west by Islam as there was by any other wave of immigration which ultimately integrates while perhaps changing the flavour of the host countries a little bit.

tower

However even Stratfor has to admit that a cartoon published in Denmark can have massive geopolitical consequences across the world and recently Stratfor noticed that a mere rumor of handling a Muslim holy book in a way immigrants don’t like in Greece was the cause of week long riots.

Today, Stratfor released an analysis of Sarkozy’s statement on mandatory Muslim dress for women saying that there is no place in a secular France for signs of submission to men as the Burka shows.

While I disagree fundamentally with the stance Sarkozy chose first lets look at the Stratfor analysis to the best of my ability while still sticking to the two paragraph quote limit the copyright allows. First, it is noteworthy that this is a party line crosser. That is to say, one can easily cross party lines when talking about this dress code without necessarily being a cross dresser. Communists and left wing feminists are right with conservatives on the issue of the burka in France. A six month study has been commissioned by the French government to determine if a ban is to be implemented.

Ultimately, Stratfor’s concern is what sort of backlash will be felt from Muslim groups and nations as a consequence of Sarkozy’s speech to the joint sessions of Parliament in France. From Stratfor:

Indeed, reports are already surfacing of foreign criticism of Sarkozy’s speech. These have included a statement from the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), an organization representing the interests of more than 500 Muslim groups across the United Kingdom (but not as linked to the British government as the French Council is to the French government). The MCB said Sarkozy’s comments that women are forced to wear the burka were offensive and that governments should not determine what individuals wear. The MCB also said that France should take the lead in enhancing cooperation among Muslims and non-Muslims rather than increasing the rift.

Outside Europe, Sarkozy’s statements have met with opposition from Muslim countries, particularly those with conservative Muslim populations. The Saudi press has openly expressed its distaste with Sarkozy’s policy. Meanwhile, The Times of India has reported on Indian women speaking out against the idea of the ban. While only a small percentage of Muslim women wear the burka, which moderate Muslims consider a repressive garment, Sarkozy’s tone could make Muslims see the step as the beginning of more anti-Muslim moves.

Stratfor then goes on to try and link anti immigration parties as being overall ignored continent wide in Europe and discrediting any anti Islamic sentiments as essentially parochial and not different than any other anti immigration feeling typical of economic down times. Continue Reading →

Pakistani tribesmen rise up against Taleban.

Posted on by

To my shock and amazement, there are depths of savagery and horror to which the Taliban will sink that is beyond what the average Muslim will tolerate. Read this story from The Times Online and rejoice. I believe this may be one of the more significant events in terms of the war with the Taliban in terms of how it may come out.

Eeyore for Vlad


Swat_577594a

It was the Taleban’s demand to take the women they had widowed that was the last straw for the residents of Upper Dir.

When the militants arrived in their mountainous corner of northwestern Pakistan in February the locals cautiously welcomed them, thinking they were waging jihad against foreign troops in neighbouring Afghanistan.

Some even joined them, attracted by the five or six pounds a day they paid. Over the next three months, however, Upper Dir’s residents were increasingly angered by the Taleban’s criminal activities and disrespect for local customs, according to residents and Pakistani officials.

In early June elders asked them to leave the five villages they had occupied. The Taleban responded on June 5 with a suicide attack on a local mosque that killed 39 people. The next day they told the elders to give them the women who had been widowed in the attack. Continue Reading →