This is a cross-post by Lucy Lips from Harry’s Place
****
We have been entertained, over the last few days, by the spectacle of one nutter – with the assistance of the Crown Prosecution Service – hauling a couple of other nutters through the courts, at the taxpayers’ expense.
Few of you will have missed the court case, in which two “born again Christians” were accused by a woman who had very recently ‘reverted’ to Islam – having passed through various other religions – of having committed the offence of “religiously aggravated assault”.
When all the evidence was in, what seemed to have happened was this. Ms Vernon, the complainant, turned up to breakfast one morning dressed in a hijab. Mr and Mrs Vogelenzang, the defendants, rather rudely took the piss. Ms Kazi responded with some fruity language about her “tits” and “backside”. The group then engaged in robust debate on the subject of Mohammed’s military record, and Jesus’ divine or prophetic status.
I expect that the scene was rather like this:
The case demonstrates the wisdom of the maxim: never discuss religion or politics at the dinner table.
I’d never initiate an argument with a religious person over their style of dress, or choice of beliefs – but then it is difficult to know who started it. (Yes, yes, I know, “they” invaded Andalusia, ect ect ect)
As nutty as I think the Vogelenzangs – and the Christian Institute which backed them – are, I should never have heard about this incident. It was a private matter. It is very difficult to see why this case was ever brought to court. The judge was quite right to throw it out.
Now, let’s see what the so-called Islamic Human Rights Commission has to say about this trial. Surprise surprise! It turns out that this front group for the Islamic Republic of Iran was behind the case:
UK – IHRC shocked at acquittal decision; verdict highlights failings in the system
IHRC is shocked at the decision to acquit Mr and Mrs Vogelenzang. IHRC feels that the conflation of terrorism with Islam popularized by mainstream politicians and the mainstream media has created fertile breeding ground for anti-Muslim sentiment.
…
Mrs. Tazi commented on the verdict saying ‘I have no faith in the system as a Muslim.’
IHRC has supported her throughout her case and will continue to support her and many others in her situation who bear the brunt of discrimination based on religion.
IHRC Chair Massoud Shadjareh states:
“Mr. and Mrs Vogelenzang acted out of hatred which is a reflection of the anti-Muslim sentiment in popular discourse. This acquittal indicates that such hatred has become acceptable. The verdict sets a bad precedent as Muslims will further lose faith in the system.”
First of all, it is notable that the IHRC has been so quick off the mark to condemn the English legal system for acquitting the Vogelenzangs. They have, after all, had nothing to say about the murder, rape and torture of thousands of Iranian pro-democracy protestors in Iran. Eventually, they came up with this. Precisely what you’d expect from a Khomeinist front organisation.
Secondly, although parts of the tabloid press certainly do encourage anti-Muslim bigotry, the IHRC’s objection to the “conflation of terrorism with Islam” is quite remarkable.
The IHRC itself is guilty of conflating Islam with terrorism. They do it repeatedly and vocally.
Here are a few examples.
Last month, they toured around British universities, the Achmad Cassiem, a Nelson Mandela-hater who the US State Department identified as the founder of a post-Apartheid Islamist terrorist organisation, Qibla/PAGAD.
They campaign for the “blind Sheikh”, Omar Abdel Rahman, who was the spiritual leader of the first WTC bombers. IHRC calls (pdf) for his release and asks Muslims to pray for him.
They’re campaigning for a cop-killer and Black Panther called H Rap Brown. Why? Because he has converted to Islam in prison.
The stage, each year, the Khomeinist “Al Quds Day” march, at which speakers and participants – from extremist groups including Hizb ut Tahrir – proclaim their support for Hamas and Hezbollah.
By contrast, when it comes to convicting British Muslims who engage in terrorism – well, IHRC chairman Massoud Shadjareh defends them. Here he is arguing that the conviction of Abu Hamza creates “an environment that can only further alienate the Muslim community”.
A group like the IHRC damages British Muslims, just as surely as the worst Daily Express headlines do. Yet, amazingly, they’re treated with respect. Last month, they were invited to Parliament to present to a select committee on the operation of Prevent. They’re against it.
Astonishing!
One Comment
The Shariah Law myth Invented by the Islamic sects
One of the biggest myth propagated by the Sunni/Shia sects is the so called Islamic state or Shariah Law. These sects have created a whole system of theocracy based on their hadiths and fiqh. The concept of the Shariah was formulated by Sunni jursits like Imam Malik and Imam Shafi during the beginnings of the Abbasid Empire. They have produced a whole jurisprudence in criminal laws and property laws and even family laws. They compiled thousands of hadiths from the prophet and his companions to formulate a theocracy and an orthodoxy. I said before the prophet never left behind him any text but the Koran. These hadiths were compiled at the earliest 160 years after Muhammad. The sects relied on some verses of the Koran to justify an Islamic state as they call it. Lets look at them:
5.48. To thee We sent the Scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety: so judge between them by what Allah hath revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the Truth that hath come to thee. To each among you have we prescribed a law and an open way. If Allah had so willed, He would have made you a single people, but (His plan is) to test you in what He hath given you: so strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to Allah. it is He that will show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute;
5.49. And this (He commands): Judge thou between them by what Allah hath revealed, and follow not their vain desires, but beware of them lest they beguile thee from any of that (teaching) which Allah hath sent down to thee. And if they turn away, be assured that for some of their crime it is Allah.s purpose to punish them. And truly most men are rebellious.
5.50. Do they then seek after a judgment of (the days of) ignorance? But who, for a people whose faith is assured, can give better judgment than Allah.
However lets look at the context of these verses in chapter 5.
43. But why do they come to thee for decision, when they have (their own) law before them(Torah)?- therein is the (plain) command of Allah. yet even after that, they would turn away. For they are not (really) People of Faith.
44. It was We who revealed the law (to Moses): therein was guidance and light. By its standard have been judged the Jews, by the prophets who bowed (as in Islam) to Allah.s will, by the rabbis and the doctors of law: for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah.s book, and they were witnesses thereto: therefore fear not men, but fear me, and sell not my signs for a miserable price. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) the Unbelievers.
45. We ordained therein for them: “Life for life, eye for eye, nose or nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth, and wounds equal for equal.” But if any one remits the retaliation by way of charity, it is an act of atonement for himself. And if any fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (No better than) wrong-doers.
46. And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the Law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah.
47. Let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel.
48. To thee We sent the Scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety: so judge between them by what Allah hath revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the Truth that hath come to thee. To each among you have we prescribed a law and an open way. If Allah had so willed, He would have made you a single people, but (His plan is) to test you in what He hath given you: so strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to Allah. it is He that will show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute
Here the Koran makes it clear that though the Koran, Gospel and OT are three different communities of believers, they are one in faith. There are believers among these communities and non believers. The Koran says each community should judge by the scriptures they inherited. Sunnis and Shias believe these scriptures(Torah and Gospel) have been abrogated and replaced by Muhammad and the Koran. Yet we see here clearly the Koran saying it confirmed the previous scriptures and says it must be followed and each community should follow its laws and commands. So how did the Sunnis solve this contradiction. Sunnis claim these verses are talking about how each community should practice its own shariah law in an Islamic state. Jews should live under Judaic law and Christians under Christian law. This was made to solve the minority problem in the so called Islamic state. They relied on this hadith to change the nature of these verses:
‘Abdullah bin ‘Umar, may Allah be pleased with them, reported:
A Jew and a Jewess, who had committed adultery, were brought to Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him). Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) came to the Jews and said: What do you find in Torah for those guilty of adultery? They said: We darken their faces and make them ride on the donkey with their faces turned to the opposite direction (and their backs touching each other), and then they are taken round (the city). He said: Bring Torah if you are truthful. They brought it and recited it until when they came to the verse pertaining to stoning, the person who was reading placed his hands on the verse pertaining to stoning, and read (only that which was) between his hands and what was subsequent to that. ‘Abdullah bin Salam who was at that time with the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Command him (the reciter) to lift his hand. He lifted it and there was, underneath that, the verse pertaining to stoning. Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) pronounced judgment about both of them and they were stoned. ‘Abdullah bin ‘Umar said: I was one of those who stoned them, and I saw him (the Jew) protecting her (the Jewess) with his body. Sahih Bukhari
Of course this hadith is a fabrication(I believe, I have no proof). Why, because what would happen if the adulterers were Christians and the Gospel was used? There is no theocracy in the Gospel. There is no marriage laws or criminal laws or any other communal laws there. So what did the Koran mean? It is quite clear the Koran is not talking about a theocracy where Muslims live by Islamic law and Jews and Christians by Christian and Judaic law, as the case in the so called Islamic state. The Koran is saying each community should take its religious laws from the scriptures and not from(I believe) the talmud, the Church and their trinity and the so called hadith of Muslims.
This is because the religion of the scriptures are one, but they are followed by different communities. These communities have abandoned the scriptures for man made dogmas with each accusing the other of disbelief regardless of an individuals faith in God and the hereafter.
It is clear the Sunnis could not bring a hadith of a theocratic nature regarding Christians so they brough a Jew instead to twist the verse to mean the law of man and not the law of God. It is clear that the same hadith could not have worked with a Christian and a Gospel.
Let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel.
The Koran then say:
“To each among you have we prescribed a law and an open way”
Its obvious that the Koran means to judge your religion by the laws of the Gospel. Take your theolgy and rights and wrongs from the scriptures and not eslewhere. It is very clear that the hadith was made to change the meaning to mean to rule by the common laws you find in the Torah and Koran. However they missed the Gospel. How would the prophet rule against Christians commiting adultery or even stealing when there is nothing about such things in the Gospel? Yet the Koran says ”
“To each among you have we prescribed a law and an open way”
The theocratic nature of the scriptures can change from scriptures to scriptures and in fact becuause Jesus never even ruled or governed you don’t see verses in the Gosple about communal laws for him to implement on his subjects. These communal laws are human laws that change with time but the Sunni jurists twisted that verse to go beyond what it saying.
Plus I wonder if the Torah has been corrupted and tampered with and has been abrogated as Sunnis claim, why on Earth will the Koran order these communities to abide by its laws.?
It very clear this hadith was made to fulfill the needs of a theocracy by turning these communal laws into a theocracy. And I wonder if these communal laws were Divine why on Earth do they change from the Torah to the Koran and why on Earth did the Gospel not reveal them?
Koran is peace!
Support the Koranist cause!