SHARIA COURT IN ONTARIO

Hi ya’ll. I thought that would get your attention.
Greetings from Canada! Are you as concerned over the
current controversy over sharia as many Canadians are?
Then please take a few moments to read my post…I
couldn’t take the risk over sending it directly to
Robert Spencer’s e-mail, due to the fear of my mail
becoming bogged down through regular channels. Anyway,
I’d just like to brief you all on the current
situation here in Canada. It’s a long post…just to
warn you…

In Vancouver, amidst a crowd of protesters, the
premier of B.C. reiterated his pledge not to allow for
an Islamic court in Vancouver, however, Ms. Homa
Arjomand is still angry with the premier, claiming
that ‘it’s not enough.’ Oh, and for those of you who
were concerned about the September 8th protests, the
protests went along just fine, no, they were not
banned, and they did not ‘incite racial hatred.’ No,
Canada is not going down the toilet…no, amputations
will not be allowed, the Charter still has the final
say….no one will be stoned to death. There have been
clashes between the Pro-Israeli student groups and the
Pro-Palestinian student groups at Concordia University
(physical and verbal), over the alleged recruitment by
the Israeli groups to recruit Israeli fighters to go
to Israel, and clashes between the two groups have
become more and more frequent this past year.

A member of Dhimmi Watch once pointed out the fact
that the wife of Maher Arar (the Canadian-Syrian man
who was deported by the US and tortured in Syria for
two years), is running for membership for a party. She
is, by the way, a very smart lady, who even has a
degree in Engineering from Waterloo (one of Canada’s
most prestigious universities.) She was trying to
become part of the NDP, in order to make sure that no
one would be put through such a harrowing ideal as her
husband once was, not trying to turn Canada into an
Islamic state. By the way, in case you are still a
little apprehensive, don’t worry, the NDP only has 27
seats in Canada’s parliament, so they are hardly a
majority.
Anyway, I’m sure that you all know by now that Ontario
has had Hassidic Courts for decades, and that both
Christians and Jews have been using them for years. In
fact, at this moment, Canadian Jewish women are asking
the Ontario government to review and possibly
dismantle the Jewish courts, claiming that past
rulings have been ‘racist, homophobic, and sexist.’
Furthermore, the government is put in a tough spot:
they can’t say ‘Jews, we like your courts, so you can
stay. Muslims we don’t like yours.’ This situation has
divided Muslims within the community, and I asked a
Muslim girl from my school, part of an organization
called MSA(Muslim Student’s Association), what were
her thoughts. She told me that she was unequivocally
against it, and that what the Qu’ran gives women,
sharia takes away, and that arbitration should be left
as a private matter. She also claimed that the Hadiths
were false, that they were created 200 yrs after the
Muhammad, and that most Muslims didn’t believe in
them.

Like the Muslims, Christians also have a similar
organization called the Varsity Christian Fellowship,
and each hold a ‘Christian Awareness week,’ and a
‘Muslim awareness week,’ whereby they each give out
Bibles and Qu’rans. I can’t tell you how annoying they
both are, but it doesn’t seem to bother the any other
students, because no one pays any attention to either
of them. As a former Christian, however, I can’t tell
you how annoying Christians can be, trying to ‘bring
me back into the fold.’ Both religions suck, suck bad,
because religion tells you what to think.

Anyway, the government is in a tough spot because it
doesn’t want to alienate both the Jews and the
Muslims. The liberal government doesn’t have to worry,
though, because no one with half a brain would vote
for the Ontario PC. Those school-closing,
tax-cuts-for-the-rich, hospital closing..you see where
I’m going with this….Anyhoo, as it stands now, the
tribunal is still being set up. There will be about 30
members, I believe, elected by members of the
community, but Syed (the man who suggested the idea in
the first place), wishes to see more female members.
The courts can only deal on matters of inheritance,
divorce, and business. My brother, also a lawyer,
claims that Syed is a money-grubbing freeloader, which
is partly true. The sharia courts will be cheaper to
use than using the secular courts, and, the proponents
claim, it will be easier because the arbitration will
be done in their own language(?) Like they couldn’t
get a translator in the secular courts? Also, as one
man pointed out, what about Immigrant Muslim women who
don’t know their rights? I suppose that’s true…but if
you are a young woman living in Canada who doesn’t
want to go to the Islamic court, then you should stand
up for you’re rights, because the law is on your side.
Within the arbitration process, there will be a lawyer
for both the man and the woman, who will inform both
parties of their rights, and, yes, women can get just
as much inheritance as men. So I really think that
there is some fear mongering going on….done to
distract the public from more important issues. The
Taliban are not coming to Canada, there is no Islamic
Republic of Canada…and, don’t worry, if some
fundamentalists decide to cross over the border to
pick a fight….well, don’t pick a fight with angry
Americans who hate ‘dem damn furrigners’ and who
consider it their god-given right to shoot anything
that moves (LOL)..That was a joke, people.

Actually Syed never said that the Sharia courts were
better for women. All he said was that there is no
distinction between being a Muslim and how you act.
What were women doing before? The Hassidic courts also
conceded the fact that gender neutral courts may be
better for women. Both the Islamic Council of Canada
and the Canadian Council of Muslim women oppose the
sharia court, along with a great number of Muslims
(male as well as female), oppose the courts, and are
rather confused as to how arbitration courts are going
to impose rulings. First, most don’t like the idea b/c
of social pressure, fearing that any woman who opposes
it will be ostracized. Second, because there is much
confusion over how to interpret such rulings ordained
by the tribunal ( a sh’itte Muslim wouldn’t accept a
ruling from a Sunni Muslim). Third, there is a fear
that allowing for such courts within Canada could
bring a new social conservatism. I get the sense that
there is a lot of fear mongering. Muslims are actually
very well integrated into society, and I think that
may be in part due to the fact that discrimination
laws are tougher in North America. However, there is
still fear over allowing the courts into Canada, there
is no evidence that the courts are being brought in by
social conservatives from abroad. The courts weren’t
being endorsed by anyone from the Saudis. Even the
Gestapo(Christian Heritage Party) pointed out that
there is an incredible amount of fear-mongering going
on. However, they did point out one case for alarm:
that Syed might try to bring in polygamy through a
loophole in the Charter. Most Canadians don’t want
polygamy, especially after the recent raid on a
Christian fundamentalist community in Vancouver. Women
were subjected to religious indoctrination, beatings,
and isolation.

In any case, if you are opposed to the sharia courts,
there is much you can do: you can stage protests,
petitions. Writing letters to Canadian newspapers
doesn’t help, as one member of Dhimmi Watch suggested.
Frankly, no one really cares if you complain to the
opinion pages or not. International pressure would
help, and it stopped the Canadian seal hunt, which was
about four months ago. As a Canadian, I’m a firm
believer in the separation of Church and State, and
so, I don’t think any religious courts should be
allowed. Homa Arjomand will be speaking at the
University of Toronto on the 4th and again in
November. You all seem so passionate about the issues
concerning the Islamic courts, so if you have any
questions, comments, or suggestions for Ms. Arjomand,
or just any words of support, you can e-mail me at:
linda_quaig@yahoo.ca, and I will gladly pass them on.

Posted by: Linda at September 27, 2004 10:49 AM

Sorry, I had to post this message twice, maybe three times just to make sure everyone would see it.

Posted by: Linda at September 27, 2004 11:32 AM

As I wrote in my 9/13/04 article, Shar'a law is a human rights violation, particularly to women and non-Muslims, and should be abolished.

If these lizards want Islamic laws so badly, theyt should pack up and move back to Islamic lands. Who do these self-serving slobs think they are?

Posted by: DCWatson at September 27, 2004 2:10 PM

Yeah, Canadians were asking the same question. I still think that the threats are over exaggerated, though.

Posted by: Linda at September 27, 2004 2:16 PM

Bravo, Switzerland!

Alongwith Holland, Denmark, Poland and maybe even Britain, Switzerland by obeying the dictum of self-preservation through its actions has maybe made it a little more fashionable and acceptable in Europe's cretinsed leftist bastions.... Well, one can always hope, eh?

Posted by: voletti at September 27, 2004 4:13 PM

Sorry, Linda. Sharia courts are much more dangerous than Jewish and Christian courts because, in contrast to Jews and Christians, Muslims intend to to make Islam triumphant over the other two and will impose Sharia on all. If Sharia must exist, keep in in the Middle East. The best solution is to eliminate this heinous set of laws. End of discussion.

Posted by: epg at September 27, 2004 4:36 PM

Linda,
Christians may try to tell you what to think
but they don't try to kill you for thinking
different from them or leaving Xianity.

Mohammedism will kill you for leaving islam,
or being a member of another islamic sect
or kill you for following another religion.

You seem to be an intelligent, sincere person
so read: Bat Yeor, Robert Spencer, Ibn Warriq
and you will find out what cult "sucks."

Posted by: the poetess at September 27, 2004 5:28 PM

re the action in Switzerland:

This is a first step to prevent Islamization of a Western country. It should be applied here in the US, where the citizenship laws were established when new citizens (born or immigrated) were believed to be citizens of the country first, with no loyalty to a an ideology at odds with the Constitution.

The next step is the removal of immigrants that are at odds with the Constitution (but not at odds when they can use it to further their agenda). Citizens intent on the overthrow of the government and Constitution by any means, including the flooding of the country with people subservient to a foreign ideology, have to be stripped of their citizenship and removed.

Immigration reform will have to keep out people subservient to a foreign ideology incompatible with present (not future) laws and the Constitution.

Chances of this being implemented here are slim at best. It is not necessary to go into all the reasons for that; freedom of religion is the first one. Only when Islam is relegated to the category of Communism and Nazism can this be circumvented. Fat chance for that.

At least we can hope that Switzerland can remain a country of the Swiss, not of the Moslems.

Posted by: unicorns62000 at September 27, 2004 10:03 PM

Linda:

By giving equivalence to Islam and Christianity, you are doing a disservice to the fight against Islamic piece-meal eating into non-Islamic countries.

Whether you believe in any religion or not is beside the point. Under Islam, you would not be allowed that option. If Christians are "annoying" you to return to that religion, at least they are not threatening your life for being an apostate.

Posted by: unicorns62000 at September 27, 2004 10:12 PM

I have heard a lot of that kind of arguments for the Sharia arbitration courts: that they are no Taliban-style, and are not gonna be in conflict with the Canadian (or British, Norwegian etc.) law, and so on.

The thing that I don't understand is, why on Earth do they need the Sharia in the first place, if they have no quarrel with the Canadian (etc) law? Can't they just set up community arbitration centers that are based on the law of the land where they are living? What's the point of the arbitration court that is "based on the Sharia, except when the Sharia contradicts the country's Constitution" (which it would do in most cases, if it were actually followed)? Could someone like Linda explain that?

Confused,

Posted by: Scandie at September 28, 2004 5:13 AM

When it comes to the Swiss law... It does feel weird that people born in a country, knowing no other home, would be denied citizenship in that country. But the Swiss must have their reasons. In Denmark and Norway, Muslim immigrant parents send their kids to their former homelands (primarily Pakistan and Somalia) to be "re-educated" in order to avoid their integration in their European homelands; the kids are sent to Koran schools which prepare the girls for arranged marriages and the boys for jihad. The estimated number of such kids is 5000 from both Norway and Denmark. Beaten and brainwashed, those young "Danes" and "Norwegians" "are indeed still, or again, "immigrants" and "foreigners" when they return to their countries of birth. How can you apply normal, humane integration rules when some groups don't want to integrate and raise their kids to hate the society in which they have chosen to live? (those who read Danish can see more at http://www.bt.dk/nyheder/focus:fid=100300214/ )

In addition, some days ago a Danish mufti, Shahid Mehdi, announced that Danish women are to blame themselves if they get raped while going around unveiled, that unveiled women don't deserve respect and that they, by their appearance, spoil (or make unclean) the "clean" society.

(in Danish http://nyhederne.tv2.dk/article.php?id=1349007; http://www.dr.dk/nyheder/indland/article.jhtml?articleID=201438 and http://pol.scantiger.net/index.php?p=106 )

So obviously, Denmark remains "unclean" as long as there are non-Muslim Danes around...

The good news is that many politicians, including the left-liberal red-green alliance, reacted. So it is not just the business of "far right" any more. Perhaps there is something similar going on in Switzerland?

Posted by: Scandie at September 28, 2004 6:58 AM