Canadian Free Press
By Dr. Sami Alrabaa
Sunday,
April 5, 2009
Once again a German court ruled by
referring to Shraia (Islamic law), which
predominantly incites to denigration of women, hatred, violence.
Most recently, Lisa, a German
woman (46) married to an Egyptian, called the police seeking protection for
herself and her 17-year-old daughter from assaults by her husband. Magdi, Lisa’s husband, threatened to kill their daughter
who had been raped by a man. Magdi, a practicing
Muslim, believes that his daughter committed “Zena”
(adultery). He told his wife that he was always suspicious of his daughter who
clandestinely had a German boyfriend. Lisa filed a divorce case against her
husband, and requested deporting him.
The judge, Matthias Rau, at a
court in
The German judge argued,
“Muslims have a different understanding of rape than Europeans, and this must
be taken into account.”
In an interview with a German
radio, NDR on Feb. 18, 2009, Rau said, “Shari’a aligns
rape to adultery, Zena, and victims – women - are
often punished instead of prosecuting the perpetrators and convict them.”
Helmut
Wagner, another German judge, this time in Essen, ruled March 2, 2009, Muslim
girls in Germany can not be forced to swim in public and learn about the
evolution theory at school. The parents of three school girls requested a
verdict freeing their daughters from taking part in swimming classes and
lessons which teach the evolution theory. Wagner argued, “These things contradict
tenets in Islam, the religion of these girls, and hence in light of freedom of
religion, the Muslim girls cannot be forced to do or learn things which are
incompatible with their religion.”
The
Attorney General was indignant. He objected to Wagner’s verdict by saying, “How
would this judge rule if a Muslim kills someone who commits apostasy. According
to the Koran, he must be killed. Would the judge let the perpetrator free?” The
Attorney General cites the Koran which says, “If they
(Muslims) turn (their) back (to Islam), then seize them and KILL them wherever
you find them, and take not from among them a friend or a helper.” (Sura 4, verse 89).
The
attorney General added, “In Islam, polygamy is permissible. Should also this be
sanctioned in
In
another case, the judge, Hans-Dieter Bachmann at a court in
Numerous
cases have now been ruled with reference to Shari’a
in
Instead
of using Paragraph 1565 of the German Federal Law, Datz-Winter
preferred to use the hardship criteria as defined in the Koran, and added in
her verdict, “Both the wife and the husband are Muslims. In Islam, the husband is
allowed to castigate his wife. This fact cannot be ignored, and cultural and
religious motives must be considered in this case.”
Andrea
Bramsche, a lawyer in
The
list of passages from the Koran and Hadith, which
basically constitute Shari’a, and denigrate women is long. For more details check out “Is Islam a Violent Faith” and “Women in Hadith”.
If
German courts opt to use Shari’a in their verdicts
then women can be beaten, their testimony is worth half of that of men, they
are disallowed to travel alone, they can inherit only half the mount their male
relatives get. Women are intellectually deficient. They even cannot fast
without their husband’s permission, etc. All these commandments are entailed in
Shari’a.
Shari’a has also infiltrated German schools. The head
teacher of a secondary school in
In
another school, the head teacher issued instructions to male teachers not to
shake hands with Muslim girls after handing over their graduation documents.
“This is haram (impermissible) in Islam.” The head
teacher said.
Shari’a has also infiltrated the German Ministry of
Foreign Affairs. In an interview with the Egyptian Al Ahram
Weekly (Oct. 19, 2008), Gabrielle Linda Guelil, a
Muslim Turk, whose real first name is Layla and who
dyes her hair blond to look German, and works for this ministry as head of a
new section called “Dialogue with the Islamic World”, said, “Through
interaction and dialogue with the Muslim world we hope to bridge the gap
between cultures and clear up any misunderstandings.”
What
kind of “misunderstandings” is Guelil talking about?
Are “beating women” and urging Muslims to kill infidels – Christians and Jews –
which the Koran, Hadith, and fatwas
(edicts) incite to, all “misunderstandings”? This is an insult to the intellect
of all sanely-thinking people.
Then
Guelil says, “Tolerance must prevail. Respecting
other religions is essential.” The question is who is intolerant, Islamists or
the rest of the world? Who does not allow non-Muslims build their temples and
practice their religions? Is it the West, or Muslim countries, spearheaded by
To
add insult to injury, Guelil says, “Some Muslim
countries like
What
should the Saudis explain? How men should beat women and denigrate them?
Beating women, denigrating them, and inciting to hatred and violence against
non-Muslims do not “constitute a violation of human rights”? This is
insane.
Instead
of lecturing us about “misunderstandings” and “tolerance”, Guelil
should have asked Muslims to be tolerant and renounce violence.
Shari’a is not the “law of Allah”. God is merciful and
tolerant. He would never incite to kill human beings and denigrate them. Anyone
who claims the opposite is an outlaw and irreligious by all means.
Islam
is an Arabic word which means “submission”. There is
no room of freedom in Islam. It is full of contradictions. While the Koran
says, “There is no compulsion in Islam” (Sura 2, verse
257), it incites to hatred and violence in numerous passages. Muslims who turn
their back to Islam are branded as “heretics” and sentenced to death. Check out
the above mentioned articles.
Many
German apologists, and for that matter many Europeans like the British
Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams who endorses Shari’a,
argue that Muslims living in the West must have their own law, Shari’a applied next to the mundane law. They justify that
by religious freedom which all Western constitutions prescribe.
They
also argue that in a bid to integrate migrants of different religious
backgrounds, these people must “feel home”. Their religious tenets must be
taken into consideration. But how about Western mundane laws and constitutions,
do they use the Bible or refer to it? The answer is NO.
At
the same time all those apologists do not realize, or rather ignore that Shari’a violates basic human rights.
I
believe that apologists who refer to Shari’a and
accept its appalling rules do so out of fear of Islamists. The aim is appeasing
radical Muslims. Consequently, they make themselves accomplice to those who
violate human rights and incite to hatred and violence.