Showing posts with label Freedom of Religion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Freedom of Religion. Show all posts

Monday, November 30, 2009

Swiss brace for minaret backlash

In the cold night air, they gathered.

First in threes and fours, until it became a bigger group. They carried candles and their anger - upset that Switzerland had approved a vote to ban minarets, the prayer towers on top of mosques.

They first read about the demonstration on a website and decided to join. And as the night got colder, the numbers got bigger, 50, 60, all denouncing the surprise result.

One woman told me: "This speaks against religious freedom in our country".

The police kept a watchful eye.

The opinion polls thought there would be a narrow "no" vote. They called it wrong. Moments after the polls closed, the exit surveys were predicting a "yes". And they were right.

In front of the bright lights of the media centre, close to the parliament, the country's justice minister announced the will of the people had to be accepted. The constitution would be changed.

The small, slight, dark-haired figure of Eveline Widmet Schlumpf insisted this was not a vote against Islam, but a simple ban on minarets.

"The ban on construction of new minarets does have the effect of restricting the freedom to display the Muslim faith to the outside world by erecting a minaret," Schlumpf said.

"However, the freedom to profess one's faith in Islam and to practice the religion alone or in the community is not affected in any way."

Switzerland has 160 mosques and cultural centres. We know this because it was included in the referendum fact pack sent to voters. Only four have minarets.

The ban was promoted by the right-wing People's Party, which ran a controversial poster campaign to sway voters.

Their argument was that this was just the start for those who wanted an Islamic state in Switzerland. There was never any concrete evidence to back up the rhetoric.

Martin Baltisser is one of the party's senior officials. He's heard the claims that this was a racist campaign, bordering on Islamophobic.

"It wasn't racist. It was an opportunity to discuss people's genuine fears and it was a very good discussion."

The turnout was much higher than expected. As we stood outside the school, which was used as a polling station in one of Bern's suburbs, they even turned up an hour before it opened, so keen were they to cast their vote.

And like those putting together the opinion polls, all we spoke to insisted they opposed the ban.

The Swiss government will now introduce article 72, paragraph three into the Swiss constitution, banning the construction of minarets.

Opposition parties are talking of a challenge in the European Court of Human Rights. What was meant to be a short debate on the future of Islam, now has the potential to become a long-running open sore.

Muslim communities say the decision will spread deep concern and worry. The Swiss government and businesses are worried too - about whether this controversial but democratic ballot will provoke an international backlash.

Al Jazeera





Thursday, November 12, 2009

Poll: Should Muslims living in a non-Muslim country integrate into host society?

Should Muslims living in a non-Muslim country integrate into host society?

 I am a Muslim living in a predominantly Muslim country
Yes, Muslims should integrate into the host society
No, Muslims should live segregated from the host society

 I am a Muslim living in North America
Yes, Muslims should integrate into the host society
No, Muslims should live segregated from the host society

 I am a Muslim living in Western Europe
Yes, Muslims should integrate into the host society
No, Muslims should live segregated from the host society

 I am a Muslim living in Eastern Europe
Yes, Muslims should integrate into the host society
No, Muslims should live segregated from the host society

 I am a Muslim living in none of the above
Yes, Muslims should integrate into the host society
No, Muslims should live segregated from the host society

 I am not a Muslim
Yes, Muslims should integrate into the host society
No, Muslims should live segregated from the host society

  


Friday, October 16, 2009

Sharia Law and the US Constitution

Sharia Law and the US Constitution
By Louis Palme
Oct 14, 2009


Americans are among the most tolerant and patriotic people in the world. As a nation of immigrants, there is a certain appeal to the idea of multiculturalism where people of different backgrounds are accepted in our communities. Our nation was founded on the principles of equality and freedom, and we have invested our resources and blood over and over again to defend those principles.

Our constitution guarantees not only the freedom of speech, but also the freedom to practice our religion of choice. So it is not surprising that many Americans see Sharia Law as a Muslim religious prerogative which we should support or at least tolerate. Banks have rushed to provide Sharia-compliant banking, and public institutions like universities and airports have spent taxpayer dollars to help Muslims comply with their religious requirements, providing special foot-baths and prayer rooms for them.

If anyone speaks out against Sharia Law, there is often a strong reaction within the Muslim community. This month, Dalia Mogahed, President Obama’s advisor on Muslim affairs, complained on British television that the Western view of Sharia was “oversimplified” and misunderstood. While acknowledging that even Muslims associate Sharia with draconian criminal punishments and laws that seem unequal for women, she stated, “Part of the reason there is this perception of Sharia is because Sharia is not well understood and Islam as a faith is not well understood.” The London-based Islam Channel panel she was on made repeated attacks against secular “man-made Law” and the West’s “lethal cocktail of liberty and capitalism.” Ms. Mogahed described her government role as “to convey . . to the President and other public officials what it is Muslims want.” (Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/6274387/Obama-adviser-says-Sharia-Law-is-misunderstood.html)

A similar reaction took place in a recent US Congressional hearing on the dangers posed by political Islam. Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, one of the most prominent Muslim reformers in the United States, testified, “I think if Muslims want credibility and we want to be respected equally, we need to stand for reform within our faith of [Sharia] laws that are still in the 15th and 16th Century.” He explained that the jihadists will not be defeated until Muslims start to recognize that their ideology is on a slippery slope toward radicalism. In response to this testimony, Muslim Congressman Keith Ellison (D, Mn) delivered a verbal tirade that accused Dr. Jasser of encouraging anti-Muslim bigotry and attempting to censor Islamists. Ellison said to Dr. Jasser, “I think you give people license for bigotry. I think people who engage in nothing less than Muslim-hating really love you a lot because you give them freedom to do that. You say, ‘yeah, go get after them.’ . . Now is somebody going to snatch my 13-year-old daughter’s hijab off, call her a horrible name, and spit on her because of something you said, Dr. Jasser? I worry about that.” (Source: http://www.investigativeproject.org/1448/jasser-challenges-congressman-on-reforms-value )

So, to better understand whether Sharia Law is desirable (or even legal) in the United States, it might be instructive to compare it with the US Constitution. This isn’t too difficult for the layman because the US Constitution is only 17 pages long, including its 27 amendments. Sharia Law is well-documented in the 1,200 page Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law, “The Reliance of the Traveler” by Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri, and published in the United States by Amana Publications. While the original document dates to the late 14th Century, it has been updated in the 1990’s and bears the approval of the Fiqh Council of North America as well as the authoritative Al-Azhar Islamic Research Academy in Egypt. The introduction to this manual states, “The four Sunni schools of Islamic Law . . are identical in approximately 75 percent of the legal conclusions. . . [T]he authors of the present volume and their positions do represent the orthodox Muslim intellectual and spiritual heritage that has been the strength of the Community for over a thousand years . . to the present day.”

While this volume of Sharia Law is primarily about the religious practice of Islam, the 800 pages of the manual devoted to rules and regulations also include sections on Trade, Inheritance, Marriage (suitable partners, legal rights, custody), Divorce, and Justice which would fall under civil law in the United States. Those sections comprise 35% of the manual, and are among the most controversial because they impose draconian punishments, authorize jihad, and sanction discrimination on the basis of religion and gender.

The summary below highlights the serious disconnects between the provisions of the US Constitution and those of Sharia Law.

LEGISLATIVE POWERS


US Constitution

Article I - All legislative Powers shall be vested in the Congress.

Sharia Law

The source of legal rulings for all acts of those who are morally responsible is Allah. (a1.1) It is not a sin to comply with man-made laws that require buying auto insurance or having a photo ID because “the authorities are responsible for the sin, not the individual forced to comply.” (w42.3 and w50.4)


POWER TO DECLARE WAR

US Constitution

Section 8 – Powers of Congress include to levy taxes, to make laws, and to declare war.

Sharia Law
It is obligatory to obey the commands and interdictions of the caliph or his representative in everything that is lawful, even if he is unjust . . because the purpose of his authority is Islamic unity, which could not be realized if obeying him were not obligatory. (o25.5) The caliph or his representative have the duty of undertaking jihad if their territory borders on enemy lands, of dividing the spoils of battle, and of remitting a fifth for “deserving recipients.” (o25.9(8))
Jihad is obligatory for everyone when the enemy has surrounded the Muslims. (o9.3) It is permissible in jihad to cut down the enemy’s trees and destroy their dwellings. (o9.1)


PRESIDENT (CALIPH)

US Constitution

Article II, Section I -- Qualifications of a President – He must be a natural born citizen, thirty-five years old, and a resident for fourteen years. The President is elected by ballot by the people (via the Electors) and shall serve for no more than 2 four-year terms.

No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

Sharia Law
A caliph must be a Muslim, a non-slave, a male, of the Quraysh tribe, etc. (o25.0)
The Caliph appoints a group to select his successor among themselves. There is no a term of office. However, the caliphate of someone who seizes power is considered valid, even though his act of usurpation is disobedience, in view of the danger from anarchy and strife that would otherwise ensue. (o25.4(3))
(Note: The Islamic Caliphate was disbanded the Turkish Parliament in 1924.)



REMOVAL OF GOVERNMENT OFFICERS

US Constitution

Section 4 – The President and all civil Officers of the United States shall be removed from office if found guilty of treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

Sharia Law

(No provision for removal from office.)

LEGAL AUTHORITY

US Constitution

Article VI – This Constitution and the laws of the United States which shall be made under it shall be the supreme law of the land, and judges in every state shall be bound by them.

Senators and Representatives, legislative officers, all executive and judicial officers both of the United States and the several states shall be bound by a Oath or Affirmation to support the Constitution.

Sharia Law

The source of legal rulings for all acts of those who are morally responsible is Allah. (a1.1)


CIVIL AND RELIGIOUS RIGHTS

US Constitution

Amendment 1 – Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press, or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for redress of grievances.

Sharia Law

Non-Muslims are obliged to comply with Islamic rules that pertain to the safety and indemnity of life, reputation, and property. Non-Muslims are forbidden to openly display wine or pork, recite their scriptures, or make a public display of feast days or funerals. Non-Muslims are forbidden to build new churches. A non-Muslim may not enter a mosque without permission. The protection for non-Muslims is withdrawn if a non-Muslim commits adultery with a Muslim woman or marries her, leads a Muslim away from Islam, kills a Muslim, or says anything derogatory about Allah, the Prophet, or Islam. (o11.5 through o11.10)

US Constitution

Amendment 2 – The right of people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Sharia Law

It is a condition that someone buying weapons be of a people who are not at war with Muslims. (k1.2(f))
Enormities (sins) include selling weapons to non-Muslims who will use them against us. (w52.1(192))

US Constitution

Amendment 3 – No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner prescribed by law.

Sharia Law

(Not covered.) However, the Pact of Omar (636 AD) imposed on Christians in Syria, “We shall keep our gates wide open for passersby and travelers. We shall give board and lodging to all Muslims who pass our way for three days.”

US Constitution

Amendments 4 – 8 – These amendments prohibit unreasonable searches, require due process according to the law, provide for confrontation of witnesses, impose jury trial on all matters involving over $20, and prohibit excessive fines and cruel and unusual punishments. Amendment 14 provides for equal protection of the laws for all citizens.

Sharia Law

No testimony may be made by people who have lowly jobs, such as a street sweeper or a bath house attendant, or non-Muslim. (o24.2-3)

Testimony regarding fornication or sodomy requires four male eye-witnesses to the act. (o24.9)

A woman’s testimony is worth only half that of a man. (o24.10)

(There is no provision for a jury trial under Sharia Law.)

Cruel and unusual Islamic punishments include 1) stoning for adultery (o12.2); 2) scourging 40 lashes with hands, shoes, ends of clothes, or a whip for drunkenness (o16.3); 3) severing the right hand for theft of over $36 and the left foot for a repeat offense (o14.1); and 4) death for apostasy from Islam. (o8.2)

Indemnity for accidentally killing a male Muslim is 100 camels or 4,235 grams of gold. (Current value: $144,000.) Indemnity for killing a woman is half that of a man, for killing a Jew or a Christian is one-third of the indemnity paid for a Muslim. The indemnity paid for a killing Zoroastrian is one-fifteenth of that of a Muslim. The indemnity for causing a miscarriage is one slave. (o4.9)

There is no indemnity for a killing a non-Muslim at war with Muslims, an apostate, or someone sentenced to death by stoning. (o14.17)

Jews and Christians are subject to a “poll tax” not less than 1 dinar (Current value: $144) per adult male per year. No maximum is stipulated. (o11.4) This is a penalty for remaining in their ancestral religion instead of embracing the “religion of truth.” (o9.8)

A husband may beat a “rebellious” wife for 1) not allowing immediate sexual intercourse when he asks for it, at home, and if she can physically endure it; 2) answering him coldly; or 3) being averse when she was previously kind. (m5.1 and m10.12) The only limitation is that he may not break her bones, wound her, or cause bleeding.

US Constitution

Amendment 13 Slavery and involuntary servitude are abolished.


Sharia Law

The section on Slavery (k32.0) is not translated into English. The provisions remain in Arabic. The editor of “The Reliance of the Traveler” claims that these provisions are no longer applicable, yet they remain in there in the text of Sharia Law. Elsewhere, the manual states, “Originally the status of slave was simply the outcome of having been taken as a prisoner of war. A captive who could not buy his own freedom by means of ransom remained in the possession of the captor until he had earned his freedom by work or until he was granted liberty by his master.” (w13.1)


US Constitution

Amendment 21 repealed “prohibition,” thereby allowing manufacture, sale, and transport of alcoholic beverages.

Sharia Law

It is unlawful to sell grapes to someone who will make wine from them. (k4.9) “Allah cursed whoever drinks wine, gives it to others to drink, sells it, buys it, presses it for another, transports it, receives it, or eats its price.”

Enormities (sins) include drinking wine in any form or other intoxicant, even if only a drop as in medicine; pressing out the juice to make wine or other intoxicant; carrying it for purposes of drinking, or having it carried; serving it to others or having it served; selling it; buying it; having it bought or sold; consuming proceeds from selling it; or keeping wine or other intoxicant. (o16.6 and w52.1(350-361))

So, the next time someone suggests that we should be more understanding of Sharia Law, it would be fair to ask him/her what parts of our US Constitution would he/she be willing to abandon in order to accommodate Sharia Law.



Friday, October 9, 2009

Islamophobes want to ban "anti Freedom of Religion" UN Resolution

Petition: Free to Believe - NO to suppression of religious freedom
08 October 2009

This is a crucial year in the fight to preserve religious freedom worldwide. The Defamation of Religions Resolution seeks to criminalize words or actions as attacks against a particular religion, namely Islam.

As incredible as it sounds, passing this resolution could allow a Christian to be persecuted under UN approval. We need you to voice your protest of this resolution by

signing the petition / More about this campaign

Thank you for participating in the "Free to Believe" campaign against the UN resolution that can increase persecution against those who disagree with or criticize Islam and even those who are merely accused of these actions.

Together we can protect the freedom to believe.

Source: EuropeNews



Thursday, October 1, 2009

Ex-jihadist former AlZawahiri's Associate on "Capitol 9/25"

Muslims Should Use Capitol Hill Rally as Example
Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:42 AMBy: Tawfik Hamid

On Sept. 25, nearly 3,000 gathered on the west lawn of the Capitol for a mass Muslim prayer service that was part religion and part pep rally for the U.S. The organizers considered this day of prayer an opportunity to show how peaceful Islam is. They had expected 50,000 Muslims to attend. The slogan was, “Our Time Has Come”.
This event raises several points for discussion.
First of all, it would have improved the image of Islam if the American Muslim community asked its fellow Muslims in areas like Saudi Arabia to allow non- Muslims to have the right to pray in public and carry their religious symbols. It would be important to hear the voices of the event’s organizers asking that equal rights be given to followers of other faiths in the Muslim world. Enjoying the right to pray freely by the thousands on Capitol Hill without asking the Muslim world to do the same for its small religious minorities is unfair. The image of Islam will only change when non-Muslims see Muslims defending rights of other religious minorities to worship and pray freely in any part of the Muslim world.
Second, selecting Capitol Hill as the place of the prayer and choosing the slogan “Our Time Has Come” is very symbolic for jihadists, as they will see it as partial fulfillment of their dream of having “the flag of Islam on the White House,” as they have articulated on several occasions. For them, “having the flag of Islam on the White House” means controlling the U.S. by Shariah laws rather than by the Constitution. The message that has been conveyed to the jihadists by choosing Capitol Hill to be the site for this prayer is, simply, “we are on the march to fulfill your dream.”

Read more: http://www.newsmax.com/tawfik_hamid/muslim__prayer_capitol/2009/09/29/266049.html

Thursday, August 20, 2009

Freedom of Religion: A Precious American Right, an Islamic Capital Crime

Apostasy

Rifqa Bary, Islamic Apartheid, and the Mainstream Media

By Phyllis Chesler

Given the anti-Christian views of many Muslims and of all the Western book-and-column writing atheists and secularists, I wonder if Rifqa Bary, the teenage convert from Islam to Christianity, is not respected as a hero who is fighting for her freedom of religion but seen, rather, as someone who has taken yet another reactionary path. Perhaps if Rifqa had launched a lawsuit for the right to wear hijab or a burqa in Ohio she might immediately have gotten mainstream media sympathy.

The mainstream American media simply refuses to cover the Islamification of the West. Publishers run scared when I mention this as a possible next book title of mine. Newspapers are reluctant to cover honor killings or attempted honor killings in America at all, or in an accurate and informed way. If and when they write about jihadist attacks against the West or honor killings in America, the information is often buried on a back page or is, amazingly, biased against the victim and/or sympathetic towards the killer–yes, even if he has confessed. Yes, even if his victim or victims are also people of color born into the Muslim faith.

Apparently, the victims win no sympathy even if they, too, have also been born in formerly colonized or “occupied” countries, are currently also immigrants of color, or Muslims. What matters is only who the perpetrator is. Muslim-on-Muslim crimes, including genocide, do not count. Read more ...

Source: PJM

Saturday, May 9, 2009

The Genesis and Working of Radical Islam

Rally
Puneet Madan on the inaugural Human Rights Coalition Against Radical Islam Rally in New York on May 3, 2009:

We are a multi-lingual, multi-cultural, multi-religious, multi-ethnic group that have gathered in Times Square, New York, today (May 3, 2009) under the Human Rights Coalition Against Radical Islam (HRCARI) banner to reaffirm the most basic of principles that our ancestors stood for when, over six decades ago, they established the United Nations, the cornerstone of a hoped-for global democracy. In doing so, they hoped to ensure that never again would humankind face the persecution it suffered during the tragedies of the mid-20th century. The establishment of the United Nations was to be the beginning of a new era in which people of different religion, cultures, castes, and color would together create a new global society, a humanistic society, finally overcoming the fascism and imperialism of the times past.

HRCARI reaffirms the most basic principles human rights: freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the right to vote, and the assurance that all human beings are equal, regardless of his social, cultural, gender, racial, sexuality or religious status.

For many in our world, democracy is considered the essence of human freedom. However, for others, the term “democracy” has come to imply only the right to vote. This is exemplified in the many Islamic countries that hold elections, even while exhibiting nary a trace of freedom. The most famous recent example of elections without the "essence of democracy" include the 2006 election of Hamas in the Palestinian Territories. The reality is that freedom, as a concept, has been defined straight out of existence. While most people in the world define freedom and human rights according to the universalistic notions set forth in the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UNUDHR), and other documents such as the United States’ Declaration of Independence, radical Muslims have defined “freedom” to mean the freedom they enjoy to exploit human suffering and dignity, a "freedom", they believe, is granted them by their age-old religious scripture. They are, in short, demanding that the democratic, freedom-loving world be tolerant to their intolerance.

In the 1930s, when Jews were forced to wear arm bands in Nazi Germany, the world ignored their plight. One of the excuses for ignoring Jewish suffering during the Holocaust was a perceived need to be "sensitive" to the plight of Nazi Germany. It is still an open question why and how the world ignored and appeased the Nazi threat for as long as it did, until action was finally taken. But it is clear that by ignoring the Nazi threat, the world permitted a massive human tragedy, the Holocaust, to happen. The United Nations was founded in the wake of that tragedy in order to prevent another Holocaust.

Ironically the same story repeated itself in 1999, when the Taliban forced Afghan Hindus and Sikhs to wear orange armbands. They also were responsible for the genocide of the Hazara Muslims in Northern Afghanistan. Let loose, the Taliban grew into a global threat by 2001, and we are still living under the shadow of that threat. Today, the media and politicians are attempting to claim there is a “moderate Taliban.” The term “moderate Taliban” is an oxymoron in itself. Once again we are making deals and compromising the very definition of the “universal human dignity” in order to be “sensitive” towards the demands of perpetrators of genocide. Read more here...

Source: Islam Watch



Friday, February 27, 2009

Does Freedom of Religion in America Cover Jihad?

No Gihad
By Dave Gaubatz

I believe Americans are extremely frustrated about a number of things, including the sad state of our national security and the declining economic situation. They are rightly concerned about their children’s future. They are losing interest in socialism taking over the news media. Many I have talked with no longer want to listen, read, or watch people ranting about how our country is secure. They are annoyed with the news headlines that focus on ladies who have eight babies and the multi-year “Aruba case.”

Americans have little patience and want people who “allegedly” know the situation our country is currently in to come to the point and fix the problem, not respond to incidents after they have happened. A good example of this is the manhunt for the former student of a high school in Georgia who allegedly has a gun. This is a legitimate concern, but the threat is 100 times higher within just a few miles of many schools throughout America. (A hint to law enforcement: Go to any inner city school in the U.S. and within a mile in any direction, there are gang members with guns.) Instead of locking down the school, it would be safer for the children to immediately be removed and allow their parents to protect them. The last tactic that should be tried is to have hundreds of students in a school surrounded by hundreds of armed law enforcement officers and possibly a student with a gun. There is more chance of students being harmed in crossfire by staying than if they left the school. Read more ...

Source: Family Security Matters

Tuesday, February 24, 2009

Malaysia: Constitutional guarantee of freedom of religion "doesn't apply" to Muslims who want to leave Islam

Malaysia
Why? Muslims in Malaysia are subject to sharia law. None of those secular shenanigans apply. It is an instructive case for Western countries pondering or already embarking down the slippery slope of granting legal legitimacy to sharia rulings within their borders: Are constitutional liberties really preserved when an "alternative" system does not guarantee freedom of conscience and other freedoms unequivocally?

The question is valid even when sharia is not as officially compulsory as it is in Malaysia: Social and familial pressures are just as likely to make the idea of the "choice" of systems a farce and work against the people most in need of the legal protections of the non-sharia system. Read more ...

Source: Jihad Watch

What Should Be the Punishment for Apostasy (Leaving Islam)?

I am a Muslim
There is no compulsion in religion; anyone is free to leave Islam
Apostasy should be a punishable offence
Death sentence is the only just punishment for apostasy

I am not a Muslim
There is no compulsion in religion; anyone is free to leave Islam
Apostasy should be a punishable offence
Death sentence is the only just punishment for apostasy





Saturday, December 27, 2008

No reason to legalize other religions in Maldives - Abdul Majeed

Abdul Majeed
There is simply no reason why religions other than Islam are legalized in Maldives and that every effort will be made to protect the country’s Islamic identity and unity, Islamic Affairs Minister Abdul Majeed Bari has said.

Minister Abdul Majeed made the statement briefing the media on the work accomplished by his ministry at press room Fansavees / Dharubaaruge on Monday.

Briefing the media Sheikh Abdul Majeed revealed US Ambassador to Maldives Robert Blake during his recent visit to Maldives met him and inquired on the state of religious unity in the country.

Minister Abdul Majeed informed that he told US Ambassador Blake that there is simply no reason to allow other religions in the country as Maldives was a very unique country where all citizens are Muslims. He further said he told the Ambassador that the present status quo can only be changed by the People’s Majlis and that he believed Majlis will not want to give such an opportunity.

Islamic minister further revealed that Ambassador Blake pledged assistance to develop human resources to further advance religious activities.

Minister further revealed that religious freedom is usually practiced in countries where the citizens practice a many religions but as country, Maldives people follow Islam and all its citizens are Muslims and as such a freedom must not be allowed.

He said foreigners may practice there religions in the privacy of their rooms but that practices should not be carried out in public places.

Source: Miadhu News

Submission

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

"Western liberties - freedom of conscience, freedom of religion ... are increasingly threatened by a growing deference to the laws of Islam"

West
To the Editor:

I am responding to Editor Marc Charisse’s column about my work, a column I found striking for its mud-slinging crudity. In Charisse’s words, my work, the product of careful research and reporting, may be summed up thus: West “never met a Muslim she didn’t hate.” There is no more apt word than “grotesque” to describe such an irresponsible and flippant mischaracterization of my weekly column, which very often grapples with the terrible, largely unspoken reality that Western liberties—freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, freedom of expression, equality before the law, including women’s rights and the rights of non-Muslims—are increasingly threatened by a growing deference to the laws of Islam. To underscore my point, I don’t write about “Muslims.” I write about Islam, the supremacist ideology constructed on laws (sharia) that justify censorship, repression, violence, inequality, and even maiming and murder of those whom the sharia leaves voiceless and powerless: dissenters, Muslim apostates, non-Muslims and women. I write about its agents—violent jihadists as well as soft jihadists, all of whom are working to extend the rule of this law across the non-Muslim world. And I write about politically correct non-Muslims who, as a public point of what is hailed as tolerance and inclusiveness have surrendered their common sense, their courage and, increasingly, their countries to the advance of this Islamic law.

“Pull the plug” on me if you like. But do not slander me or my work as a manifestation of hatred toward individuals. If anything, it is a manifestation of fear—fear that our liberties are not just under assault but have already been diminished, and are destined for still more restriction in that “sharp new subtext” Charisse says the recent presidential election has added “to the subject of Muslims.” Whatever that means.

I’ll take Charisse’s assessment of my work as “confrontational” as a compliment, even if he didn’t mean it that way. After all, what columnist worth his space, from Paul Krugman to Pat Buchanan, isn’t confrontational? But as for branding my ideas as “inappropriate” and “out of place”—well, isn’t that less the language of an American newsroom than an old Soviet politbureau?

Diana West

Source: Diana West
H/T: Jihad Watch

Submission

Sunday, June 22, 2008

Supreme Council Bans Hassan Saeed's Book

Hassan Saeed
By Judith Evans

[Maldives] - The government's Supreme Council of Islamic Affairs has banned a book co-authored by former attorney general and presidential candidate Dr Hassan Saeed, Freedom Of Religion, Apostasy and Islam, on the grounds that it "violates Islamic principles".

It is the first time the Council has banned a specific title since a short-lived bar on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 2005, which was retracted a week later.

The ban was requested by the Islamic Democratic Party (IDP), which has now called for Saeed to stand down as a presidential candidate – but denies its action was politically motivated. Read more ...

Source: Minivan News
Dr. Hassan Saeed
Latest recipient of The MASH Award


MASH Award

Thursday, January 31, 2008

More than 50 Bahá’ís get prison terms for talking about their faith

Tehran (AsiaNews/Agencies) – Iran yesterday sentenced three Baha'i to four years in jail for security offences after being convicted of propaganda against the political system and proselytism in the southern city of Shiraz under the pretext of helping the poor. Another 51 were given a year in prison with suspended sentences handed condition they attend courses by state propaganda officials, judiciary spokesman Ali Reza Jamshidi said.

The Bahá’í religion was founded in 1863 by a Persian aristocrat who came to be known as the Bahá'u'lláh and who saw himself as a new prophet along the lines of Moses, Jesus and Muhammad. This was in direct violation of the Islamic claim that Muhammad was the last of the prophets. Read more ...

Source: Asia News
H/T: Dhimmi Watch

FEEDJIT Live Traffic Feed

Followers

Copyright Muslims Against Sharia 2008. All rights reserved. E-mail: info AT ReformIslam.org
Stop Honorcide!



Latest Recipients of
The Dhimmi Award
Dr. Phil
George Casey


The Dhimmi Award


Previous Recipients of
The Dhimmi Award




Latest Recipient of the
World-Class Hypocrite Award
Mainstream Media


World-Class Hypocrite Award


Previous Recipients of the
World-Class Hypocrite Award




Latest Recipient of the
MASH Award
Dr. Arash Hejazi


MASH Award


Previous Recipients of the
MASH Award




Latest Recipient of the
Yellow Rag Award
CNN


Yellow Rag Award


Previous Recipients of the
Yellow Rag Award




Latest Recipient of
The Face of Evil Award
Nidal Malik Hasan


The Face of Evil Award


Previous Recipients of
The Face of Evil Award




Latest Recipients of the
Distinguished Islamofascist Award
ADC, CAIR, MAS


Distinguished Islamofascist Award


Previous Recipients of the
Distinguished Islamofascist Award




Latest Recipient of the
Goebbels-Warner Award
ISNA


Goebbels-Warner Award


Previous Recipients of the
Goebbels-Warner Award




Muslm Mafia



Latest Recipient of the
Evil Dumbass Award
Somali Pirates


Evil Dumbass Award


Previous Recipients of the
Evil Dumbass Award




Insane P.I. Bill Warner
Learn about
Anti-MASH
Defamation Campaign

by Internet Thugs




Latest Recipient of the
Retarded Rabbi Award
Shmuley Boteach


Retarded Rabbi Award


Previous Recipients of the
Retarded Rabbi Award




Latest Recipient of the
Mad Mullah Award
Omar Bakri Muhammed


Mad Mullah Award


Previous Recipients of the
Mad Mullah Award




Stop Sharia Now!
ACT! For America




Latest Recipient of the
Demented Priest Award
Desmond Tutu


Demented Priest Award


Previous Recipients of the
Demented Priest Award




Egyptian Gaza Initiative

Egyptian Gaza




Note: majority of users who have posting privileges on MASH blog are not MASH members. Comments are slightly moderated. MASH does not necessarily endorse every opinion posted on this blog.



HONORARY MEMBERS
of

Muslims Against Sharia
Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury
Hasan Mahmud

ANTI-FASCISTS of ISLAM
Prominent.Moderate.Muslims
Tewfik Allal
Ali Alyami & Center for Democracy and Human Rights in Saudi Arabia
Zeyno Baran
Brigitte Bardet
Dr. Suliman Bashear
British Muslims
for Secular Democracy

Center for Islamic Pluralism
Tarek Fatah
Farid Ghadry &
Reform Party of Syria

Dr. Tawfik Hamid
Jamal Hasan
Tarek Heggy
Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser &
American Islamic
Forum for Democracy

Sheikh Muhammed Hisham
Kabbani & Islamic
Supreme Council of America

Sayed Parwiz Kambakhsh
Nibras Kazimi
Naser Khader &
The Association
of Democratic Muslims

Mufti Muhammedgali Khuzin
Shiraz Maher
Irshad Manji
Salim Mansur
Maajid Nawaz
Sheikh Prof. Abdul Hadi Palazzi
& Cultural Institute of the
Italian Islamic Community and
the Italian Muslim Assembly

Arifur Rahman
Raheel Raza
Imad Sa'ad
Secular Islam Summit
Mohamed Sifaoui
Mahmoud Mohamed Taha
Amir Taheri
Ghows Zalmay
Supna Zaidi &
Islamist Watch /
Muslim World Today /
Council For Democracy And Tolerance
Prominent ex-Muslims
Ayaan Hirsi Ali
Magdi Allam
Zachariah Anani
Nonie Darwish
Abul Kasem
Hossain Salahuddin
Kamal Saleem
Walid Shoebat
Ali Sina & Faith Freedom
Dr. Wafa Sultan
Ibn Warraq

Defend Freedom of Speech

ISLAMIC FASCISTS
Islamists claiming to be Moderates
American Islamic Group
American Muslim Alliance
American Muslim Council
Al Hedayah Islamic Center (TX)
BestMuslimSites.com
Canadian Islamic Congress
Canadian Muslim Union
Council on American-Islamic Relations
Dar Elsalam Islamic Center (TX)
DFW Islamic Educational Center, Inc. (TX)
Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (Closed)
Ed Husain & Quilliam Foundation
Islamic Association for Palestine (Closed)
Islamic Association of Tarrant County (TX)
Islamic Center of Charlotte (NC) & Jibril Hough
Islamic Center of Irving (TX)
Islamic Circle of North America
Islamic Cultural Workshop
Islamic Society of Arlington (TX)
Islamic Society of North America
Masjid At-Taqwa
Muqtedar Khan
Muslim American Society
Muslim American Society of Dallas (TX)
Muslim Arab Youth Association (Closed)
Muslim Council of Britain
Muslims for Progressive Values
Muslim Public Affairs Council
Muslim Public Affairs Council (UK)
Muslim Students Association
National Association of Muslim Women
Yusuf al Qaradawi
Wikio - Top Blogs