Category Archives: Sharia

MEMRI Reports on Blasphemy Laws and Deaths

Special Dispatch No. 3159—Urdu-Pashtu Media Project

Human Rights Campaigner I. A. Rehman Examines Pakistan’s Controversial Blasphemy Law and Its Misuse Against Christians, Other Minorities

On July 19, 2010, two Christians, pastor Rashid Emmanuel and his brother Sajjad, were shot dead on the premises of a court in Pakistan’s Faisalabad city. The two had been accused of distributing blasphemous materials; a case had been filed against them under Section 295-C of the Pakistani Penal Code (PPP) for distributing handwritten pamphlets that contained blasphemous materials.

According to the report, the pamphlets carried two cellphone numbers which led to the brothers’ arrest, following a complaint lodged by one Khurram, who is believed to be member of the little known Tehreek-e-Hurmat-e-Rasool (Movement for the Prophet’s Dignity).

In another case, a 60-year-old woman, Zaibun Nisa or Zainab Bibi, spent 14 years in a Pakistani prison for an alleged act of blasphemy against the Holy Koran, though no court trial took place and no police case was filed against her. The Lahore High Court, which ordered her release after no evidence was found against her, expressed dismay over her long detention “without any trial.” The woman was also found to be mentally unstable.

The cases cited above have caused fresh concerns over Pakistan’s controversial blasphemy laws. One of them, Section 295-C, carries the death penalty.

In most blasphemy cases, Pakistan’s trial courts in Pakistan cannot deliver impartial judgments because of threats from armed religious groups, and sometimes even from vigilante policemen, who take it upon themselves to implement their own form of instant justice against the accused. The blasphemy laws have also attracted international attention, especially for their misuse against minority communities in Pakistan such as Christians, Hindus and Ahmadi Muslims.

Several human rights campaigners and members of minority communities have demanded changes in these laws. However, no Pakistani minister wants to risk his life by introducing such legislation.

Read the full report

Advertisements

Sharia Blasphemy Laws Enforced Against Opponents of NYC Mega Mosque

An article on Atlas Shrugs is reproduce in full below.

SIOA LAWSUIT AGAINST NYC: BLOOMBERG’S MTA REFUSES TO ALLOW 911 IMAGES: BANS GROUND ZERO BUS CAMPAIGN

Today we filed a lawsuit against the city of New York. Here is the complaint: Download Complaint–FDIvMTA–Filed_Stamped

The city has refused to run my SIOA “Preservation of Ground Zero” bus campaign.

It seems that Mayor Bloomberg invokes certain freedoms when it serves his 2012 agenda. Doing away with term limits wasn’t enough (which is why we are still suffering under his no-salt, no-transfat regime). He  is now widening his ayatollah-like power grab to imposing blasphemy laws (Islamic sharia laws) on the secular marketplace. Bloomberg’s frenzied Ground Zero mosque push may have inspired Al-Azhar clerics to oppose the Ground Zero Mosque, calling it a “a zionist plot.”

Last month, I signed a contract with CBS Outdoor to run a “Preservation of Ground Zero” bus ad campaign. The campaign was paid for in full.

Here is the ad I submitted:

Ground zero bus

The ad was refused. I asked on what grounds. CBS Outdoor told me that the city said that “images of 911 were not allowed.” I was floored. I said, “It is American history. How can it be banned? What about Pearl Harbor? Is that censored too?” I said, “On what grounds is 911 images banned?” It is unconscionable. Will of CBS said, “You can’t run the plane.”

I asked CBS/MTA to provide me with the guidelines for these seventh-century censorship restrictions. They never did. And so, with the help of talented and singular Big Fur Hat, I removed the plane and submitted this ad with the following note:

Will, Still waiting for the MTA guidelines. Please respond to my previous queries. Here is the new art …… please know that I strenuously object to you changing my artwork and my message in the process. It’s American history. I am floored. However, since you and/or the MTA are unwilling to change your position, I have no choice but to run the advertisement with your edits.

Ground zero noplane

CBS refused this ad as well. They said I had to remove the smoke. “The smoke?”

When I spoke to CBS’s representative concerning the second rejection of my Ground Zero bus ad, he said that the MTA “doesn’t want toassociate the new building with Ground Zero.” The showing of the burning buildings “hurts people.” “Hurts people?” I find bus ads proselytizing for Islam hurts apostates, are you going to take those bus ads down?

I said, “Are you saying images of the largest attack on American soil are censored? Are Pearl Harbor images censored? Gettysburg,too?”

He said, “The people behind the new building say it has nothing to do with Ground Zero.” I said, “So what? That’s what they say. Others think differently. You are telling me they have said it has nothing to do with Ground Zero. But they are on record repeatedly as saying they want it there for Ground Zero ‘healing’ and ‘outreach.'”

I said, “Who cares what they say, what do they (Imam Rauf and Daisy Khan) have to do with running my ad? They dictate what can and cannot run?”

He said, “It’s controversial.” I said, “How? Where are the guidelines that point to this, where are the guidelines that I have been asking for over a month? Give me the guidelines and I will adhere to them.”

He said “I have been having a hard time getting the guidelines out of the MTA.” I said, “A hard time? Aren’t they written somewhere or posted somewhere? What are they?”

I said, “Andw hat’s controversial? The ad merely says, ‘Why there?'” He said, “You are implying………..” I said, “Implying what? You are now going to tell me what I am thinking? Who is making these decisions? Who at the MTA or CBS is making these decisions? The MTA is a government agency — and you can’t provide me with guidelines but I am being held hostage to the capricious whim of some flak at the MTA? I am an advertiser. I bought and paid for an ad a month ago and you cannot point me to any substance or set of rules for the basis of ad rejection.”

I said, “I took out the plane as requested — now what’s the problem?” He said, “the flames.”  I said, “What would be ok? Just the towers alone?” He said yes. I said “OK, I will create another ad with just the towers.” He said, “Before you do that, let me run down the hall and ask if that’s OK.” I said, “With who?” He said, with “his VP.”

And so I took out the smoke and submitted this ad:

Ground zero bus ad no smoke

CBS, on behalf of the MTA, said, “Remove the plane.”

Will of CBS said he was “meeting obstacles” but he was “trying to help me.” He said, “Get me an ad a/s/a/p without smoke, without any flames — just the towers.

And so, I submitted another planeless ad, stating emphatically,

I object to this censorship, which is effectively editing the viewpoint I am attempting to express in my message, but if this is the only choice you are giving me, then run the ad without the plane. It’s a plane in the sky, far removed. Planes do fly in the sky.”

Ground zero bus last art

Needless to say, I am still awaiting approval from the MTA.

Today my legal team of David Yerushalmi and Robert Muise filed suit on our behalf against NYC.

The complaint against the New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority has now been filed. It alleges violation of FDI’s (and Pamela Geller’s and Robert Spencer’s) Free Speech rights under the First & Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

In essence, and it is laid out clearly in the complaint with clear illustrations in the exhibits, the MTA decided that it was going to accept the “viewpoint” of Imam Rauf and his Islamist co-conspirators – to wit, that their plan to develop the Ground Zero Mosque has nothing to do with marking the “victory” marked by the destruction of human life and property on 9-11. Literally, the MTA made it its business to decide which of many viewpoints it would deem politically correct speech for advertisements on its buses.

What makes this jihad against free speech so egregious is that the MTA has run any number of controversial religious andpolitical ads without batting an eyelid. But as soon as the Shariah-faithful cowed Mayor Bloomberg and the MTA into dhimmi-like submission, the First Amendment to the Constitution gave way to Shariah’s blasphemy laws. How long before the Mayor’s office begins issuing fatwas against those who dare counter the “noble and peaceful outreach” narrative?

Mr. Mayor and your colleagues at the MTA and the Landmark Commission: New Yorkers will not forget 9-11 and we will not be cowed into submission or silence. You might not want to hear our voices, but the federal courts will require you to listen. You claim the mantle of the Constitution as a basis for supporting a Shariah-Islamist mosque at Ground Zero, yet the MTA—a government agency of the City—cavalierly denies “infidels” freedom of speech. Enough is enough. (David Yerushalmi)

Aisha Suffers Horrific Punishment Under Taliban

It’s difficult to imagine this kind of cruelty.  Such is life under the Taliban.

Suffering Under Cruel Muslim Men

“The Taliban pounded on the door just before midnight, demanding that Aisha, 18, be punished for running away from her husband’s house. Her in-laws treated her like a slave, Aisha pleaded. They beat her. If she hadn’t run away, she would have died. Her judge, a local Taliban commander, was unmoved. Aisha’s brother-in-law held her down while her husband pulled out a knife. First he sliced off her ears. Then he started on her nose.”  Read more

Thanks to the Wichita chapter leaders for sharing this story with me.

Court Finds Rapist "Not Guilty" Because of His Islamic Beliefs and Practices!!!

Do you think sharia is not creeping into American culture?  This case removes all doubt.  A New Jersey Judge acknowledges that a Muslim man violated New Jersey laws, but rules “not guilty” on the grounds that he was operating under his beliefs and consistent with his practices.

Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch provides some of the theological justification from Islamic authoritative sources for a Muslim man raping his wife:

Muhammad said: “If a husband calls his wife to his bed [i.e. to have sexual relation] and she refuses and causes him to sleep in anger, the angels will curse her till morning” (Bukhari 4.54.460).

He also said: “By him in Whose Hand lies my life, a woman can not carry out the right of her Lord, till she carries out the right of her husband. And if he asks her to surrender herself [to him for sexual intercourse] she should not refuse him even if she is on a camel’s saddle” (Ibn Majah 1854).

First to report on this case was Eugene Volokh of  The Volokh Conspiracy, a blog written mainly by law professors.  Volokh writes:

While recognizing that defendant had engaged in sexual relations with plaintiff against her expressed wishes … the judge did not find sexual assault or criminal sexual conduct to have been proven.

The judge’s reasoning according to court records:

This court does not feel that, under the circumstances, that this defendant had a criminal desire to or intent to sexually assault or to sexually contact the plaintiff when he did. The court believes that he was operating under his belief that it is, as the husband, his desire to have sex when and whether he wanted to, was something that was consistent with his practices and it was something that was not prohibited.

The judge needs a good proof reader, but that’s beside the point. The judge really needs to reject the free exercise of religious beliefs and practices WHEN DOING SO HARMS ANOTHER HUMAN BEING OR OTHERWISE BREAKS THE LAWS OF THE LAND!

Thank God for the appeals process because this sharia-loving judge was overruled by a higher court, who stated:

As the judge recognized, the case thus presents a conflict between the criminal law and religious precepts. In resolving this conflict, the judge determined to except defendant from the operation of the State’s statutes as the result of his religious beliefs. In doing so, the judge was mistaken (emphasis mine).

America Patriot and member of ACT! for America.

Give Islam Freedom of Treason?

I happened to catch a Fox News contributer this morning stating his opinion about the NYC Mega Mosque.  In essence, he said we cannot forsake the Constitution and Freedom of Religion and that’s why we shouldn’t forbid the building of the 13 story Mosque near Ground Zero.

While we should never abandon the principles of our Constitution and Freedom of Religion, we should never permit organized treason to operate freely on our soil.  Missed on many loving, tolerant Americans is that Islam contains doctrines, which mandate the overthrow of non-Muslim governments and the imposition of sharia (Islam expressed in a set of laws).

If Islam was limited to religious beliefs and behaviors surrounding prayer and good moral character, there would be no objection to the NYC Monster Mosque.  If Islam were so limited, it would be true that a very small number of radicals have taken over a world religion.  Unfortunately, Islam is not limited to piety as we understand it.

From the primary sources of Islam, the Qur’an (statements by Allah)  & Hadith (records of Islamic history, including the teachings and example of Muhammad) come principles, or doctrines, which radically differ from the typical Western understanding of religion.  The prophet Muhammad is the highest example for Muslims to emulate and his example included prayer, but also militant conquest of people groups and the subjugation of the conquered to Islamic rule.

The political nature of Islam is missed on the vast majority of Americans.  The political nature of Islam is the reason why there have been bloody boarders around Muslim controlled land for Islam’s 1400 year history.  We oppose the political side of Islam, which cannot be divorced from the whole of Islam without severe damage to the example of the revered prophet and the supposed commands of Allah.

You cannot change the Qur’an and authoritative Hadith.  You will never see the eradication of fundamentalist Islam so long as these books are preached.

We recognize and loath “terrorist groups” like Hamas, Hizballah, Al Quaeda, the talaban, …  We do not yet recognize the larger number of like-minded Muslims, who use politics and the courts to wage the same war for the same ultimate objectives – imposing sharia on non-Muslim nations.

Leading Muslims like Imam Fiesel Rauf, who is spearheading the NYC Monster Mosque, do not use bombs as terrorists proudly do in the name of Allah, but they are engaged in the same jihad, and are inspired by the same Qur’an.

It is critical that we learn that Muslim leaders like Rauf are skilled at deceiving the societies in which they fight.  Rauf and his ilk speak soothingly about mutual understanding, reconciliation and peace, while concealing the fact that they strive for Allah and the establishment of sharia in the USA!

The more we understand about the political side of Islam, and especially the theologically justified tactics for conquering non-Muslim lands, the more we will resist Islam as we would resit Nazism, or any other ideologically driven political movement that seeks to overthrow our government and our freedoms.

Freedom of religion? Yes! Freedom of treason? NO!

See a Collection of Articles on this blog, explaining the Need to Refuse the Proposed 13 Story Mosque at Ground Zero and why your won’t have the least bit of guilt for denying the ‘Freedom of Religious Expression’ to committed political jihadists.

Apostasy Fatwas of Shaykh Sa‘id Hijjawi: former Grand Mufti of Jordon and prominent signatory of "A Common Word Between Us and You"

The Grand Mufti’s Fatwas:

🙂   Grand Hypocrite, Grand Liar, Grand Muslim   🙂

This post provides the main points of the apostasy fatwas written by the chief scholar of the Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute, Shaykh Sa‘id Hijjawi.  More bio info can be found here.

Shaykh Said Hijjawi is one of the leading jurists of the Middle East and has participated in high-level, international interfaith dialogue meetings with Christians.  The Shaykh is a prominent signatory to the open letter, A Common Word Between Us and You, which is addressed to Christians around the world.

Many Christians perceive Islamic outreach to the Western world, like A Common Word, as a good faith effort toward reconciliation between the two faiths.  Others of us have become knowledgeable of sharia and are quite skeptical of such publicized ‘outreach efforts’ from Islamic leaders. Given his written fatwas, calling for the death of former Muslims, we perceive the Grand Shaykh to be a Great Fake.

The following is an excerpt from an article by Mark Durie:   Verses of the Qur’an, as well as hadiths (traditions) of Muhammad are cited by the Grand Mufti to support his rulings: some of these authorities are reproduced below.The pronoun ‘he’ is used to refer to the apostate (a Muslim, who rejects Islam), following the Arabic, although the penalties apply to both men and women):

Whoever desires a religion other than Islam, it shall not be acceptedfrom him and in the Hereafter he shall be among the losers. (Sura 3:58)

  • Apostasy must be proved by the actions or declarations of belief of the apostate.
  • To be declared an apostate, someone must be an adult (having attained puberty), and be in their right mind.
  • Someone who is coerced to renounce Islam overtly, while remaining a believer in their heart, cannot be declared to be an apostate:

Whoever disbelieves in God after [having affirmed] his faith — except for him who is compelled, while his heart is at rest in faith — but he who opens up his breast to unbelief, upon such shall be wrath from God, and there is a great chastisement for them. (Sura 16:106)

  • Before an apostate is sentenced, he must be invited to repent and come back to Islam:

Say to the disbelievers, that if they desist, that which is past will be forgiven them; but if they return, the way of [dealing with] the ancients has already gone before! (Sura 8:38)

  • The punishment for apostasy is death, mandated by Allah when he said ‘sedition (fitna) is graver than slaying’:

They ask you about the sacred month, and fighting in it. Say, ‘Fighting in it is a grave thing; but to bar from God’s way, and disbelief in Him, and the Sacred Mosque, and to expel its people from it – that is graver in God’s sight; and sedition is graver than slaying.’ They will not cease to fight against you until they turn you from your religion if they are able; and whoever of you turns from his religion, and dies disbelieving – their works have failed in this world and the Hereafter. Those are the inhabitants of the Fire, abiding therein. (Sura 2:217)

  • The death penalty is also supported by clear sayings of Muhammad (hadiths):
  • The prophet said ‘Whoever changes his religion, kill him.’
  • Muhammad gave three reasons for which the killing of a Muslim is a legal act: infidelity after belief, adultery after marriage, and murder (defined as the illegal killing of another).
  • The sentence for apostasy must be passed by the Muslim ruler.

If the apostate is not put to death, other rules apply:

  1. His marriage is annulled by virtue of his apostasy.
  2. He cannot inherit the wealth of any of his relatives – whether they are Muslims or not – because the apostate is legally regarded as dead.
  3. None of his actions after apostasy has any legal validity (as the apostate is a legal non-person).
  4. An apostate cannot be remarried, whether to a Muslim or a non-Muslim.
  5. He cannot be a guardian for anyone else, so he loses custody of his children, and an apostate father has no say over his daughters’ marriages.

Those who wait in watch for you, and, if a victory comes to you from God, say, ‘Were we not with you?’ but if the disbelievers have some luck, they say, ‘Did we not gain mastery over you, and did we not defend you against the believers?’ God will judge between you on the Day of Resurrection, and God will never grant the disbelievers a way over the believers. (Sura 4:141)

  • An apostate must not be prayed for by Muslims after their death, and must not be buried in a Muslim cemetery.
  • If a male apostate repents and comes back to Islam, and wishes to resume his marriage, he must remarry his wife with a new ceremony, and provide a new dowry for her.
  • The apostate’s wealth and possessions are to be entailed upon an heir. If the apostate repents and returns to Islam, he receives his wealth back. If he dies while still apostate, his wealth is inherited by his Muslim heir, but only the amount which he had at the time of his apostasy. Any wealth which has accrued after he left Islam is considered fay (and thus the collective property of the Muslim community).

Mark’s entire article can be read here.

Will Muslim Leaders Let Former Muslims Live?

Group asks American Muslim leaders nationwide to repudiate Sharia’s requirement to execute Muslim apostates.

The group, Former Muslims United, has developed a document they call the “Muslim Pledge for Religious Freedom and Safety from Harm for Former Muslims” or The Freedom Pledge. Muslim leaders are receiving the pledge with a request that they sign and return it.

The document cites eight different sources to establish the fact that mainstream Islam includes doctrines requiring apostates to be executed.  Here’s just one example:

All four schools of Sunni Islamic law… as well as the other main schools of Shia Islamic law… unanimously agree that a former Muslim male, also known as an apostate, must be executed. While some hold that an apostate woman should also be executed.

Interesting isn’t it?  A majority of the most dedicated and knowledgeable members of the ‘religion of peace and tolerance’ advocate murdering the ones, who part with Islam, and yet many would claim that I am the one scaring people and using hate speech!

To what are the Islamic leaders being asked to agree?  Stated at the bottom of the pledge is:

I renounce, repudiate and oppose any physical intimidation, or worldly and corporal punishment, of apostates from Islam, in whatever way that punishment may be determined or carried out by myself or any other Muslim including the family of the apostate, community, Mosque leaders, Shariah court or judge, and Muslim government or regime.