Muslims in Britain are pushing for the new religious hatred law, and jihadists will be the happiest to see it instituted, since it will muzzle honest consideration of the Islamic roots of jihad terrorism. However, at least one jihadist group, Hizb-ut-Tahrir, which runs the site Khilafah.com, doesn't look at the new law with unalloyed joy: they see that it could be turned against them, and the Qur'an.
Maybe they do have something to worry about. After all, a man was stopped from quoting the Qur'an in an Australian court because to do might have constituted incitement. Oh, wait -- that was a non-Muslim, and by reading the Qur'an he was alleged to be inciting hatred of Muslims.
Also, this presupposes a British politician who is not so much of a dhimmi as the others, and there are no such on the horizon, so Hizb-ut-Tahrir can breathe easy.
From Khilafah.com, with thanks to DC Watson:
The proposed British legislation relating to religious hatred may be perceived by many Muslims as a real benefit. Others may see it as something of a double-edged sword. However it is best described as a dagger in our back. The adoption of an “incitement to religious hatred” law will be an attempt to muzzle Muslims from quoting from the Quran, and the other sacred texts of Islam. The new law, under consideration in the Westminster Parliament, would mean Muslims convicted of incitement would face up to seven years in jail. Quoting from the Quran in a “threatening, abusive or insulting” way will become a crime in the amendment to Part 3 of the Public Order Act of 1986. Rather than introduce new legislation on the vague but broad concept of religious hatred, the UK government has decided to slip the new provisions into amendments. These are planned to change a range of minor matters in the existing Act. These include additional protections for the victims of “animal rights” activists, or greater sanction against trespass on Crown land or “a site belonging to the Monarch or Heir to the Throne”. This comes in the wake of high profile publicity stunts staged at royal residences (Windsor Castle and Buckingham Palace) during the past few years.Muslims will take particular note of the new definitions of religious hatred, which several high profile comedians have already complained about. The comedians are concerned that they will be restricted in their ability to pour scorn on all forms of organised religion, a not inconsiderable percentage of the typical comedic routine. They needn’t be concerned. In Schedule 10 of the bill, Religious Hatred is defined as “hatred against a group of persons defined by reference to religious belief or lack of religious belief”. The emphasis is clearly upon the adherents of belief (or rather perversely those of no belief). Quite how one can express religious hatred against someone who has no religion will be interesting to note. Legal commentators have indicated that expressing insults, abuse or worse against religions per se including Islam is perfectly OK in the planned scheme of things. To express any such thoughts, and hatred in particular against members of any belief/non belief will not be allowed....
It also cannot be ignored that the British Labour government will soon face a general election, and amidst rising unpopularity, due to its foreign policies, it needs to court the Muslim community. Rising anti-Muslim sentiment in the UK in the wake of 9/11, and the war against Islam is hardly surprising. This legislation will do little or nothing to protect Muslims, and is more likely to be used against those that carry and propagate Islam. Liberty has warned that the new law will be directly used against Muslims rather than protecting them: “We are particularly concerned that Home Secretary has publicly stated a desire to target and prioritise certain Islamic clerics for prosecution once the proposed extension of the law is passed”. The now former Home secretary David Blunkett when presenting the amendments to parliament stated: “It is possible to quote or misquote passages of sacred texts out of context so that they become threatening, abusive or insulting and intended or likely to stir up hatred. Such activities would rightly be caught by the scope of the law”. That these “paragons of secular virtue” now feel able to distinguish clearly between legitimate quoting and misquoting of sacred texts would be laughable if it was not so serious.
There is no shortage of verses in the Quran to excite the interest of the British judiciary. The dozens of verses exhorting Jihad for starters, or perhaps the verses warning of the plans of the Jews or Christians, or which castigate the unjust!
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ لاَ تَتَّخِذُواْ الْيَهُودَ وَالنَّصَارَى أَوْلِيَاء بَعْضُهُمْ أَوْلِيَاء بَعْضٍ وَمَن يَتَوَلَّهُم مِّنكُمْ فَإِنَّهُ مِنْهُمْ إِنَّ اللّهَ لاَ يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الظَّالِمِينَ
“O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.” [Quran 5:51]
At a time in which the Muslims living in the Western nations need to be even more vocal in presenting the clear guidance of the Quran to both Muslims and non-Muslims we find ourselves again under pressure to adhere to poorly defined and biased legislation to silence the call to Islam.
يُرِيدُونَ أَن يُطْفِؤُواْ نُورَ اللّهِ بِأَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَيَأْبَى اللّهُ إِلاَّ أَن يُتِمَّ نُورَهُ وَلَوْ كَرِهَ الْكَافِرُونَ
“They wish to extinguish Allah’s guiding (light) with their utterances, but Allah will not allow (this to pass) for He has willed to spread His light in all its fullness, however hateful this is to those that deny the truth” [Quran 9:32]
I seem to be having a little deja vu ;)
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/004702.php#comments
Like I've said before it all depends on how they are going to enforce this law. None of the police force speak Arabic for a start, so they they are only going to enforce it for English. If this law was to be put in place, then reading out certains verses would be inciting hatred agains Jews, Christians and Non-believers.
Call my cynical but they are much more likely to jump on Nick Griffin from the BNP than to risk offending our rather offensive prone muslim communities. The dark force of political correctness looms. Just imagine the furore for arresting an Imam for reading of the Qu'ran.
All in all bizarre piece of legislation purely to kiss the back sides of the Muslim vote.
Religious Villifiation law is a danger.
http://www.barnabasfund.org/news/itrhc/about_itrhc.htm
Andrew thanks for the link, I have just emailed my local MP.
Very good. I like this.
I am reminded of a case in Chicago in the 80s, I believe. The person prosecuting a neo-nazi, refused to prosecute him based on a law concerning freedom of speech. This lawyer- a conservative- understood that if the conviction occurred under that law- which would ratify it- it could be used to dampen the freedom of speech by minorities in the future.
Just think what would have happened if an activist judge (read: liberal/leftist/loser/loner) had been sitting on that case... the jihadists would be that much closer to silencing us in the US.
Here's an interesting piece of anti-dhimmitude - got this from The Guardian of all places:
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,11026,1389426,00.html
This IS a little problem:
Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the mushrikun wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
(Qur'an 9:5)
Can you feel the love?
In Canada the head of the http://www.canadianislamiccongress.org/
(Muhommed Elmasry)
thought he'd enjoy the free speech benefits
in Canada and went on TV and said "All Israelis over 18 are valid targets for murder by palestinian suicide-bombers because of the State-Army", he's now part of a Police investagation
to prove he promoted genocide and incited people to violence since just after his comment a suicide-bomber attacked civilians in an Israeli food market.
The slimeball still denies he said it but the show was re-run for the public and he's right on video calling for the murder of Jews,oops i forgot the new code-word "Israeli" .
The government might not ever pass this kind of bill in the UK, maybe not in Australia or Scandanavia, maybe not anywhere in the Western world. Nevertheless, there are too many individual Moslem thugs who'd be happy to slit your throat on a city street if you upset them with some comment or other, like Mohammed being a child molestor, a thief, a rapist, whatever else he was. You'd be luicky to go to gaol. But you could be caught up in the webs of some CAIR-like spiders, and then your life would be nearly as bad as prison becuase they'll sue you till you can pay your grocer.
Are you willing to fight for the right and for your rights even to the point of spending the night in the slammer?
Some of us have worked behind the scenes for months to bring together a movement of people across the world who will take to the streets to put a stop to Islamic encroachment, and aside from the obvious problems of street thugs, the subtle threats of CAIR, and the possiblities of your neighbours thinking you're a loon, there's a possibility that you will indeed go to bed in a cell for the night if you get caught pasing out leaflets of quotions from the Koran and Ahadith and Sira.
Are you willing to take those chances? Fighting against this Islamic fascism entails risks. Some of those risks are in upsetting the governments of our nations. Yes, you might go to gaol for handing out leaflets in London. Even at Hyde Park.
I don't think that the koran could really be banned seeing as there are now hundreds of Islamic schools in the UK.
This would mean that you would have to monitor every school and every mosque.
But isn't this fear - that the law against religious hatred might lead to banning the Quran - kind of lovely in its honesty? By expressing it, those people implicitly admit that the Quran is full of religious hatred!
I was hoping that it was a two-edged sword.
Hugh had the right idea when he suggested a few weeks ago that some clever member of Parliament (or perhaps someone like Melanie Philips) should simply read or publish tidbits from the Qur'an every day. No editorialising necessary. You know, something like
"Those with Muhammad are ruthless toward disbelievers and merciful toward themselves".
Not only would this provide an essential education for those infidels who have not read the Qur'an and therefore do not know its "wonders", but it would be fascinating to watch the Home Office squirm over the paradox of whether such a reading constitutes an offence under the new incitment law.
Charles Martel:
Rowan Atkinson, dressed as an imam... ...a role he would doubtless savour.