These sharia courts have no place in our country

In this country there are thought to exist around 85 of these courts, which make rulings based on Islamic edicts rather than the laws of the land.

This is not simply an example of people choosing to live in accordance with their own beliefs. It is a case of religious leaders bullying others into obeying commands completely at odds with Britain’s own values of equality and fairness.

Time and again the rulings made are horrifyingly misogynistic. The entire system is rigged in favour of men with the rights of women given little more than passing consideration.

This is unacceptable in a civilised society and it has no place here.

Moreover the different groups that make up our nation cannot possibly live in harmony while there are still people following their own separate and self-policed legal code. These courts are one of the ways in which some Muslim communities have cut themselves off from the rest of Britain, a process which fuels hatred and division. [Daily Express] Read more

Labour MP 'felt pressured' after speaking out

A Labour MP has said he is "disappointed" by the party's response to concerns about the selection of female Muslim councillors.

He told BBC Newsnight: "In recent weeks, when I've spoken up about this issue, I felt extremely pressured to be silent on the things I know to be true."

The Labour Party said any complaints or evidence of sexism or intimidation were dealt with fairly.

Mr Shuker raised his concerns in response to claims made by the charity Muslim Women's Network UK (MWN UK) concerning the "blocking" of vocal, independent Muslim women by male members of the Labour Party who are of Pakistani heritage.

MWN UK has called for an inquiry by the party into "systematic misogyny" within Labour.

Mr Shuker says: "I've been disappointed with the response of the Labour Party.

"I would like robust action from the leadership - both from the NEC and from the leader of the Labour Party to say 'If there are these practices, we will take time to root them out.' [BBC] Read more

Muslim woman who refused to remove her burka to testify against man accused of abusing her is warned by German judge SHE will be jailed if she does not comply

A Muslim woman who refused to remove her burka to testify against a man accused of abusing her has been warned by a German judge she will be jailed if she does not comply.

Amira Behari, 43, refused to reveal her face at the State Court in Munich last year when she appeared to testify against a man who allegedly abused her in a train station.

The man, identified only as Kai.O, allegedly called her an 'a******e' and told her to 'go back to where you belong.'

Judge Thomas Mueller said at the original hearing in November he wanted to see her face to 'read her emotions,' adding: 'I need to see you otherwise there will be considerable problems in adjudicating your case.'

Behari refused, saying: 'I have a God at the end of the world who will see me right at the end. I will not do this.'

In court she wore a niqab, which is an ultra-burka with only a gap for the eyes. She also wore gloves and a long leather coat. [242 comments]

[TOP RATED COMMENT 3571 votes] How can we be sure there's a woman under that burka?

[2ND 3441] As a Muslim, stuff like this REALLY annoys me! The burka is CULTURAL not religious, and even in our religion it states you can remove your hijab (headscarf) for identification purposes - so why do these Muslims make it difficult for themselves and everyone around them, and in the process they just give the rest of us Muslims a bad name!!!! Ugh.

[3RD 2891] Ban it full stop

[4TH 2491] What an idiot- ban it and jail her.

[5TH 2221] Don't ask her. Just remove it!

[6TH 2197] She should have been jailed for contempt of court the first time she refused the judge's request to remove it. It not only prevents the judge from gauging her emotions, but also makes identification difficult, if not impossible. This is the exact reason why the burka/niqab MUST be banned forthwith. [Daily Mail] Read more

South Ayrshire Tory councillor in Tweet storm as she backs call to ban the burka

A top councillor has been caught up in a Twitter storm – after she backed calls to ban the burka.

Depute provost Mary Kilpatrick has been forced to say sorry for an online slur against the traditional Muslim dress.

The Conservative member for Ayr East ‘retweeted’ posts from an account carrying the hashtag “BanTheBurka”.

And she relayed another message which attacked fasting during the Islamic holy month of Ramadan.

Kilpatrick, a member of South Ayrshire Council for 17 years, has been rebuked by Tory bosses in Edinburgh following the controversial posts.

One of her retweets from the @BanningTheBurka account – which has more than 21,000 followers – read: “Absolutely ridiculous that exams are being pushed back due to Ramadan. Children should not be fasting in the first place!” [Daily Record] Read more

London ‘more Islamic’ than Muslim world – scholar

London is a more “Islamic” city than much of the Muslim world put together, a leading Muslim scholar has argued.

Maulana Syed Ali Raza Rizvi, a prominent Shia cleric, who was born in Pakistan and studied in Iran, said he “feels more Islamic” in Britain than other countries because of the freedom to worship and the multicultural mix.

He said Islam could be summed up as being about “love and justice” but that the “Muslim political leadership” around the world was failing to foster this.

He was speaking alongside the Cardinal Vincent Nichols, the leader of the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales, and the Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis at the annual Benedict XVI Lecture, an interfaith discussion event in London. [The Telegraph] Read more

Stop allowing gender-segregated meetings, David Cameron tells Labour

Labour denies organising segregated meetings, after PM says people with ‘bigoted religious views’ are treating women as second-class citizens.

David Cameron has accused Labour of allowing people with “bigoted religious views” to organise political meetings where men and women are segregated.

There have been several reports of Labour politicians addressing meetings where men and women are segregated – in Birmingham last May and during the Oldham byelection campaign in December. The party has always denied allowing meetings to be organised in this way.

One general election meeting in Birmingham addressed by Tom Watson and four other Labour MPs was reportedly advertised to local Muslim communities as having a “women’s section”, and a sign was said to have directed female attendees to separate seats.

Cameron raised the issue during prime minister’s questions on Wednesday, in response to a Labour MP asking about cuts to benefits for women. He said the opposition’s contribution to gender equality should be to stop allowing political meetings to be segregated for religious or cultural reasons. [The Guardian] Read more

Pakistan’s prime minister is defying the clerics — very carefully

During a speech to international business leaders here in late November, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif shocked the country’s powerful religious community by calling for a new, more “liberal” Pakistan.

Amid an outcry, within hours, Sharif’s staff was playing down the speech, saying he didn’t really mean to imply Pakistan should become more like the West.

But so far this year, Sharif and his party have defied Islamic scholars by unblocking access to YouTube, pushing to end child marriage, enacting a landmark domestic violence bill, and overseeing the execution of a man who had become a symbol of the hatred that religion can spawn here.

The shift in tone can be traced to Sharif’s ambitious economic agenda, the influence his 42-year-old daughter has over him, and his awareness that Pakistan remains the butt of jokes, according to his friends, senior government officials and analysts. [The Washington Post] Read more

Egypt drafts bill to ban burqa and Islamic veils in public places

Legislators have argued that full face veils are un-Islamic and that the Quran only requires women to dress modestly and cover their hair.

The Egyptian parliament is drafting a law banning women from wearing the niqab veil. The ban will apply to wearing the clothing in public places and government institutions, it has been reported.

The full-face veil is worn by some followers of Islam and typically covers all of the wearer’s face other than their eyes. The clothing is common in Egypt which is a predominantly Muslim country.

MP Amna Nosseir, professor of comparative jurisprudence at Al-Azhar University, who has backed the ban, said that wearing the veil is not a requirement of Islam and in fact has non-Islamic origins. She has argued that it is a Jewish tradition which appeared in the Arabian Peninsula prior to Islam and that a variety of Quran passages contradict its use. Instead, she has advocated that the Quran calls for modest clothing and covered hair, but does not require facial covering. [The Independent] Read more

Australian Muslims may resort to violence if headscarf laws not changed, SA imam says

The founder of the fledgling Islamic Association of South Australia (IASA) has warned a lack of tolerance could spark violence, after a man who allegedly grabbed a woman's headscarf was released on bail.

The imam of IASA, who goes by the name Shaikh M Tawhidi, today released a statement saying he feared a day "where the Muslim community might take matters into their own hands to protect their women and mothers".

SA Police today arrested and charged a 27-year-old man from Kilburn in Adelaide's inner-north with assault and offensive behaviour on a passenger vehicle.

They alleged he grabbed a young woman's headscarf as she got on a bus at Churchill Road on March 16 and intimidated her for the rest of the bus journey into the city. [ABC] Read more

Ban the burqa call by MEP

North West MEP Paul Nuttall, UKIP’s deputy leader, has called for a ban on burqas and niqabs being worn in public buildings in Britain.

Mr Nuttall said: “It is International Women’s Day and what better opportunity to call for the empowerment of women and free them from the tyranny of the veil.

“We live in dangerous times when security is all important and it is vital that people’s faces can be seen.

“And just as importantly we live in a civilised liberal society and why should women be anonymised in this way? All free thinking women should be supporting a ban on full face coverings in public buildings.

“There are laws in place in France, Belgium, Italy and the Netherlands, as well as other countries in the world, restricting the wearing of such face coverings and such a prohibition should be introduced in this country.

“You cannot stroll into a bank wearing a crash helmet or balaclava for eminently sensible security reasons and it is just common sense that the same should apply to the burqa and niqab. Why should they be exempt? [Rochdale Online] Read more

Top doc axed in bust-up after reporting Muslim surgeon’s hijab was ‘spotted with blood’ before an NHS operation

AN NHS consultant has been suspended for revealing how a Muslim surgeon refused to remove her hijab for an operation — even though it broke hospital health rules.

Dr Vladislav Rogozov said in a blog that he confronted her as they scrubbed up when he realised she planned to keep the Islamic scarf on during surgery.

He claimed the hijab was spotted with blood from previous operations. But she refused to remove it and walked out, forcing the hospital to find a stand-in.

The unnamed surgeon later accused anaesthetist Dr Rogozov, 46, of racial discrimination.

She left Sheffield’s Royal Hallamshire Hospital after a hospital investigation backed Dr Rogozov for enforcing its strict dress code.

It says religious headscarfs are “excluded in areas such as theatre, where they could present a health and cross-infection hazard.” [The Sun] Read more

Aarhus super mosque shelved following Sharia revelations

Aarhus Municipality has decided to halt plans for a super mosque after a TV2 documentary revealed that a Sharia council prohibited a Muslim woman in the city from divorcing her abusive husband and even denying him sex.

The council at the Fredens Moske in Aarhus informed the woman she would be in breach of Sharia law.

Aarhus mayor Jacob Bundsgaard explained that the series, ‘Moskeerne bag sløret’ (the mosques behind the veil), had led him to reconsider the massive super mosque project that the city had already approved.

“It’s always been an underlying prerequisite that only moderate powers would be exercised in the Muslim society,” Bundsgaard told DR Nyheder.

“But my trust in the project is gone with these revelations, and the natural consequence must be that the project is cancelled. It’s a shame for the vast majority of moderate Muslims, but it’s their responsibility to condemn those who don’t want to be integrated – like those who pressure a woman to go back to her abusive husband and to let him rape her.” [The Copenhagen Post] Read more

Algerian novelist Kamel Daoud sparks Islamophobia row

.... But Kamel Daoud has now announced to the world that he is giving up his newspaper work, and will focus on fiction.

Why? Because of the frenzied reaction to a piece he wrote in Le Monde concerning New Year's Eve in Cologne.

The article in question - entitled "Cologne - City of Illusions" - was a two-pronged attack on the cliches triggered by the mass molestations of women.

On the one hand Daoud deplored the far-right "illusion" which treats all immigrants as potential rapists.

But by far the greater part of his anger was directed at the "naive" political left, who in his view deliberately ignore the cultural gulf separating the Arab-Muslim world from Europe.

Thus, according to Daoud, Europe welcomes immigrants with visas and material sustenance - but without addressing what really counts, which is the world of values.

What Cologne showed, says Daoud, is how sex is "the greatest misery in the world of Allah". [BBC] Read more

Local Muslims cautious about new Idaho anti-Shariah bill

Last week a committee in the Idaho Legislature agreed to introduce a bill designed to keep Shariah law and other foreign codes from becoming part of Idaho court decisions or government policies.

An Idaho State University instructor and a Pocatello doctor, both Muslims, have reservations about such legislation.

The bill was sponsored by Rep. Eric Redman, R-Athol, and it passed the Idaho House Ways and Means Committee on a partisan vote, with the three Democrats on the committee voting not to move the bill forward.

.... Redman's bill doesn't specifically mention Islamic law, but the Associated Press reported that Redman circulated pictures of a severed hand and a man about to be beheaded to legislative leaders considering the proposal. The pictures were pasted in between definitions of Shariah law and accused the Prophet Muhammad of being a pedophile.

"This bill isn't just about Shariah law, but Shariah law is a major concern," Redman told the AP. [AP] Read more

Almost 80 percent of Latvians seek ban on face-covering clothing

The vast majority of Latvians, or 77 percent, support a legislative initiative calling for a ban on wearing face-covering garments in public places, a new TNS poll shows.

The survey reveals that 42 percent of respondents strongly support the ban and 35 percent tend to support it.

Meanwhile 16 percent do not support the Justice Ministry's proposal to ban wearing face-covering clothes like Muslim burqas in public places.

Eleven percent of respondents tend not to support the draft legislation and five percent strongly disapprove of a ban.

Seven percent of the surveyed Latvians did not voice a particular position on the issue.

TNS pollster ran the survey for 900 Seconds, the morning news program of Latvia's LNT commercial TV channel.

The survey too place from March 1 to 3, and interviewing 1,000 residents of Latvia between the ages of 18 to 55. [The Baltic Times] Read more

German politicians campaign to make pork mandatory in public canteens after sausages and bacon were removed 'to prevent offending Muslims'

German politicians are campaigning to make pork mandatory in public canteens and schools, after reports that sausages, chops and bacon were disappearing from menus.

Christian Democratic Union (CDU) in Schleswig-Holstein claimed pork products were being removed from cafes, daycare centres and state schools across the state to 'prevent offending Muslims'

The suggestion to force public schools and canteens to serve pork has subsequently been widely mocked on social media, using hashtags #porkduty and #wurstcasescenario.

The local arm of the CDU, the party of German Chancellor Angela Merkel, claimed pork was being banned for 'religious reasons' across the north German state.

'The protection of minorities - including for religious reasons - must not mean that the majority is overruled in their free decision by ill-conceived consideration,' said CDU's Daniel Günther. [Daily Mail] Read more

Islamic group ordered to stop segregating men and women

Controversial Islamic group Hizb ut-Tahrir has been ordered to stop forcibly segregating men and women at its public events after a NSW tribunal found the practice constituted sexual discrimination.

Former NT News journalist Alison Bevege sued the organisation and five of its members for sexual discrimination after she was forced to sit in a designated women's and children's section at a public lecture hosted by the group on October 10, 2014.

Ms Bevege, then a freelance journalist, told the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal she attended the lecture, titled "the politics and plots of the American led intervention in Iraq and Syria", with the intention of writing an opinion piece and asking questions of the speakers.

She was "scared" to attend on her own so she arranged to go with a male friend, the tribunal heard.

Though the pair separately entered the lecture hall at the KCA Centre in Lakemba, when Ms Bevege attempted to join her friend in the men's section "to be closer to the action" a female usher insisted she sit with the other women at the back of the room. [The Sydney Morning Herald] Read more

Senior Muslim calls for charity watchdog to suspend top officials at Glasgow Mosque

.... The two formal complaints represent a dramatic escalation of the bitter turf war at what is Scotland’s single biggest single place of worship of any faith.

And they place OSCR in the difficult position of having to consider using its powers, including suspension, against an important religious body.

The watchdog has already published damning interim findings about the way the Mosque has been managed in the past.

A new generation of liberal Scottish Muslims had been in control of the facility until earlier this month, when they resigned en masse citing threats and intimidation.

Mr Farooq was one of just five members of the committee not to stand down. However, he now believes that members who were resigned were replaced illegally.

Mr Farooq said in a statement: “I have written to OSCR advising them of the illegal committee.

“I have asked them to investigate that the process in the selection of seven new committee members, which was not constitutional. [Herald Scotland] Read more

Torquay station sex attacker 'misunderstood boundaries', court hears

A SOMALIAN who sexually assaulted a 15-year-old girl at Torquay train station said it was a misunderstanding caused by 'cultural differences', a court has been told.

Ali Abdullahi, 34, committed two sex attacks against two females and made an approach to a third woman while catching the train from Torquay to Bristol.

Exeter Crown Court was told that despite his guilty pleas the security guard still had trouble admitting he had done anything wrong.

He told police he came from a conservative culture and misunderstood the sexual boundary between men and women in the UK. [Herald Express] Read more

We must not tolerate British imams who applaud barbarism in Pakistan

How outraged were you when you heard the news?

The Muslim man in America arrested for blasphemy against the state’s Christian constitution, the governor who defended the man’s right to freedom of religion, and then the dramatic gunning down of the governor by a well-armed redneck with a “Jesus Is Alive” tattoo.

Whose side were you on? Did you defend the redneck with the tattoo, take to social media on the day he was sent to the electric chair to call him a martyr to Christianity?

How did you feel when you read of the Church of England vicar who praised the murderer, justified his actions and even boasted about attending his funeral?

All these events actually happened. In a way.

Except it was a Christian woman in Pakistan, Asia Bibi, who was arrested and sentenced to death for alleged blasphemy. It was a Muslim governor, Salmaan Taseer, who came to her defence and called for the country’s absurd and medieval blasphemy laws to be reviewed. [The Telegraph] Read more

Top Pakistani religious body rules women's protection law 'un-Islamic

A powerful Pakistani religious body that advises the government on the compatibility of laws with Islam on Thursday declared a new law that criminalizes violence against women to be "un-Islamic."

The Women's Protection Act, passed by Pakistan's largest province of Punjab last week, gives unprecedented legal protection to women from domestic, psychological and sexual violence. It also calls for the creation of a toll-free abuse reporting hot line and the establishment of women's shelters.

But since its passage in the Punjab assembly, many conservative clerics and religious leaders have denounced the new law as being in conflict with the Muslim holy book, the Koran, as well as Pakistan's constitution.

"The whole law is wrong," Muhammad Khan Sherani, the head of the Council of Islamic Ideology said at a news conference, citing verses from the Koran to point out that the law was "un-Islamic." [Reuters] Read more

If a moderate like Sadiq Khan shouldn’t stand for London mayor, which Muslim can?

I did warn him. Shortly after he became the first Muslim to attend cabinet, I urged Sadiq Khan to be prepared. The Islamophobes, the new McCarthyites, would at some stage come after him. He laughed it off. Yet it was only a matter of time. In the current climate of anti-Muslim hysteria, it was perhaps naive of Khan and his advisers to believe that he could run for City Hall as a proud and public Muslim without being targeted or smeared.

Consider the recent spate of newspaper headlines: “Exposed: Sadiq Khan’s family links to extremist organisation” (Evening Standard); “Khan joined radical imam at rallies” (Sunday Times); “Khan linked to ‘online bin Laden’” (Daily Telegraph); “Sadiq Khan gave speech with ‘black flag of jihad’ flying” (the Sun).

These stories basically boil down to: hard-working constituency MP and former human rights lawyer who campaigned against the extradition of a constituent, Babar Ahmed, to the US on terrorism charges, and for the release of British resident Shaker Aamer from Guantánamo Bay, may, in the process, have shared platforms with allegedly unsavoury characters who’ve made unpleasant remarks. Quelle surprise. [Mehdi Hasan, 1110 comments]

[TOP RATED COMMENT 355 votes] People smear Goldsmith for being a millionaire – Khan’s running for office, so whatever stick people can beat him with, they will.

That said, Islam in particular is perceived as incompatible with the socially progressive ideas that we hold dear. And ;let’s face it Mehdi – by and large, it is.

[2ND 305] Why shouldn't people dislike Islam? It's just a set of beliefs, ideas and principles, like Conservatism, which do not align with my own beliefs, ideas and principles.

[3RD 175 ] So the fact that Khan actually did those things as reported means he's being victimised for his religion? Surely any political up for election has their pasts raked over don't they? And where has anyone said he 'shouldn't be' running for mayor? You've decided to write this article first , and then gone looking for justifications to write it. What a pile of shit.

[4TH 162] Once you reduce this article to its core substance, the message appears to be that because Sadiq Khan is a Muslim, anyone who draws attention to that fact or brings up anything contentious or questionable he has said, or reports any actions in his past or those of his extended family which may call into question his fitness to hold the office of Mayor of London, is guilty of Islamophobia.

However, it is perfectly acceptable for he and his supporters to do exactly that about any of his opponents which may call into question their fitness to hold the office of Mayor.

This is basically another demand for special treatment for someone based on their religious beliefs and as such should be roundly rejected.

[5TH 131] That shouldn't mean...

Of course it shouldn't. That's why newspapers investigate. Mr Hassan seems to think kuffirs (his word) should shut up and elect the candidate he favours. Anyone standing for electoral office should expect investigation on the issues which are pertinent. For Zac Goldsmith that'll be having shitloads of dosh and non-dom status. For Sadiq Khan, that'll be his religion.

[6TH 124] When you are choosing a person, you have to consider what they believe. So you MUST consider their religion.

[7TH 122] A phobia is an irrational fear of something. As somebody originally from India I assure you that there is nothing irrational about a fear of Islam. Muslims on an individual basis are different but Islam as a belief system? Nothing irrational about being afraid of that.

[8TH 117] Are cattle allowed to comment on this?

[9TH 111] Moderate or extreme, they all read the same texts. The difference is one of emphasis. Ayaan Hirsi Ali (who Mehdi has shamefully smeared in the past) makes a division between Mecca Muslims and Medina Muslims.

Mecca Muslims choose to focus on the early stages of Mohammed’s career, when he’s building alliances and preaching a ‘peace and love’ message. Medina Muslims focus on his later life, where he becomes a successful leader, and where he teaches a much more warlike message.

But whatever you focus on, the question remains – how do you choose which parts of God’s message to trust? If God said it all, isn’t it all true? [Guardian Cif] Read more

Are certain cultural practices inferior to others? Yes.

It is morally inferior, indeed repugnant, to beat one’s spouse no matter the religious or cultural justification—of which plenty is offered.

It is morally inferior to justify killing a person for leaving their faith, regardless of how important identity and religion is to anyone’s politics, and despite which regime thinks otherwise.

Likewise, sexual intercourse with a minor is rape. There can be no legal consent involving a child. Euphemistically calling this “child marriage” does not change the fact that it is nothing but child sex abuse.

That these are subjective moral positions should be as relevant as it is when discussing the abolition of slavery. In other words, not at all.

You would be forgiven for thinking this is all incredibly obvious. You may even have believed that such moral viewpoints had become as enshrined in the West as the prohibition on torture. If so, and to naughtily lift a phrase from the left: check your privilege.

In a move that can only ever go down in history as incredibly regressive, a municipality in the Swedish city of Malmo decided to approve underage “child marriage” among refugees. [The Daily Beast] Read more

Schleswig-Holstein CDU fights to keep pork on canteen menus

The regional arm of Chancellor Angela Merkel's CDU announced plans on Tuesday to ensure that pork continues to be available at public canteens, as well as child daycare centers and schools across the north German state.

The proposal is due to be presented by the CDU's group in parliament at next week's regional parliamentary session.

CDU parliamentary group leader, Daniel Günther, bemoaned on Tuesday that an increasing number of canteens, nurseries and schools are removing pork from their menu due to religious considerations.

"The protection of minorities - including for religious reasons - must not mean that the majority is overruled in their free decision by ill-conceived consideration," Günther said, arguing that tolerance also means "the appreciation and sufferance of other food cultures and lifestyles." [Deutsche Welle] Read more

Will not let Pakistan become secular, says Fazlur Rehman

Expressing his reservations on the recently passed Punjab Protection of Women Against Violence Bill, Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl (JUI-F) chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman has said that he would not let the country become secular.

“We are with all those who want to end violence against women but by this law the country is going from one extreme position to another,” he remarked while addressing a news conference on Tuesday.

The JUI-F chief said the law does not adhere to the values of Pakistani society and contradicted religious beliefs. “This law is in conflict with the Holy Quran, the life of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), Constitution of Pakistan and values of our country.”

Talking about the legislation, he said that his party is not against the system of lawmaking but it should be done keeping in view the Islamic principles. [The Express Tribune] Read more