The next step in British Dhimmitude:
Amnah is a modern British Muslim. She is dressed in a denim skirt and her head is covered in a hijab. Poised and self-assured, she has come to meet Dr Suhaib Hasan, a silver-bearded sheikh who sits behind his desk, surrounded by religious books. “But why would I have to observe the waiting period?” she asks him. “What are the reasons?” There is an urgency to her questions.
Dr Suhaib Hasan: ‘We want to offer sharia law to Britain'”
Dr Suhaib Hasan is pushing for personal sharia law to be integrated into the British legal system.
‘These reasons don’t apply to me, that’s what I’m very confused about. If you could give me the reasons why I have to wait three months, then I’ll understand.” Amnah is going through a divorce and is baffled at being told that she must wait for three months to remarry, considering that she hasn’t seen her estranged husband for two years.
She twists her sock-clad toes into the carpet, grasping one hand with the other in her lap, and fixes Dr Hasan with an intense look.
He meets this with a simple reply: “These rulings are all in the Koran. The rulings are made for all.”
Amnah has little choice but to comply: Dr Hasan is a judge, and this is a sharia court – in east London. It sits, innocuously, at the end of a row of terrace houses in Leyton: a converted corner shop, with blinds on the windows, office- style partitions and a makeshift reception area.
It is one of dozens of sharia courts – also known as councils – that have been set up in mosques, Islamic centres and even schools across Britain. The number of British Muslims using the courts is increasing.
To many in the West, talk of sharia law conjures up images of the floggings, stonings, amputations and beheadings carried out in hardline Islamic states such as Saudi Arabia and Iran. However, the form practised in Britain is more mundane, focusing mainly on marriage, divorce and financial disputes.
For now, that is….
The judgments of the courts have no basis in British law, and are therefore technically illegitimate – they are binding only in that those involved agree to comply. For British Muslims who are keen to follow Islam, this poses a dilemma. An Islamic marriage is not recognised by British law, and therefore many couples will have two ceremonies – civil for the state, and Islamic for their faith.
How long will it be before it’s integrated into the British legal system?
……Dr Hasan, who is also a spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain on issues of sharia law, says there is great misunderstanding of the issue in the West.
“Whenever people associate the word ‘sharia’ with Muslims, they think it is flogging and stoning to death and cutting off the hand,” he says with a smile. He makes the distinction between the aspects of law that sharia covers: worship, penal law, and personal law. Muslim leaders in Britain are interested only in integrating personal law, he says.
“Penal law is the duty of the Muslim state – it is not in the hands of any public institution like us to handle it. Only a Muslim government that believes in Islam is going to implement it. So there is no question of asking for penal law to be introduced here in the UK – that is out of the question.”
Despite this, Dr Hasan is open in supporting the severe punishments meted out in countries where sharia law governs the country. “Even though cutting off the hands and feet, or flogging the drunkard and fornicator, seem to be very abhorrent, once they are implemented, they become a deterrent for the whole society.
“This is why in Saudi Arabia, for example, where these measures are implemented, the crime rate is very, very, low,” he told The Sunday Telegraph.
The problem is, the punitive amputations and beatings are given out for relatively minor infractions. Women bear the brunt of the draconian system, simply because of gender. You don’t see any muslim men getting castrated for rape or incurring severe prison sentences for sexual or physical assaults against women, because that behavior is sanctioned by the Koran.
In a documentary to be screened on Channel 4 next month, entitled Divorce: Sharia Style, Dr Hasan goes further, advocating a sharia system for Britain.
“If sharia law is implemented, then you can turn this country into a haven of peace because once a thief’s hand is cut off nobody is going to steal,” he says.
“Once, just only once, if an adulterer is stoned nobody is going to commit this crime at all.
“We want to offer it to the British society. If they accept it, it is for their good and if they don’t accept it they’ll need more and more prisons.”
You mean, once the female ‘adulterer’ is stoned. Some “haven of peace”:
Or a female rape victim is stoned for ‘luring young men to sex’:
Wouldn’t it be a hoot if the women in that ‘culture’ stopped being doormats, rose up and engaged in a good old fashioned Biblical “cutting off the offending limb”?
These sentiments, and the vast cultural gulf they expose, alarm many in the West and go to the heart of the debate about the level of integration among Muslims living in Britain and their acceptance of British values.
Dr Hasan’s cause is not helped by the fact that, last December, he was named by the Policy Exchange think tank as being linked to a mosque, the Al-Tawhid in Leyton, east London, which was accused of propagating extremist literature – although the evidence for this has since been challenged.
Many are uncomfortable with the idea of linking sharia to civil law in Britain. In The Sunday Telegraph earlier this month, Michael Nazir-Ali, the Bishop of Rochester, wrote: “Attempts have been made to impose an “Islamic” character on certain areas…. There is pressure already to relate aspects of the sharia to civil law in Britain. To some extent this is already true of arrangements for sharia-compliant banking but have the far-reaching implications of this been fully considered?”
There are also issues around the Islamic approach to equality and human rights that make integration with British law problematic and contentious.
“The introduction of sharia law in Britain raises complex questions, as some of its basic tenets are incompatible with the fundamental principles of our liberal democracy and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,” says Baroness Cox, a leading human rights campaigner.
“There is no equality before the law between men and women and between Muslims and non-Muslims; and there is no freedom to choose and change religion.”
Ibrahim Mogra, chairman of the Muslim Council of Britain’s inter-faith committee, admits that to non-Muslims some laws may seem harsh on women. Those who are married to a man with a number of wives can be treated badly, for instance. But he insists that sharia is an equitable system.
……In fact, Sheikh Mogra argues that sharia in Britain would give rights to women. “A Muslim man can take a second wife under sharia law and treat her as he wants, knowing that she has no legal rights in Britain. It means that she is regarded as no more than a mistress and he can walk out on her when he wants.”
You mean like the “rights” proscribed in your Koran?:
Surah 4:34- “Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High, Exalted”
Surah 4:3 – A Muslim man can marry up to 4 women; a Muslim woman can have only one man.
Surah 2:229 – Men can ask for a divorce. Women can’t.
Surah 4:11 – A woman can only inherit half of what a man can
Surah 4:34 – Women cannot serve as imams, but they can’t even lead a prayer in front of men.
Surah 33:53 – A woman cannot answer the door at home if a husband is not there.
Surah 33:33 – Women should stay in their houses and not travel without permission of husband/fathers.
Surah 4:34 – A husband can beat a wife into submission if the wife refuses sexual relations.
Qur’an 2:228- “And it is for the women to act as they (the husbands) act by them, in all fairness; but the men are a step above them.
Critics warn, however, that in giving even parts of sharia law official status, Britain would be associating itself with a system that in many ways was intolerable according to Western values.
Gee, ya think???
Professor John Marks, author of The West, Islam and Islamism, points out that apostates from Islam can suffer severe punishment, even honour killings.
“There are more violent cases that are being related to people who choose to convert from Islam,” he says.
A survey by Policy Exchange found that 36 per cent of young British Muslims believed that a Muslim who converted to another religion should be “punished by death”.
“This clearly goes against the laws of our country. If they come to live in this country they should live by our laws,” says Prof Marks.
Well then you’d better stop them from superseding your laws, mate.
……Dr Muhammad Abdul Bari, the secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain, points out that during British rule in India, Muslim personal law was allowed to operate and sees no reason why it wouldn’t work now.
Sorry bub, India in no way compares to Britain. As bad as British rule was, they were a lot more lenient toward Islam than you would be under similar circumstances.
“Sharia encompasses all aspects of Muslim life including personal law,” he says. “In tolerant, inclusive societies all faith groups enjoy some acceptance of their religious rules in matters of their personal life.
Unfortunately the “religious rules” include beheading, “honor killings”, and planting bombs.
……Despite Amnah’s protestations and questioning, Dr Hasan goes on to explain that the methods and rules set out in the Koran are for very practical reasons. A recently divorced wife must wait three months to remarry to give enough time for her ex-husband to know that she is not carrying his child. “This is for all,” he says.
“There is no exception to this rule, in the sharia there is no exception, you have to accept it.”
He takes down a copy of the Koran from a shelf and points to the chapter and verse that spells out the lengths of iddat – the waiting period – in detailed terms.
There are different lengths for widows, for wives whose husbands have authorised the divorce and for wives whose husbands have not. There is even a rule for pre-pubescent girls.
Islam is diametrically opposed to a free society. Why should they be allowed to practice their brutal theocracy anywhere near a member of Western civilization? More and more we are witnessing the acquiescence of Democracy to Islamofascism.
Don’t believe it? Look no further than the legal battles being fought over freedom of speech when muslims get their panties in a wad over a perceived “offense” against their religion.
As we speak, author Mark Steyn is being hauled in front of a Canadian tribunal for daring to describe Islam by its evil nature in his book: “America Alone”.
Theo Van Gogh was stabbed to death in Denmark by a rabid muslim for making a documentary showing how abhorrently women are treated under Sharia Law.
Cartoonists, journalists, authors, and critics alike, have received death threats, been forced to hide, attacked physically, and even murdered for telling muslims what we already know:
Islam is a vile cesspool of rabid demagogues and butchers. It’s an execrable doctine depraved of any redeeming value.
“The Religion of Peace.com” ( http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/) site has a compilation of muslim atrocities–world-wide–against innocent people and those who dared to violate Islamic precepts. It’s graphic, no nonsense, and blunt. The photographic documentation of what they do to each other and non-muslims should be enough to get your blood boiling….unless you’re a member of C.A.I.R. or the ACLU.