An essential article by Piers Akerman on the Australian vilification case against two Christian pastors. Charged with defaming Islam, they are scoring devastating points by ... quoting Islamic texts. Akerman says that the case shouldn't have been brought at all, and from the standpoint of sanity in Australian law that is certainly true. However, from the looks of his report this case could be a watershed event for the preservation of free speech and free societies, and a huge setback for the tactics of intimidation and bullying so often used by Muslims (in the US also) to silence critical inquiry and uncomfortable questions. From the Daily Telegraph, with thanks to Mark Durie, Andy Bannister, and Nicolei:
A religious vilification case has embarrassed the plaintiffs and shown the stupidity of the law, says PIERS AKERMAN.IN a case being closely followed around the world, the Victorian Government has effectively placed Islam on trial under its controversial Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001.
It didn't mean to, of course. The legislation was intended to shield religions – particularly Islam – from scrutiny and was championed by the Islamic Council of Victoria and other Muslim organisations before being passed by the Bracks Government in mid-2001.
Indeed, the current matter was the first brought under the flawed legislation when it came into effect early in 2002.
The case in the Victorian Equal Opportunity Commission bears all the hallmarks of a set-up, but it has exploded in the equal opportunity industry's face.
Consider the facts. The matter had its genesis in a seminar held under the aegis of Catch the Fire Ministries, one of the major opponents of the legislation.
Three complainants, all Australian converts to Islam, were encouraged to attend the seminar by contacts within the Victorian Islamic Council.
One of those who encouraged one of the female attendees was May Helou, who was then employed by the Equal Opportunity Commission and also involved with the Islamic Council as its women's education officer, the Australian Arabic Council, and Victorian Arabic Social Services. (Helou has apparently recently left her EOC position.)
The principal speakers at the seminar were Christian pastors Daniel Scot and Danny Nalliah and they were charged under Victoria's appalling legislation with allegedly vilifying Islam.
Attempts at conciliation before the Victorian EOC and the Victorian Civil Administration Tribunal failed and the case is now being heard by Judge Michael Higgins at VCAT.
Unfortunately for both the EOC and the Victorian Islamic Council, the three complainants – whose evidence is critical to the case – have scant knowledge of the Koran.
Pastor Scot, on the other hand, has testified to having read the Koran more than 100 times and has made a study of Islam and Islamic scholars.
Attempts to discredit his knowledge of the topic have backfired embarrassingly for the complainants' counsel, Brind Woinarski QC, and have highlighted some crucial differences between Christian and Islamic teachings.
Among the arguments Mr Woinarski has tried to develop is the claim that laughter during Pastor Scot's reading of the Koran at the seminar may have breached the Act's prohibition on "severe ridicule".The screwy law was already on dangerous ground concerning freedom of speech, but now freedom to laugh is also under threat in Victoria.
Pastor Scot has also been asked to comment on the Koranic verse which calls for the cutting off of the right hand of a thief, and another verse which mentions repentance.
As Pastor Scot's barrister, David Perkins, noted, there is nothing about re-attaching the hands of those who later repent.
Pastor Scot was also able to point out that Mohammed cut off the hands of thieves and that Muslim scholars, four schools of Sunni Islamic law, as well as Shi'a law, all say that a hand can be cut off and do not link the verse relating to repentance with the earlier verse about such punishment.
Indeed, he explained that the Koranic law as well as the hadith (the collected teachings second only to the Koran) say that if a thief steals again they also will have their right leg chopped off.
Islamic mercy, he said, was shown by the fact those who had been punished by having a hand chopped off did not have their leg similarly treated – so long as they changed their ways.
The case has even examined the question of differences between Allah in the Koran and God in the Bible.
The hearing was also given chapter and verse references (or Koranic reference and hadith) to the role of women in Islam.
The hearing was told that the Islamic view was that the testimony of a woman was worth half that of a man, that a woman was a "toy", was "not to be seen" and was as a "rib that is crooked".
It was told that a husband's sexual demands must be met even if his wife is cooking a meal, that a wife is as property, that a "temporary wife" is acceptable and that a woman is "deficient in intelligence".
Whether May Helou will be as energetic an exponent in promoting Islam when this matter is finally resolved will be interesting to see.
Perhaps the most telling moment to date came just last Friday when Pastor Scot was asked by the Islamic Council's barrister Debbie Mortimer to stop reading passages from the Koran and just give verses because the readings vilified Muslims. He replied: "If it is not for reading, it shouldn't be in the book."
Relatively straightforward and accurate reports of the trial have been placed on the web by Pastor Scot's church; certainly in all the pertinent facts they accord with the few reports that have appeared in the local press.
Summing up in the case should begin next week. The greatest crime is that the politically correct Victorian Government ever enacted the shameful legislation which permitted the case to begin at all.
This is a remarkable case, one well known to a colleague of mine in Canada, who is a fundamentalist Christian. Apparently, the case is notorious amongst Christian groups internationally.
It is a classic case of PC run amok through the misguided prosecution of two Christian pastors through an Australian state human rights tribunal of some sort.
The link is:
www.catchthefire.com.au
Click on the Articles and Updates section of the Islamic Court Case- posting No. 2 is the entire, pdf of the defence brief submitted to the tribunal. Makes for fascinating reading. I suspect the defendants will be acquitted, but it will CERTAINLY give ACAIR a boost when fighting CAIR.
CAIR and others meant the law for evil; God meant it for good. Never has Islam had so much light shone on it. May Helou will wind up becoming a Christian. Who can eschew freedom for bondage?
Excellent!
I have always said that the more the truth comes out about "REAL" Islam—the more Islam will become the pariah of the world.
And in the digital age—the truth is getting out faster than ever before. Let us hope it is fast enough, before some mad-mullah throws the bomb.
Lili
I do hope that the Anti-CAIR people will be allowed to quote from the Quran and the Hadiths if the case does indeed make it to court. Let their own words hang them - and how can they say that the words were taken out of context, when they are being read directly from the Quran......go for it!
I am delighted on how the case is going in Australia - let the Pastors keep reading the falsehood in the Quran - and perhaps if the media does report it, those stupid Australian converts to Islam will finally see the truth and leave that death cult. I still cannot understand how ANY woman could EVER convert to Islam where she becomes a non-entity just for the pleasure of a man! So disgusting!
jihan
jihan
Great stuff.the truth is always the truth in any room, let your yes be yes and your no be no ...............
Its clear (even for a government body)that if you give them enough rope (stand your ground with grace and conviction and truth ) THEY WILL INDEED HANG THEMSELVES.
The end result of attenpting to mock the Lord of Lords!
PTL
thom
To Helen and Lilith,
May Helou was a Christian Arab that found peace in Islam. "Never has Islam had so much light shone on it."....which is why it is getting more converts then ever!
Phillip,
"... which is why it is getting more converts than ever!"
This would be more than just an empty boast if you responded to the points in the above article. Specifically regarding amputation and the treatment of women.
I look forward to your response.
To Not Phillip,
Islam and other Non-Christian religions must be doing something right(regardless of what their teachings are), as they are getting more converts and Christianity is losing followers.
If the treatment of women is really that bad in Islam, why is it that there are more women convert to Islam then men.
Shalom
Phillip,
"Islam and other Non-Christian religions must be doing something right(regardless of what their teachings are), as they are getting more converts and Christianity is losing followers."
This is not necessarily so. Some recent studies have shown that Christianity is actually growing faster. It is losing people in America and Europe, but gaining more in Africa and Asia. Also I'm sure you're aware that there are tens of thousands of converts from Islam to Christianity in Muslim countries who cannot announce their conversion openly because Muslim law calls for the death penalty for converts.
"If the treatment of women is really that bad in Islam, why is it that there are more women convert to Islam then men."
I don't know. You tell me. Tell me also what you think of the Koran saying it's ok to beat your wife. (Sura 4:34).
"Shalom"
Thanks, but I am not a Jew. Why do Muslims think that any critic of Islam must be a Jew?
To Not Phillip,
You are right more Asians are converting to Christianity, but alot are reverting back to Buddhism. A lot of my friends have done that. Converting to Christianity was something you did when you were young and silly and it was what everyone did at that time because it was the "in thing", but when it was time to be serious with life, many reverted back or gave up religion altogether.
Shalom means Peace. I only mean to wish you peace. I am not a Muslim nor a Jew but a former Christian and we always use to wish each other peace where I am from regardless of what religion you belong to.
"Converting to Christianity was something you did when you were young and silly and it was what everyone did at that time because it was the 'in thing', but when it was time to be serious with life, many reverted back or gave up religion altogether."
A bit of an overgeneralization.
"Shalom means Peace. I only mean to wish you peace. I am not a Muslim nor a Jew but a former Christian and we always use to wish each other peace where I am from regardless of what religion you belong to."
You may be interested to know that Muslims are forbidden by Muslim law to wish peace (salaam)to non-Muslims. I also notice you didn't answer my question about wife-beating.
I doubt that you are not a Muslim, and I would like to see you or any other Muslim answer some of the tough questions about your faith.
Peace.