It takes a nation to protect the nation
[I am just the poster of this material. All credit goes to Magnus Nielsen]
Dear fellow Kuffar,
I am happy to share publicly my correspondence with the President of the Supreme Court and the Lord Chief Justice on the question of face veiling while giving evidence. In the replies section to this post are my letters, in chronological order, on that subject.
You may recall that this question arose a few years ago when a judge was asked to respect the religious sensitivities of a witness who wished to remain fully veiled while giving evidence in court. The judge refused the witness permission to do this but said that the question would be considered by judges more senior than himself for a final ruling on this matter.
Accordingly, on the 7th December 2017, I wrote a letter to Lady Hale, President of the Supreme Court to offer my opinions on this matter. My study of the 'Reliance of the Traveller', the authoritative digest of Sharia Law, says quite clearly that women must remove their veils while giving evidence, so that others may fairly appraise the value of their testimony. This letter of mine to Lady Hale is attached/below. [Appendix 1]
With this letter, I also enclosed an actual copy of the 'Reliance of the Traveller' (so that it could be clearly seen that I was supporting my point with hard evidence). With the book, I also sent
(1) my comparison of Sharia Law with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to show that Sharia Law is entirely incompatible with western values, [Appendix 2] and
(2) a note on the Reliance of the Traveller, explaining what the book was about and offering a small selection of its contents. [Appendix 3] Both these are attached.
After posting this package, I waited for a few weeks.
On the 19th February, I received a reply from Lady Hale, thanking me for the letter and the book. She apologised for not having written sooner, but said that she was due to speak on this very subject at the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies on the 25th January. Her letter to me included a copy of that very speech, on page 16 of which she said,
'My attention has also been drawn to two sources which state that it is not contrary to Sharia Law for a woman to uncover her face while she is giving testimony in court, or for a male Magistrate or Judge to look at her or identify who she is, to make assessment of her credibility where this is an issue and to protect the rights of all concerned. One is the Australian National Imams Council's 'Explanatory Note on the Judicial Process and Participation of Muslims' citing several texts in support. The other is the Reliance of the Traveller, by Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misry, translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller (Beltsville Maryland, USA, 1994) which is to the same effect'.
She asked if she might retain the book in the Library of the Supreme Court 'where it may be of interest to others who work here'.
My reply to Lady Hale is attached. [Appendix 4]
On Wednesday 7th March, an article appeared in 'The Times' which stated that 'guidance is awaited from senior judges in court'. [Also reported in the Daily Mail] [Appendix 5] Accordingly, the same day, I wrote a letter to the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Burnett of Maldon, (attached) enclosing another copy of the Reliance of the Traveller for his perusal. [Appendix 6] I took this down to the Royal Courts of Justice in the Strand in person.
Since that time, I have not received a reply. If I get one, I shall let you know what it says.
See below for
Appendix 1 Initial letter to Lady Hale
Appendix 3 Reliance of the Traveller
Appendix 4 Reply to Lady Hale
Appendix 5 'Daily Mail' article
7th December 2017
To the Rt. Hon. Baroness Hale of Richmond,
President of the Supreme Court,
London SW1P 3BD.
Dear Lady Hale,
RELIGIOUS FACE VEILS IN COURT.
Before beginning this letter, I must ask you to excuse me if I have not used the correct form of address for a Lady President of the Supreme Court. Debrett has not yet been updated, and I have no wish to be discourteous.
I understand that you are shortly going to make a definitive ruling on the question of the acceptability of wearing face veils while giving evidence in court. The question is controversial since a face-covering creates special difficulties for those trying to evaluate verbal evidence; psychologists reckon that most of the meaning in our words is supported by our ‘body language’, and most of our body language is revealed in our facial expressions. When considering this matter, you should be informed that women giving testimony in a Sharia Court are required to do so ‘barefaced’, because Sharia judges would experience the same difficulty in their courts as English Common Law judges would in theirs. The authority for this is found in the book which I enclose, ‘The Reliance of the Traveller’, the classic digest of Sharia Law. You will find this ruling clearly set out on page 514 of the volume, (⅞ toward the bottom of the page, under ‘m2.11’). Anyone who tries to argue that Islam demands that women cover their faces in court is either ignorant of the religion, or simply lying for some ulterior purpose.
Most people who set out to study the Quran are quickly baffled by the way in which that book is set out, leaping from one topic to another without any apparent reason, and contradicting itself in many places. The study of the Hadith literature, which seeks to elucidate the verses of the Quran, runs into several volumes, like encyclopaedias, and is a wearisome undertaking. ‘The Reliance of the Traveller’, however, has the merit of being relatively concise and logically organised and, for that reason alone, it is the best source of authentic Sharia Law for judgements on any given issue. A copy of this book ought to rest on the table, for purposes of consultation, whenever and wherever the subject is discussed.
Islam (the word in Arabic denotes ‘submission’ rather than ‘peace’) is an all-encompassing belief system, wrapped in religious packaging, whose doctrines form the taproot of a political, legal, educational, financial and military ideology, implacably hostile not only to the values of British civilisation, but to western civilisation as a whole. To support that assertion, I enclose also a copy of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as promulgated in the United Nations in 1948, the most comprehensive statement of western values, with my own commentary and appropriate verses from the Quran, and ‘The Reliance of the Traveller’.
English Law works by precedent, Sharia Law works by stealth. Islamic activists within Muslim communities – often the self-appointed leaders, since Islam has no use for democracy - are working discreetly but assiduously to intrude the teachings of Islam into every sphere of British public life, into our political institutions (both at local and at national level), into our financial institutions, into our schools and universities - and into our courts and tribunals. This is a form of ‘Jihad’, an alternative to fomenting civil unrest, bombings, stabbings, beheadings and driving cars into pedestrians. However distant the goal, however long it takes to accomplish its goal, Islam will not be satisfied by anything less than complete takeover.
If this concession of permitting witnesses to wear face veils while giving evidence is granted, other demands will surely follow. For that reason, I urge you to take a stand on this issue and demand that all testimony, whether it be from Muslim or non-Muslim, should be given barefaced.
I remain, my Lady,
Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Sharia Law
To show that the foundational principles of both are diametrically opposed to each other, I am setting out a copy of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights with a commentary, drawn from my own reading and understanding of the Quran and Sharia Law, specifically, the Quran (as translated by Marmaduke Pickthall) and the 'Reliance of the Traveller', a compendium of Sharia Law authorised by Al-Azhar University in Cairo, the pre-eminent authority throughout the Muslim world on issues relating to that form of jurisprudence.
The Universal Declaration embodies not only the core values of British society, but also the core values of all civilised societies throughout the modern world. It was in defence of these core values, that Britain, and the allies, went to war in 1939. I hope, that by publishing this document, those reading it will be more fully aware of the threat now confronting the British people, a threat which will prove to be the most dangerous of all those they have faced since Britain committed itself to upholding the Articles of the Declaration in 1948.
A society which justifies its existence by protecting the rights and freedoms of its citizens cannot co-exist with theocracy; there is never any possibility of a peaceful and lasting compromise between the two systems of government. At some time in the future – and probably the not so distant future, if we continue to drift in the direction where events are taking us - they will fight and, as a result, one must lose and the other prevail.
To prevail over Islam requires a strategy. This is what our current political leadership fail to understand and, therefore, cannot supply. Fortunately, the impending conflict between Islam and the British people need not, at this early stage, be violent, nor would it require the implementation of sweeping measures against the innocent majority of Britain's Muslim population, people who have settled peacefully among us, speaking our language and living out their lives according to British values and attitudes. But it will require resolute action, if we are to protect the freedoms we inherited from our forefathers (at great sacrifice!), so that they may be passed intact to succeeding generations.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
10th December 1948.
PREAMBLE: (0.1) Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,
(0.2) Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,
(0.3) Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,
(0.4) Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,
(0.5) Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,
(0.6) Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,
(0.7) Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,
(0.8) Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.
Article 1. All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
(1) 'Slaves of Allah'. Sharia Law, however, denies that human beings are 'born free and equal in dignity and rights'. Many verses throughout the Quran assert that human beings are born as 'slaves' of Allah. 'He is the Omnipotent over His slaves' (Sura 6, verses 18 & 61); 'Allah giveth grace unto whom He will of His slaves' (Sura 14, verse 11); 'He sendeth down the angels with the Spirit of His command unto whom He will of His bondmen' (Sura 16, verse 2); 'Lo, He was ever Knower and Seer of His slaves' (Sura 17, verses 17 & 96); 'There is none in the heavens and the earth but cometh unto the Beneficent as a slave' (Sura 19, verse 93)'This is Allah's law which hath ever taken course for His bondmen' (Sura 40, verse 85); Observant Muslims are described as 'the single-minded slaves of Allah' (Sura 37, verses 40, 74, 128, & 160); etc., etc., etc.
(2) Inherent Inequality. Sharia Law denies equality between human beings; insisting that unbelievers are created to be subservient to Muslims. 'And Allah hath favoured some of you above others in provision. Now those who are more favoured will by no means hand over their provisions to those (slaves) whom their right hand possess, so that they may be equal with them in respect thereof' (Sura 16, verse 71), and 'Allah coineth a similitude: (on the one hand) a (mere) chattel slave, who hath control of nothing, and (on the other hand) one on whom We have bestowed a fair provision from Us, and he spendeth thereof secretly and openly. Are they equal?' (Sura 16, verse 75). The whole world is given by Allah to Muslims. 'And verily We have written in the Scripture, after the Reminder, “My righteous slaves will inherit the earth”'.(Sura 21, 105). Allah restricts His benefits, for fear of rebellion, 'And if Allah were to enlarge the provision for His slaves, they would surely rebel in the earth, but He sendeth down by measure as He willeth. Lo! He is Informed, a Seer of His bondsmen'. (Sura 42, verse 27). The Quran declares the moral superiority of Muslims over unbelievers, 'Ye are the best community that hath been raised up for mankind. Ye enjoin right conduct and forbid indecency...' (Sura 3, verse 110); 'He it is who hath placed you as viceroys in the earth, and hath exalted some of you in rank above others,...' (Sura 6, verse 166); 'Then we appointed you viceroys in the earth..' (Sura 10, verse 15); 'Lo! Those who disbelieve among the People of the Scripture and the idolaters, will abide in the fire of hell. They are the worst of created beings. (And) lo! Those who believe and do good works are the best of created beings...' (Sura 96, verse 6);
(3) Unquestioning Obedience. The 'true believers' are denied the exercise of 'reason and conscience'; they must obey the will of Allah without question; the Quran is the sole source of authority. 'Whoso obeyeth the messenger, obeyeth Allah' (Sura 4, verse 80). 'Obey Allah and obey the messenger, and beware!' (Sura 5, verse 92); 'The true believers are those only who believe in Allah and His messenger and afterward doubt not, but strive with their wealth and their lives for the cause of Allah. Such are the sincere'; (Sura 49, verse 15). 'O ye who believe!Ask not of things which, if they were made known unto you, would trouble you; but if ye ask of them when the Quran is being revealed, they will be made known unto you. Allah pardoneth this, for Allah is Forgiving, Clement. A folk before you asked (for such disclosures) and then disbelieved therein'; (Sura 5, verses 101 & 102). 'Unto each nation We have given sacred rites which they are to perform; so let them not dispute with thee of the matter, but summon them to thy Lord' (Sura 22, verse 67).
(4) Universal Warfare. The notion that all human beings might realise their aspirations for justice by living in peace with each other 'in a spirit of brotherhood' is entirely alien to Islam and to Sharia Law. 'True believers' are required by their religion to wage war – jihad against all unbelievers - by any means possible, until Islam becomes dominant throughout the earth. Until that aim is accomplished, devout Muslims should shun and avoid the company of unbelievers.'Allah (Himself) is an enemy to the disbelievers' (Sura 2, verse 98); 'Warfare is ordained for you, though it is hateful unto you' (Sura 2, verse 216); 'We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve because they ascribe unto Allah partners..' (Sura 3, verse 151); 'Those who believe do battle for the cause of Allah. And those who disbelieve do battle for the cause of idols. So fight the minions of the devil.'.(Sura 4, verse 76); 'O ye who believe, choose not disbelievers for (your) friends in place of believers' (Sura 4, verse 144); 'And fight them until 'fitna' is no more, and religion is all for Allah' (Sura 8, verse 39; the Arabic word 'fitna' may be translated as 'civil commotion', or any resistance to Islamic rule); 'O Prophet, exhort the believers to fight' (Sura 8, 65); 'Slay the idolators wherever ye may find them' (Sura 9, verse 5); 'Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah!' (Sura 9, verse 41); 'O Prophet, strive against the disbelievers and hypocrites. Be harsh with them..' (Sura 9. verse 73); 'Lo, Allah hath bought from the believers their lives and their wealth because the Garden will be theirs. They shall fight in the way of Allah and slay and be slain. It is a promise which is binding upon Him in the Torah, and the Gospel and the Quran. Who fulfilleth His covenant better than Allah? Rejoice then in your bargain that ye have made, for that is the supreme triumph' (Sura 9, verse 111; this verse is frequently cited by the Islamic clergy as a justification for suicide bombings; 'O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty unto Him' (Sura 9, verse 123); 'Allah hath promised such of you as believe and do good works that He will surely make them to succeed (the present rulers) in the earth, even as He caused those who were before them to succeed (others); and He will surely establish for them their religion which He hath approved for them...' (Sura 24, verse 55) etc., etc., etc..
Article 2. Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
Sharia Law openly practices discrimination against unbelievers and women. The refusal of unbelievers to acknowledge the divinity of Allah and the prophethood of Muhammad amounts to a capital offence in Sharia Law and is a justification for 'Jihad' (as explained in commentary on Article One, fourth paragraph, 'Universal Warefare'). Any Muslim rejecting Islam and converting to any other faith is also subject to summary capital punishment which may be executed by any believer, (see Sura 18, verses 75-82, relating to the encounter between Moses and his Muslim companion with a young apostate). The lives of Jews and Christians are spared, only on condition that (1) they live in subservience to believers, and that (2) they pay a humiliating Poll Tax to the Muslim community, 'Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture [that is, the Jews and the Christians] as believe not in Allah and the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the religion of truth [sic], until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low' (Sura 9, verse 29).
A Muslim man may marry as many as four wives, but Sharia Law makes no provision for a Muslim woman to have more than one husband 'marry of the women who seem good to you, two, or three, or four;...etc' (Sura 4, verse 3). The Quran gives a Muslim husband authority to chastise his wife; indeed, he is obliged to 'scourge' her, if he feels he has any cause to 'fear rebellion', 'Men are in charge of women, because Allah made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them...etc.' (Sura 4, verse 34).
Under Sharia Law, the wife of a Muslim is treated as a slave, the equivalent of a piece of landed property. 'Your women are a tilth for you (to cultivate) so go to your tilth when ye will,...' (Sura 2, verse 223).
A Muslim husband may divorce his wife, merely by announcing his intentions, 'The words that effect a divorce may be plain or allusive. Plain words effect the divorce whether one intends whether one intends divorce by them or not, while allusive words do not affect it unless one intends divorce by them. Using plain words to effect a divorce means expressly pronouncing the word 'divorce' (or words derived from it. When the husband says, “I divorce you”, or “You are divorced”, the wife is divorced whether he has made the intention or not. Using allusive words to the effect a divorce includes, the husband's saying, “You are now alone”, “You are free”, “You are separated”, “You are parted”, “You are no longer lawful to me”, “Return to your kin” etc.'. ('The Reliance of the Traveller', 'n3.1-3', p 559). There is nothing either in the Quran or in 'The Reliance of the Traveller' to suggest that a wife may initiate divorce proceedings against her husband.
Her testimony of a Muslim woman in a Sharia Court is worth only half that of a Muslim male, 'And call to witness, from among your men, two witnesses. And, if two men be not (at hand), then a man and two women, of such as ye approve of witnesse, so that if the one erreth (through forgetfulness) the other will remember...' (Sura 2, verse 282)
A Muslim woman may only inherit half that which is due to her brothers, 'Allah chargeth you concerning (the provision for) your children: to the male the equivalent of the portion of two females...etc. (Sura 4, verse 11)
A Muslim man may marry an unbelieving woman, but a Muslim woman may not marry a unbeliever; he must convert to Islam before marriage can be considered, '..and give not your daughters in marriage to idolators until they believe...(Sura 4, verse 221).
The Age of Consent in Sharia Law is low enough to allow Muslim men to marry pre-pubescent girls, 'And as for those of your women as despair of menstruation, if ye doubt, their period (of waiting) shall be three months, along with those who have it not...' (Sura 65, verse 4).
After his victory over the tribe of the 'Banu Mustaliq', Muhammad encouraged the rape of the female captives, taken as war booty. This conduct is sanctioned in the Quran, and the moral example of Muhammad is used as a justification for grooming and rape of the womenfolk of unbelievers. 'O Prophet! Lo! We have made lawful unto thee thy wives unto whom thou hast paid their dowries, and those whom thy right hand possesseth of those whom Allah hath given thee as spoils of war,.. etc.' (Sura 33, verse 50) 'And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess', (Sura 4, verse 24)
Article 3. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Certain verses of the Quran, already cited, however, command Muslims to undertake the task of waging continual war against unbelievers until they accept Islam as supreme, (vide supra, under Article One, fourth paragraph. 'Universal Warfare')
Article 4. No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.
The institution of slavery is hardwired into the religion of Islam since its foundation. Muhammad himself was a slave-owner and a slave trader. He and his companions sold the women and children of defeated tribes into slavery after slaughtering their menfolk. Such events are recorded both in several Hadiths and in the Ibn Ishaq's 'Biography of the Apsostle of God' the 'Sira', notably in the treatment of the 'Banu Qurayza' and the 'Banu Mustaliq'. Following this example, the Muslim Caliphates extending across the Middle East and North Africa conducted systematic slave raids against the native Africans (the 'Abid') and white European Christians (the 'Mamluk'). For many centuries, the children of Eastern Europeans were regularly abducted during the slave raids of the Turks. Slave raids against the children living on the coastal towns and villages of Italy, France, Spain and Portugal were also prey to slave raids of the Barbary Pirates.
[continued: Slavery persisted...]
Slavery persisted in the Muslim world until erradicated by European administrations. However, slavery is now making a reappearance in those very societies, notably in sub-Saharan Africa, where the effects of European civilisation are in retreat and where Sharia Law is becoming inreasingly dominant.
Article 5. No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
The Quran, however, expressly provides for crucifixion and limb amputation as part of its array of punishments and tortures to be inflicted upon defeated enemies, 'The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will killed, or crucified, or have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides,...' (Sura 5, verse 35).
Article 6. Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.
Unbelievers have no rights under Sharia Law.
Article 7. All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.
Under Sharia Law, the rights of Muslims take precedence over the interests of unbelivers.
Article 8. Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.
Sharia Law provides no redress for offences committed by Muslims against unbelievers.
Article 9. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.
These rights and freedoms are not recognised under Sharia Law.
Article 10. Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.
To meet the requirements set out in this Article of the Declaration, justice must be considered an end in itself. Sharia Courts, however, operate on inquisitorial procedures and treat the administration of Sharia Law as a means of furthering obedience to Islam.
Article 11. (11.1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence. (11.2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.
Sharia Courts do not operate from the presumption of innocence. Unbelief is already the equivalent of guilt. 'Lo, those who disbelieve in the Reminder when it cometh unto them (are guilty),...(Sura 41, verse 41).
Article 12. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
Sharia Law does not provide unbelievers with protection from arbitrary interference from the state or from unwarranted attacks against their reputation.
Article 13. (13.1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state. (13.2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.
Sharia Law does not recognise these rights and freedoms.
Article 14. (14.1) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution. (14.2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Sharia Law does not recognise these rights and freedoms.
Article 15. (15.1) Everyone has the right to a nationality. (15.2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.
Sharia Law does not recognise these rights and freedoms.
Article 16. (16.1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution. (16.2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses. (16.3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.
Under Sharia Law, marriages are arranged between the families of the putative spouses; thereafter, the wife remains subservient to her husband. Sharia Law allows Muslim parents the right to murder any recalcitrant daughter who, by refusing to marry according to their choice, brings dishonour upon the family. 'The following are not subject to retaliation – a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring – or offspring's offspring'. (Reliance of the Traveller, 'o1.2(4)', p584)
Article 17. (17.1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others. (17.2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.
Sharia Law does not recognise the rights of unbelievers to hold and use property..
Article 18. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
Sharia Law expressly denies the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion and the right to change religion; Islam is the only religion acceptable to Allah. 'Lo! Religion with Allah (is) The Surrender (to His will and guidance)....(Sura 3, verse19); 'and whoso seeketh as religion other than Surrender to Allah, it will not be accepted from him', (Sura 3, verse 85); 'This day, I have perfected your religion and completed My favour unto you, and have chosen for you, as religion, Al-Islam', (Sura 5, verse 3); 'He it is who hath sent His messenger with the guidance and the Religion of Truth [sic] , that He may make it conqueror of all religion, however much idolaters be averse', (Sura 61, verse 9), also (Sura 9, verse 33) & (Sura 48, verse 28).
Article 19. Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
.Sharia Law does not recognise these rights and freedoms.
Article 20. (20.1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association. (20.2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.
Sharia Law does not recognise these rights and freedoms.
Article 21. (21.1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives. (21.2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country. (21.3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.
Sharia Law does not recognise these rights and freedoms.; the Caliphate is to be adminstered as a totalitarian dictatorship.'He maketh none to share in His government' (Sura 18, verse 27)
Article 22. Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.
Sharia Law does not recognise these rights and freedoms.
Article 23. (23.1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment. (23.2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work. (23.3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection. (23.4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.
Sharia Law does not recognise these rights and freedoms.
Article 24. Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.
Sharia Law does not recognise these rights and freedoms.
Article 25. (25.1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control. (25.2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.
Sharia Law does not recognise these rights and freedoms.
Article 26. (26.1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit. (26.2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace. (26.3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.
Sharia Law does not recognise these rights and freedoms; religious indoctrination prevails over 'full development of the human personality'. The scientific understanding of the universe is outlawed by Sharia. 'The unlawful character of philosophy....[consists of]...all too human attempts to solve ultimate questions about man, God, life after death, and so forth, without the divinely revealed guidance of the Quran and the Sunna. Any opinion that contradicts a well-known tenet of Islamic belief that there is a scholarly consensus upon is unbelief, and is unlawful to learn or teach...The unlawfulness of the “sciences of the materialists” refers to the conviction of the materialists that things in themselves or by their own nature have a causal influence independent of the will of Allah' (Reliance of the Traveller, w10&11, page 828 )
Article 27. (27.1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits. (27.2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.
Sharia Law does not recognise these rights and freedoms. Poetry is strictly curtailed 'composing panegyrics with poetic figures of speech that exceed normal bounds, earning one's living thereby, and spending most of one's time at it'; singing, “Allah Mighty and Majestic sent me [Muhammad] as a guidance and a mercy to believers and commanded me to do away with musical instruments, flutes, strings, crucifixes, and the affair of the pre-Islamic period of ignorance. On the Day of Resurrection. Allah will pour molten lead into the ears of whoever sits listening to a songstress. Songs make hypocrisy grow in the heart as water does herbage”; and the making of images 'It is unlawful to decorate walls with pictures of animate life'. (Reliance of the Traveller, 'w52.1 (432-438)' p989, 'r40.1 (1-3)' pp774-5, 'f17.9' p201). The The unlawfulness of the “sciences of the materialists” has already been considered in the commentary on the previous Article (Number 26).
Article 28. Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.
Sharia Law prescribes a Caliphate in which the rights and freedoms set out in this Declaration will be entirely abolished.
Article 29. (29.1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible. (29.2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society. (29.3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
In order to give effect to the Universal Declaration, this Article requires the common allegiance of all people in any community, local, national or international, to the observance of its laws and the participation in its institutions of the societies in which they live Muslims, however, are forbidden by their religion from obeying the laws of the unbelievers or from working within their institutions. The Quran repeatedly calls for believers to shun the company of unbelievers. 'Let not the believers take disbelievers for their friends in preference to unbelievers' (Sura 3, verse 28); 'O ye who believe, take not for intimates other than your own folk...(Sura 3, verse 118) etc. 'Obey not of them any guilty one or disbeliever' (Sura 76, verse 24); 'O ye who believe, if ye obey those who disbelieve they will make you turn back on your heels, and turn back as losers' (Sura 3, verse 149), 'O Prophet! Keep thy duty to Allah and obey not the disbelivers and the hyprocrites...'(Sura 33, verse 1), 'obey not thou the rejecters' (Sura 68, verse8), 'obey not of them any guilty one or disbeliever' (Sura 76, verse 24).
Article 30. Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.
No state, no group nor any person may use the Articles set out in the Universal Declaration as a means of violating the rights of others.
‘THE RELIANCE OF THE TRAVELLER’
by Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri (AH769/1368), translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller (1991).
‘The Sharia’ is the name given to the Islamic code of civil, criminal and constitutional jurisprudence, derived from (1) the verses of the Quran (the book accepted by all devout Muslims as the actual and inerrant Word of God), (2) the Hadith collections (half-a-dozen compendia of anecdotes relating to the actions, opinions and judgements made by Muhammad on various subjects during the course of his career, each amounting to several thousand ‘narratives’ of which those attributed to ‘Bukhari’ (810-870AD) are regarded as the most ‘sahih’, ‘authentic’), and (3) the accumulated reasoning – ‘Ijtihad’ - of scholars and jurists complied in the early centuries of the Islamic era. The long era of philosophical speculation in the Muslim world ended in the late 11th century with the publication of a work called ‘The Incoherence of the Philosophers’ (‘Tahafut al-Falasifa’) by Muhammad al-Ghazli (1058-1111), the Islamic jurist known to Europeans by the name ‘Algazel’. It was he who closed ‘the gates of reason’, ‘the gates of ijtihad’, and effectively extinguished the achievements of Islamic science. From this time forward, knowledge of Sacred Law took priority over ‘worldly knowledge’, and later Islamic jurists occupied themselves with the task of organisation and promulgation of the codes of Sharia Law. Four separate schools of Sharia Law arose: the Hanafi, the Maliki, the Shafi’i, and the Hanbali. Although these schools of jurisprudence differ in minor details, they have much in common; an opening page of the Reliance of the Traveller (p vii) states that their content is ‘identical in approximately 75 percent of their legal conclusions’.
Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri (1302-1367) was the son of a Christian citizen of Antioch, captured and enslaved by a Muslim prince, and subsequently granted his freedom after conversion to Islam. Al-Misri was born in Cairo, and spent his childhood and formative years among Islamic scholars, memorising the entire Quran and much of the Hadith literature. He undertook responsibility for organising and publishing the accumulated labours of the Shafi’i scholars that had gone before him. In Arabic, this work is titled, ‘Umdat al-Salik wa ‘Uddat al-Nasik’, the ‘Reliance of the Traveller and Tools of the Worshipper’. Despite its tremendous significance, this book remained virtually unknown to academics in western universities until its translation, in 1988, by Nuh Ha Mim Keller. It was published three years later. Nuh Ha Mim Keller (b 1954) is an American convert to Islam, currently working at the University of Amman, Jordan. This translation of the ‘Reliance of the Traveller’ has received many commendations from authorities in the Islamic world, including the University of Al-Azhar, who have given it their imprimatur (page xx).
The reputation of Al-Azhar carries the same prestige in the Muslim world that the universities of Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, Yale, Princeton and the Vatican carry in the west. What follows is a brief selection from the book, each preceded by my own commentary, illustrating the essential nature of Sharia Law and its jurisprudence, a code of law intended by Islamic activists to undermine and replace the laws and institutions of the democratic nations of the western world.
The only form of higher education permitted to believers is knowledge of the Quran and of sacred law (the Sharia). Believers are forbidden to study the advances made by Europeans, and other unbelievers, into matters relating to the sciences of physics, chemistry, or biology, which are equated with subjects like astrology and witchcraft. For this reason, the nations of the Islamic world are unable to produce a single university of a standard found in either in Europe or America.
p14 (a7.2) Unlawful Knowledge: ‘(5) the sciences of the materialists,
(6) and anything that is a means to create doubts...’.
Circumcision is an obligation for both sexes.
p59 (c4.3) Circumcision. Circumcision is obligatory (O: for both men and women..)
It is forbidden for believers to question any of the Five Pillars of their faith; to do so is a capital offence.
p109 (f1.3) Who Must Pray. ‘Someone raised among Muslims who denies the obligatoriness of the prayer, zakat, fasting Ramadan, the pilgrimage, or the unlawfulness of wine and adultery, or denies something else upon which is scholarly consensus …. and which is necessarily known as being of the religion (N: ‘necessarily known’ meaning things that any Muslim would know about if asked) thereby becomes an unbeliever (kafir) and is executed for his unbelief…’ (my emphasis, MN).
A portion of the money which is raised for charitable purposes (Zakat, one of the Five Pillars of Islam) shall be used to finance jihad, warfare and terrorism against unbelievers. No charitable funds raised by believers shall be disbursed to benefit unbelievers.
p272 (h8.17) Those Fighting for Islam. ‘The seventh category is those fighting for Allah, meaning people engaged in Islamic military operations for whom no salary has been allotted in the army roster (O: but who are volunteers for jihad without remuneration)…’.
p274 (h8.24) ‘It is not permissible to give zakat to a non-Muslim…’
The cultural standards of Europe, and the civilised world, require men to exercise responsibility for restraining their sexual impulses. Islam, on the other hand, demands that women should cover their bodies in order to preserve their modesty. This ruling implies that any woman, Muslim or non-Muslim, failing to comply with Sharia Law on this matter is openly inviting sexual advances from men.
p512 (m2.3) Looking at Members of the Opposite Sex. ‘A majority of scholars…have been recorded as holding that it is unlawful for a woman to leave her house with faces unveiled, whether or not there is likelihood of temptation…’
Nevertheless, a woman must unveil herself when giving testimony to a court.
p514 (m2.11) Permissible Looking – at a Marriageable Member of the Opposite Sex. ‘Looking at a woman is permissible for testimony in court…..’
Sharia Law makes provisions for the appropriate punishment of criminal offences. In certain circumstances, however, murder does not always amount to a criminal offence. Extenuating circumstances to killing another person include: the killing of a non-Muslim by a Muslim, and the killing by a parent (or grand-parent) of a child who is deemed to have behaved in a manner which has brought dishonour upon the family.
p582 (o1.0) Who is Subject to Retaliation for Injurious Crimes. (o1.1) Retaliation is obligatory… (o1.2) ‘The following are not subject to retaliation….(2) a Muslim for killing a non-Muslim, …(4) a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring…’
Apostasy from Islam is a capital offence.
p595 (o8.1) When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed…
Islam divides the entire world into ‘Dar al-Salam’ (the ‘House of Peace’), the abode of the believers, and ‘Dar al-Harb’ (the ‘House of War’), the abode of the disbelievers. In several verses of the Quran, believers are commanded to wage total war against all unbelievers until Islam prevails over all other religions and other political ideologies.
p599 (o9.0) Jihad. ‘O: Jihad means to war against non-Muslims….The scriptural basis for jihad…is such Quranic verses as (1) “Fighting is prescribed for you” (Q2:216), (2) “Slay them wherever you find them” (Q4:89), (3) “Fight the idolaters utterly” (Q9:36), and such hadiths as the one related by Bukhari and Muslim that the Prophet…said, “I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform the prayer, and pay zakat. If they say it, they have saved their blood and possessions from me, except for the rights of Islam over them. And their final reckoning is with Allah”. [Bukhari, Vol 1, Chap 2, Nº25], and the hadith reported by Muslim, “To go forth in the evening to fight in the path of Allah is better than the whole world and everything in it”. [Bukhari, Vol 5, Chap 52, Nº50] Details concerning jihad are found in the accounts of the military expeditions of the Prophet…including his own martial forays and those on which he dispatched others. The former consist of the ones he personally attended, some twenty-seven (others say twenty-nine) of them. He fought in eight of them and killed only one person with his noble hand, Ubayy ibn Khalaf, at the battle of Uhud. On the latter expeditions, he sent others to fight himself remaining at Medina, and these were forty-seven in number’.
p600 (o9.1) ‘The Obligatory Nature of Jihad’. ‘Jihad is a communal obligation…’
p601 (o9.2) ‘Jihad is personally obligatory upon all those present in the battle lines…’
p601 (o9.3) ‘Jihad is also (O: personally) obligatory for everyone (O: able to perform it…)…’
When non-Muslims refuse to convert to Islam, believers must be prepared to fight them to the death. However, the lives of Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians may be spared, if they agree to pay a humiliating poll-tax.
p602 (o.9.8) The Objectives of Jihad. ‘The Caliph makes war upon the Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians…until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax (O: in accordance with the world of Allah Most High), “Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who forbid not what Allah and His messenger have forbidden – who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the book – until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled” (Q9:29)’.
p603 ‘(o9.9) The Caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim…’.
The reward of jihad is the plunder of the property of the unbelievers.
p606 (o.10.0) The Spoils of Battle. ‘(o.10.1) A free male Muslim who has reached puberty and is sane is entitled to the spoils of battle when he has participated in a battle to the end of it. After personal booty … the collective spoils of the battle are divided into five parts. The first fifth is set aside … and the remaining four are distributed, one share to each infantryman, three shares to each cavalryman…
Further to what has been said above, Jews, Christians, and other monotheists, may live under the protection of the Islamic state on conditions already specified.
p607 (o11.0) Non-Muslim Subjects of the Islamic State (Ahl al-Dhimma). ‘(o11.1) A formal agreement of protection is made with citizens who are (1) Jews, (2) Christians, (3) Zoroastrians, (4) Samarians and Sabians, if their religions do not respectively contradict the fundamental bases of Judaism and Christianity, (5) and those who adhere to the religion of Abraham…’
‘(o11.2) Such an agreement may not be effected with those who are idol worshippers …or do not have a Sacred Book or something that could have been a book…’
Stoning is the appropriate punishment to deal with sexual misdemeanours. Note, this punishment does not appear in the Quran which explicitly states, ‘The adulterer and the adulteress, scourge ye each one of them (with) a hundred stripes…(Quran, Sura 24, verse 2, Pickthall)’. However, authority for the practice of stoning appears in the Hadith of Bukhari, and is incorporated into Sharia Law on the basis of Muhammad’s moral example: (Narrated Ibn 'Abbas: 'Umar said, "I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, "We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book," and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed. Lo! I confirm that the penalty of Rajam be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if he is already married and the crime is proved by witnesses or pregnancy or confession." Sufyan added, "I have memorized this narration in this way." 'Umar added, "Surely Allah's Apostle carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him.", Bukhari, Ch 82, Nº816).
p611 (o12.0) The Penalty for Fornication or Sodomy. ‘(o.12.6) The penalty is stoning, the offender is stoned even in severe heat or cold, and even if he has an illness from which he is expected to recover. A pregnant woman is not stoned until she gives birth and the child can suffice with the milk of another….’.
Islam is a political order as well as a religion. For that reason, all believers are required to dedicate their entire lives towards the establishment of a Caliphate, as the appropriate form of governance to enforce Sharia Law.
p638 (o.25.1) The Obligatory Nature of the Caliphate. ‘The reason the office of supreme leadership has been established in Sacred Law is to fulfil the caliphal successorship to prophethood in preserving religion and managing worldly affairs….’
Believers are under no obligation to tell the truth to unbelievers, and are actually commanded to lie in order to advance the aims and objects of Islam.
p745 (r8.0) Lying. ‘The best analysis of it I have seen is Imam Abu Hamid Ghazali, who says, “Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish by lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible…, and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory…”’. (my emphasis, MN)
26th February 2018.
To the Rt. Hon. Baroness Hale of Richmond,
President of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom,
London SW1P 3BD.
Dear Lady Hale,
RELIGIOUS FACE VEILS IN COURT.
I should like to thank you for your response to my letter of the 7th December on this subject, and also for the enclosed copy of the speech which you delivered at the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies. It is very instructive to learn of the opinion of the Supreme Court, and the opinion of prominent Islamic scholars on matters relating to Sharia Law – a subject which is unhappily shrouded in mystery and misinformation in the public mind.
Yes, I agree that the best place for the book which I sent to you should be in the Library of the Supreme Court where it might be consulted at any time by those who need to refer to it, on the subject of Face Veils or any other matter. It seems that the book is currently being withdrawn from Amazon – perhaps because it is rather too frank, and too helpful – so copies are likely to become increasingly scarce in the foreseeable future.
I remain, My Lady,
Supreme Court president Lady Hale
Published: 01:09, 7 March 2018 | Updated: 12:05, 7 March 2018
Women giving evidence in court should not be able to hide their faces behind religious veils, one of Britain’s most senior judges has suggested.
Supreme Court president Lady Hale said it is vital to see expressions and body language when judging whether someone is telling the truth – something she learned while presiding over a child abuse case.
The intervention from Lady Hale, head of the Supreme Court since last autumn, comes after more than two years since guidance was promised from the Lord Chief Justice on whether or not women in courts should be allowed to cover their faces for religious reasons.
She said in a speech to the Oxford Centre For Islamic Studies: ‘The ingredients of a fair trial should be the same for all, regardless of their religious or other beliefs. We do take it for granted in this country that observing a person’s facial expressions, body language and general demeanour are an important part of assessing their credibility.
‘And our adversarial trial system depends crucially on testing a witness’s evidence through cross-examination. I suspect that most advocates would find it difficult to imagine how one would cross-examine a witness whose face one could not see.’
She revealed she had learned how important it is to see the face of a witness giving evidence during a High Court child abuse case in the 1990s.
In the hearing, the wife of a doctor suspected of violence towards a baby was persuaded to remove her face covering when giving evidence, because all the lawyers were women.
‘This mother’s love for her children was quite apparent,’ Lady Hale said. ‘So too was the fact that, from time to time, she was repeating a rehearsed script.’
But she put a question mark over whether the face of a woman needed to be visible all the time while she is on trial.
She said: ‘A rather more difficult question is whether the magistrates, judge or jury should be able to observe a defendant’s demeanour throughout the trial. I would much have preferred to be able to watch the doctor’s wife’s reactions to what was being said throughout the proceedings. But I think I could weigh up the evidence without doing so.’
Equality guidance supplied to judges last week suggested when women remove a religious face covering to give evidence, there should be screens so only the judge and jurors can see them.
7th March 2018.
To the Rt. Hon. Baron Burnett of Maldon,
Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales,
The Royal Courts of Justice,
London WC2A 2LL.
RELIGIOUS FACE VEILS IN COURT.
In December of last year, I wrote to Her Ladyship, Baroness Hale, the President of the Supreme Court, to express my concerns about witnesses who insist upon wearing face veils while giving evidence in court. From the reply that I received, and from a brief article in today’s edition of ‘The Times’ (which I attach), I understand that the final decision on this matter is to be taken by yourself at some time in the near future.
My knowledge of our legal system has not yet caught up with recent structural changes, so I offer my sincere apologies for not having approached you directly in the first place. For the sake of brevity, I enclose (1) a copy of my letter to Her Ladyship outlining my concerns with (2) my own summary introduction to ‘The Reliance of the Traveller’, the classic exposition of Islamic jurisprudence, and (3) a copy of the book itself, which you and your colleagues on the bench are most welcome to retain for the purposes of study.
All that I need say on this matter has already been said to Her Ladyship. I hope that you will consider the arguments I have put forward to her, before reaching your own conclusions.
I remain, My Lord,
Because of the substantial body of work, and to keep it all in focus here, I have closed the option for comments, critiques, praises, suggestions etc.
Please comment on another forum here. These will be read by Magnus.