Warning: Undefined array key "rbname" in /data/rantburg.com/www/rantburg/pgrecentorg.php on line 14
Hello !
Recent Appearances... Rantburg

Great White North
Canadian Muslim Community Fears Actual Backlash After Hate-Crime Hoax
2018-01-18
Ah, the evergreen headline. I don't know about you, but it's long past time for a 'backlash' or two or three...
[Zero Hedge] Canadian Muslims say they fear anti-Muslim hate over this week’s revelation that a young girl fabricated an internationally anti-Muslim hate crime story.

Canadian police reported that Kwalah Noman, an 11-year-old Muslim girl from Toronto, fabricated her claims that a man repeatedly attacked her by trying to cut off her hijab in public, sparking concern among the Toronto Muslim community that outrage over the lie could lead to actual discrimination, according to CTV News. Sabrine Azraq, a member of the Canadian Council of Muslim Women (CCMW), urged people to argue against any anger over the lie.

"This will probably be used as an opportunity to downplay all the times that Muslims come out and speak out against Islamophobia," Azraq told CTV News.
For a woman, she's got some balls saying that.
Amira Elghawaby, a human rights activist, said she also feared potential, legitimate backlash, adding that the Canadian Muslim community is filled with " a lot of anxiety" over the upcoming anniversary of the Jan. 29 Quebec City mosque massacre.

Both Elghawaby and CCMW member Sabreena Ghaffar-Siddiqui pleaded with the public to take Noman’s age into consideration and refrain from targeting an 11-year-old girl.
And why should Canadian citizens listen to this? She felt free to participate in a hoax. I'd give her 30 days in juvee 'youth center', her accomplices a lot more.
Link


Great White North
The CBC offers a shariah FAQ
2006-03-27
Rhetorical question: Do you think CBC readers are getting enough information to have an informed opinion?
What is Shariah?
The word Shariah means "the path to a watering hole." It denotes an Islamic way of life – not just a system of criminal justice. It is a code of living that most Muslims adopt as part of their faith. Some countries formally institute it as the law of the land, enforced by the courts. However, the way Shariah law is applied from country to country can vary widely.

How did it originate?
According to Muslim scholars, the Prophet Muhammad laid down the laws. Some of the laws are said to be direct commands stated in the Qur'an. Other laws were based on rulings Muhammad is said to have given to cases that occurred during his lifetime. These secondary laws are based on what's called the Sunnah – the Prophet's words, example and way of life. One of the major concerns of people critical of Shariah law is that it is subject to interpretation and evolution. There is virtually no formal certification process to designate someone as being qualified to interpret Islamic law.

As it stands today, almost anyone can make rulings as long as they have the appearance of piety and a group of followers.

Why have Shariah law in Canada?
Many Muslims believe that because Canada is a secular country, its secular legal system makes it difficult for them to govern themselves by the personal laws of their own religion. For instance, Canada's marriage and divorce laws differ from Muslim law. It can be important for a Muslim to be granted a divorce under Muslim law, especially if he or she intends to move to a Muslim country in the future and remarry. Another concern for some is that if a Muslim dies without a will in Ontario, the estate would be divided according to Ontario law as opposed to Muslim law.

How did Shariah come to be considered in Canadian jurisdictions?
In 1991, Ontario was looking for ways to ease the burdens of a backlogged court system. So the province changed its Arbitration Act to allow "faith-based arbitration" – a system where Muslims, Jews, Catholics and members of other faiths could use the guiding principles of their religions to settle family disputes such as divorce, custody and inheritances outside the court system. It's voluntary – both parties (a husband and wife) have to agree to go through the process. But once they do, the decisions rendered by the tribunal are binding.

The Ontario government has been reviewing its Arbitration Act and on Dec. 20, 2004, it released a report conducted by former attorney general Marion Boyd. Among her 46 recommendations was that:

The Arbitration Act should continue to allow disputes to be arbitrated using religious law, if the safeguards currently prescribed and recommended by this review are observed.

Earlier in the year, the Islamic Institute of Civil Justice said it wanted to set up its own faith-based arbitration panels under the Arbitration Act, based on Shariah law.

The proposal ran into opposition from women's groups, legal organizations and the Muslim Canadian Congress, which all warned that the 1,400-year-old Shariah law does not view women as equal to men.

In her report, Boyd noted that some "participants in the Review fear that the use of arbitration is the beginning of a process whose end goal is a separate political identity for Muslims in Canada, that has not been the experience of other groups who use arbitration."

In May 2005, the Quebec National Assembly unanimously supported a motion to block the use of Shariah law in Quebec courts.

What are the concerns about establishing Shariah law in a Canadian jurisdiction?
The National Association of Women and the Law, the Canadian Council of Muslim Women, and the National Organization of Immigrant and Visible Minority Women of Canada argued that under Shariah law, men and women are not treated equally.

They argued that women fare far worse in divorce, child custody and inheritance matters under Shariah law. For instance, a woman can only inherit half as much as a man can. If a divorced woman remarries, custody of the children from her previous marriage may revert to the children's father.

How would Shariah law apply in Ontario?
First, it's not clear the term "Shariah law" would even be used. Several groups that appeared before Boyd's process of reviewing the Arbitration Act say it's not Shariah law they want to set up but a Muslim Personal/Family Law process which has its roots in Shariah.

The arbitration process as set out in the Arbitration Act is voluntary. Most of the concerns about the creation of "Shariah" tribunals have focused on the fear that Muslim women may feel they are being forced into taking part in a process of binding arbitration according to Muslim family law instead of resolving their disputes through the court system.

In her report, former Ontario attorney general Marion Boyd stressed that any faith-based system would have to conform to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Link


Europe
Europe's Wahhabi Lobby
2005-10-06
Warsaw
I SHOULD HAVE KNOWN something would be out of kilter. At the end of September, the Organization for Security and Cooperation (OSCE), an international body made up of 55 nations--including such dictatorships as nearby Belarus--called for a day-long roundtable in the lovely and spiritual city of Warsaw. The topic was "Intolerance and Discrimination Against Muslims." Aside from OSCE diplomats, staff, and two representatives of the U.S. Commission for International Religious Freedom, the participants consisted of some 25 representatives of Muslim NGOs as well as European and North American human rights monitors.

I should have known something was amiss because I have witnessed much OSCE mischief since going to postwar Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo in the late 1990s. And don't forget that OSCE was the international organization with the nerve to propose that it "observe" the most recent U.S. presidential election for presumptive irregularities. But it has an especially bad record in the Balkans, as has been pointed out in The Weekly Standard.

The OSCE is, to put it bluntly, political correctness personified. Its agenda for combating intolerance and discrimination includes everyone from prostitutes to victims of schoolyard bullying. But it was obvious that the status of Islam in Europe, which has lately involved bloodshed in several countries, is viewed by OSCEcrats as an intractable challenge. The do-gooders had no apparent choice but to relegate the roundtable on Muslims to a place outside the regular agenda of a weeklong "human dimension" assembly in Warsaw, and to hold the Muslim gathering in the basement of a hotel.

Reliable sources reported that the OSCE's Warsaw conference on Islam came as a trade-off for a conference on anti-Semitism held in Córdoba, Spain, earlier this year. It was soon made clear that the event would serve as little more than a platform for ranters and cranks from such countries as Britain and Denmark who were there to defend radical Islam. It turns out that proponents of Islamist extremism are even more aggressive, defiant, and confrontational than their American counterparts.

Thus, a religious functionary from Britain, Imam Dr. Abduljalil Sajid of the grandly (and, it appears, falsely) titled Muslim Council for Religious and Racial Harmony, used up much of the morning's discussion with loud denunciations of Tony Blair for his alleged assault on civil rights in the wake of "7/7." Before that this religious leader, when asked which school of Islamic law, or madhdhab, he followed, said, "I shoot all madhdhabs."

Imam Sajid regaled the audience with the many times he had confronted Blair, insisting to the British prime minister that Islam and terrorism are completely unconnected from one another. He also offered up a diatribe against internment at Guantanamo. In the minds of many Muslims at the event, it seemed, the London bombings and the attacks that preceded them, as well as the radical ideology that inspired them, are irrelevant; the only thing that matters is to push back against the legal response of the British, U.S., and other European authorities.


THE PHRASE "the Fight Against Extremism" was included on the agenda of the meeting, but not one word was said about it until the very end, when Turkish diplomat Omur Orhun let his voice sink to a near-whisper. He affirmed, in closing the deliberations, that the problem of extremism would eventually have to be taken up, "because that is what brought us all here." But to listen to many of the other participants one might have thought fear of Muslims among non-Muslims in Europe was a purely gratuitous expression of bias, or, as Nuzhat Jafri of the Canadian Council of Muslim Women put it, a product of "U.S. foreign policy decisions."

When I pointed out to her that Saudi-financed Wahhabi terrorists have struck Turkey, a country that opposed U.S. policy in Iraq, as well as Morocco and Indonesia, which have nothing to do with Washington's policies, Ms. Jafri limited herself to the admission that additional "root causes" exist; these she left undescribed.

Others were less restrained. Scandinavian countries seem to have experienced a particular incapacity to exclude Muslim extremists from their territories. Bashy Quraishy, a man who disclaims being religious, averring that he is not a practicing Muslim, seems to have adopted the defense of radical Islam as a career move, and is a self-proclaimed functionary of the "Federation of Ethnic Minority Organizations in Denmark." Although he admits his irreligion and distance from Islam, Quraishy has no compunctions about presenting himself as an expert on it.

Quraishy did his best to hog the proceedings. While Imam Sajid asserted the lack of any link between Islam and terror, Quraishy demanded that global media be prevented from even suggesting such a thing. His printed handouts, piled up on a side table, were hallucinatory in tone. To him, "America Under Attack"--a CNN caption after September 11, 2001--was offensively prejudiced. In addition, Quraishy's handouts insisted, "there was no proof, no one took responsibility, and not one particular country or group was singled out" for blame in the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks. There was nothing more than "finger pointing" at Islam.

Quraishy also recycled the late Jude Wanniski's attacks on Richard Perle as the evil controller of "uncritical and nationalistic journalism and intentional use of anti-Islam terminology as a tool of propaganda." Quraishy reproduced the clichés employed by al Qaeda and its supporters: the "Crusades are back," and Saddam in Iraq was nothing but a "tiny dictator." Quraishy's pamphlets even asserted that "fundamentalist," "ghetto," and "ethnic gangs" are hate terms and should not be used in any media.

The rest of the palaver was less fervid, but equally absurd. Canadian Muslims complained about the effect of the U.S. Patriot Act on their country. As the afternoon wore on, phrases such as "so-called terrorists" were increasingly heard. Brit Mohammed Aziz, of Faithwise, declared that members of his community are "first responsible to God . . . then to the umma," or global Islam, and only lastly to the country in which they live.

All of this came about three months after the horror in London. The meeting ended with nothing more than an agreement to hold more meetings. The OSCE it seems, like much of Europe, has few answers for the challenge of radical Islam--aside from their pieties about discrimination.

Stephen Schwartz is a frequent contributor to The Weekly Standard.
Link


Great White North
Canadian Muslim women welcome rejection of sharia tribunals
2005-05-29
The Canadian Council of Muslim Women has welcomed the Quebec National Assembly's unanimous adoption of a motion declaring that no Muslim tribunals for family matters will be allowed in the province, and that the laws of Quebec will apply to all its residents, regardless of religion, ethnicity or culture.

The Council said, "This public motion is a courageous act and though it may be criticised by some, its message is strong that religious women will not be isolated and placed under any other form of law. Quebec has clearly understood that different laws for different citizens lead to discrimination and have nothing to do with multiculturalism or Quebec's Charter of Rights and Freedom. Our regret is that the motion did not include a statement that no religious laws shall be used. This move towards separate laws, according to religion, is being advocated by other religious groups and is not restricted to Muslims only. We hope that Ontario will follow the same reasoning and demonstrate courage to state unequivocally that all Ontario families must be treated equally under the laws of the land.

Conservative Islamic groups in neighbouring Ontario province have been campaigning for an enactment that will allow family matters relating to Muslims to be adjudicated upon under sharia. The bid has been opposed by progressive Muslims and several women's groups, with the latter taking the position that if the move is successful, it would abridge women's rights and place them at the mercy of those who hold anti-feminist and puritanical views.
Link


Great White North
Canada's Muslims split over bid to introduce Islamic law courts
2005-01-16
CANADA'S Muslim community is being torn apart by a controversial proposal to establish Sharia courts to enforce Islamic law in civil matters. Women's groups and moderate Muslims in the nation's largest province are outraged at the recommendation by former attorney-general Marion Boyd to allow arbitration tribunals to be governed by the principles of Sharia - the code of Islamic law. The ruling is the latest challenge for multicultural Canada, whose open-door policy to immigrants is under strain from the post-11 September terrorist threat. The proposal is also certain to raise eyebrows in the United States where a belief already exists that its northern neighbour and largest trading partner is honeycombed with Islamic radicals.

Critics of tribunals based on Sharia law claim they would allow Islamic jurisprudence to swell beyond the scope of family law, potentially exposing vulnerable groups - particularly women - to unjust treatment in the eyes of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. "We've had a flood of e-mails from people, asking: "How can we help?" said Alia Hogben, president of the Canadian Council of Muslim Women. She said there is great concern that Muslim women may now be coerced into taking part in Sharia tribunals or face family and community ostracism, or worse. "When you come to Canada, you are a human being with full rights. Allowing Sharia here - even a "Canadianised" version as its proponents claim it would be - will subject Muslim women to a huge injustice."

The scope of a traditional Sharia tribunal is extensive and includes a canon of criminal law which is incompatible with the Canadian constitution, most experts agree. Ms Boyd was appointed to study the issue after the Islamic Institute for Civil Justice requested the right to offer religious-based arbitrations for family disputes based on Sharia. The proposal immediately ran into opposition from women's groups, legal organisations and the Muslim Canadian Congress, who all warned that the 1,400-year-old Sharia does not view women as equal. Ms Boyd recommended that the option to hold a Sharia tribunal be incorporated into Canada's Arbitration act. She suggested mediators screen each party separately about issues of power imbalance and domestic violence before they enter into an arbitration agreement. She also said the government should work with mediators and other professional organisations to develop a standard screening process for domestic violence.

Moderate Muslim cleric Ahmad Kutty - one of two Canadian imams who made headlines a year ago when they were thrown out of the US on suspicions of terrorism - has rejected the proposals. "Sharia is a loaded word; it includes all of the civil, criminal and other institutions associated with the Islamic legal system," he said. "No-one in his right mind would propose implementing this system of laws in Canada." But Syed Mumtaz Ali of the Canadian Islamic Legal Institute said that freedom of religion is guaranteed under Canada's Constitution. And it means not only freedom to practise and propagate religion but also to be able to be governed by one's religious laws in all aspects of one's life.
Link


Great White North
Sharia in Canada: Some Canadian Moslems Worried; some happy
2004-04-28
EFL

Sharia Gains Foothold in Ontario
By DeNeen L. Brown
Washington Post Foreign Service
Wednesday, April 28, 2004; Page A14

TORONTO -- Suad Almad, her head wrapped in a blue silk scarf, was discussing her beliefs with a group of friends. She said fervently that she thought the lives of all Muslims should be governed by Islamic law, known as sharia....
Some Muslim leaders in Canada said that there should be no controversy about the new arbitration process, but some opponents expressed concern that people might feel coerced into accepting sharia-based arbitration...
Alia Hogben, a board member of the Canadian Council of Muslim Women, said she opposes the religious tribunals. "It is difficult to speak up because we don’t want to feed into anti-Muslim, anti-Islamic stuff ..."If I am a woman of faith, and the community of people who see themselves as leaders say that if I do not follow the sharia court here, the Islamic Institute, then I will be tantamount to blasphemy and apostasy," Hogben said in a debate shown on Canadian television. "And you know that in some countries, apostasy means death sentence." ... how could she get this idea

Ali [President of the Society of Canadian Muslims] said the creation of the Islamic Court of Civil Justice would allow this "without violating any Canadian Law." Ali told the Canadian Law Times that sharia tribunals were important for practicing Muslims in Canada. He said that Muslims would no longer have an excuse not to follow sharia because it would no longer be impractical in Canada.

"The concession given by sharia is no longer available to us because the impracticality has been removed," Ali said. He has written that Muslims who choose not to be governed by sharia "for reasons of convenience would be guilty of a far greater crime." Ali said in a telephone interview

- No intimidation there ---
Canadian Moslems will all become victims of Islam


Link



Warning: Undefined property: stdClass::$T in /data/rantburg.com/www/rantburg/pgrecentorg.php on line 132
-6 More