“Sentencing them at Preston Crown Court Sessions House, Recorder Julian Shaw told them: ‘There is no place for any religious or honour based violence. It’s abhorrent, it’s against your religion, it’s unlawful.” Did Julian Shaw study Islam? He seems to know all about it, but it is unlikely that he is aware of these facts:
Muslims commit 91 percent of honor killings worldwide. A manual of Islamic law certified as a reliable guide to Sunni orthodoxy by Al-Azhar University, the most respected authority in Sunni Islam, says that “retaliation is obligatory against anyone who kills a human being purely intentionally and without right.” However, “not subject to retaliation” is “a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring’s offspring.” (‘Umdat al-Salik o1.1-2). In other words, someone who kills his child incurs no legal penalty under Islamic law. In this case, of course, the victim was the murderer’s wife, a victim to the culture of violence and intimidation that such laws help create.
The Palestinian Authority gives pardons or suspended sentences for honor murders. Iraqi women have asked for tougher sentences for Islamic honor murderers, who get off lightly now. Syria in 2009 scrapped a law limiting the length of sentences for honor killings, but “the new law says a man can still benefit from extenuating circumstances in crimes of passion or honour ‘provided he serves a prison term of no less than two years in the case of killing.’” And in 2003 the Jordanian Parliament voted down on Islamic grounds a provision designed to stiffen penalties for honor killings. Al-Jazeera reported that “Islamists and conservatives said the laws violated religious traditions and would destroy families and values.”
Until the encouragement Islamic law gives to honor killing is acknowledged and confronted, more women will suffer.
“Asian trio who rammed their car into the boyfriend of one of their sisters in ‘honour attack’ all avoid prison,” by Richard Spillett, MailOnline, November 4, 2015 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):
Three Asian men who carried out an ‘honour attack’ on the boyfriend of one of their sisters have all avoided prison terms.
Kasim Ali, 25, and his cousins Adeel Ali, 20, and Razi Khalid, 18, targeted Aquib Baig because their family did not approve of him seeing their sister, a court was told.
They rammed his car before chasing him into a corner store in Blackburn, Lancashire, where they kicked and beat him in front of horrified shoppers.
Despite a judge condemning the violence, the trio were this week spared jail for their attack on Mr Baig, which took place on April 13.
Sentencing them at Preston Crown Court Sessions House, Recorder Julian Shaw told them: ‘There is no place for any religious or honour based violence.
‘It’s abhorrent, it’s against your religion, it’s unlawful. I have had to see the violence perpetrated.
‘Mercifully, perhaps more by luck than judgement, the victim didn’t sustain more serious injuries.
‘He was attacked by all three of you together at the same time despite attempts by member of the public to break it up and despite the perception that he offered no violence towards you at all.’
Prosecutor Sarah Gruffydd told the court how Mr Baig was in a relationship with Kasim Ali’s sister, causing upset among the extended family.
Miss Gruffydd said: ‘It was a relationship which was disapproved of by Ali and the rest of his family. This is an honour-based violence case.’
She told the court the three attackers drove their car into Mr Baig’s before chasing him into a shop and attacking him.
The court heard that the beating only came to an end after members of the public got in between the defendants.
The victim was taken to hospital where he was found to have bruising to his forehead and left eye, grazes to his cheek and swelling to his head. He also had injuries to his chest and back, the court heard.
Miss Gruffydd added: ‘It was a group action and a sustained assault. There was kicking and stamping and an attempt to cause more serious harm.’
Defending Kasim Ali, Ben Morris said: ‘I’m not too sure what honour-based means. If this was a young man from Liverpool, not of the Muslim faith, who didn’t approve, he may well take steps to stop his sister from heading down a particular road.
‘He is a sensible chap who doesn’t hang about with the wrong sort and this is entirely out of character for him.
‘The family are together and reunited. There is no rift between sister and brother or father and son.’
Darren Preston, for Adeel Ali, also refuted claims it was an honour attack.
He told the court: ‘Whatever it was that sparked that violence in this young man, it was nothing to do with this honour-attack, as the prosecution has put it.
‘He was angry for a specific reason, perhaps for a good one but of course that’s no excuse.’…

jr says
I fear for the future as the world continues to go down this dark path
Don McKellar says
You and every thinking person who has been intellectually honest with themselves fear for the future.
The most fearful thing of all is that we — those who have educated ourselves about the nightmare facts about Islam — are in the tiny minority. And the odds of the majority throwing off their brainwashing and/or willful ignorance in time and taking sweeping, corrective action are very slim before the civil wars break out. That time is A LOT closer than most think in several major EU countries thanks to Merkel’s mass colonization plans. It’s no joke.
Cartimandua says
All we can do is what we few do, continue to fight. Tell the truth. Truth always wins, but it takes time.
mortimer says
Muslims commit 91 percent of honor killings worldwide. A manual of Islamic law certified as a reliable guide to Sunni orthodoxy by Al-Azhar University, the most respected authority in Sunni Islam, says that “retaliation is obligatory against anyone who kills a human being purely intentionally and without right.” However, “not subject to retaliation” is “a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring’s offspring.” (‘Umdat al-Salik o1.1-2). In other words, someone who kills his child incurs no legal penalty under Islamic law. In this case, of course, the victim was the murderer’s wife, a victim to the culture of violence and intimidation that such laws help create.
The Palestinian Authority gives pardons or suspended sentences for honor murders. Iraqi women have asked for tougher sentences for Islamic honor murderers, who get off lightly now. Syria in 2009 scrapped a law limiting the length of sentences for honor killings, but “the new law says a man can still benefit from extenuating circumstances in crimes of passion or honour ‘provided he serves a prison term of no less than two years in the case of killing.’” And in 2003 the Jordanian Parliament voted down on Islamic grounds a provision designed to stiffen penalties for honor killings. Al-Jazeera reported that “Islamists and conservatives said the laws violated religious traditions and would destroy families and values.”
Until the encouragement Islamic gives to honor killing is acknowledged and confronted, more women will suffer.
Recorder Julian Shaw’s approach to the matter is GUESSING. It would be more intellectual of him to research and study Sharia law and its application in Islamic countries which acknowledge and even exonerate ‘honour killings’.
YES, ‘honour killing’ is part of Sharia law…Mr. Shaw should acquaint himself with it.
Mike says
The judge needs to visit Raqqa and attend Islamic classes there.
Or, frankly, Al-Azhar, for a start. If he survives and still has the same opinions, I’ll fund a trip to Raqqa for him…
Salome says
And if that doesn’t work, while he’s still in Raqqa, you should introduce him to someone’s sister.
Neil Jennison says
And just bear in mind, how many third world Muslims are flooding into Europe as I write this. This will only get more and more common.
David Church says
I believe no amount of reading about Islam in general and Sharia Law in particular would help arrogant judges and world leaders who presume to tell Muslims what Islam is or is not!
Rev g says
What an absolute idiot! Even assuming that he studied islam and found some justification for his claim, it is still idiocy.
Next he will need to empty the prisons entirely. I am sure a good number of prisoners are Christians or Jewish, and murder, rape, and stealing are abhorrent to their religion. Those few prisoners left would surely claim a religious belief in order to find freedom
Angemon says
Right, that’s why they’re free to walk the streets of Blackburn…
Hmmm, I wonder if the judge ever read anything relating to islamic law…
jayell says
“There is no place for any religious or honour based violence.
it’s against your religion”
1. They’ve committed the act of gross violence (in front of witnesses).
2. But it’s (apparently!) against they’re religion.
3. So they’re let off. Because they shouldn’t have done it.
4, Is there some insanity here? See my post below.
Dave B says
There is a covenant between the police, and by extension the courts, that the people shall not take the law into their own hands as long as the Police (and courts) uphold their end of the bargain.
That covenant is now dead and buried. The authorities have now not only totally abdicated from their responsibilities but are actively aiding the islamic invaders. As a white Englishmen, do you for one minute think that if, with premeditation, I rammed someone with a car and then beat them I would get off with a non custodial sentence?
This is happening all the time… the Imam let off for molesting a little girl, the islamic punk let off after raping a girl because of his cultural belief!!! And yet when a father went to recover his UNDERAGE daughter from the clutches of a muslim rape gang, the police threatened to arrest HIM!!!
The Police and courts have failed and seem to be actively working against us. Me personally… I’m reclaiming my right of self defence and tooling up. It’s time all of us tooled up.
Kepha says
DaveB–You’ve dusted off the argument used by the Parliamentary Puritans and Scots Covenanters back in 1638 when they deposed Charles I and by the Protestant Netherlanders when they successfully rebelled against the King of Spain.
I admit that I have long feared the day when the people need to take justice into their own hands. I’ve seen too many places wracked by revolutionary violence and its aftermath and read too much history to be truly comfortable with either just war or right of revolution–even though I believe in both. Yet I wince every time I read of such idiotic statements by some black-robed fool. But if the revolution must come, we all had better be ready to be in it for the long haul, including those of us who will probably not live to see its resolution.
jayell says
Yet again I’m noticing references to ‘revolution’ (or ‘civil war’) in posts both on this site and elsewhere in UK blogs. That should set the alarm bells ringing because it’s a clear signal that we’re reaching the limits of this famous ‘tolerance’ that we’re supposed to be exercising towards those who apparently have to be ‘tolerated’; the ‘credit balance’, as it were, is now running out (some might say that this proverbial ‘credit balance’ was far too generous in the first place to judge from some of the reported experiences of many in the UK and elsewhere). What I cannot understand is the premise that a situation where one apparently has to exercise perpetual ‘tolerance’ is somehow ‘satisfactory’, because the fact that one has to ‘tolerate’ (rather than ‘welcome’ or at least ‘accept’) suggests that the situation in question is basically UNstatisfactory, and anything that is ‘unsatisfactory’ cannot be sustained. It would be the responsibility of those in charge to correctly judge the limits of sustainability in any situation because these limits, by definition, cannot be extended. And those in charge will have to take responsibility for the consequences of any bad judgements because these consequences will be way beyond their control. And Dave B and Kepha are sending signals that we might just be in sight of that point now.
jayell says
“They rammed his car before chasing him into a corner store in Blackburn, Lancashire, where they kicked and beat him in front of horrified shoppers…..”
OK. 1. – “They rammed his car” – deliberate and premeditated reckless driving with intent to cause criminal damage and injury. Causing actual criminal damage.
2. “…..chasing him into a corner store…….” – Threatening behaviour, at the very least.
3 “…..where they kicked and beat him in front of horrified shoppers…..” – criminal assault, plus grievous/actual bodily harm.
Forget the ‘honour’ bit, that’s quite irrelevant. This was an atrocious piece of thuggish criminal behaviour. Why the hell wasn’t the book thrown at them???
ballotcode says
I find it morbidly humorous that there is an ideology that has rules or laws under which conditions that it is acceptable to murder people. That is so far from any form of moral code that a rational person or society would come up with that it is dumbfounding.
I think that this is the situation that most in the midst of cultural jihad have arrived at, and are in denial. Thinking to them selves, they can’t be all that bad, and this is the mild semi passive form of sharia.
Kepha says
What else do you expect from a legal establishment that denies that there is any such thing as Divine and Natural Law?
Rob says
Is there some kind of leftie/liberal honours board where judges and politicians of this ilk apply for brownie points?
Why worry about no go zones when the open British Courts System a dual-level of culpability approach.
Sad and sick.
Rob says
‘operate a dual level etc’
Charli Main says
Here we go again with the MSM continuing to kiss Muslim arse by describing this vermin as ” Asian”.
Evolution says
That’s what I was thinking.
Kasim Ali, Adeel Ali, Razi Khalid – not very Asian sounding.
Even less Asian looking.
The media always has to go that one extra step to find new ways of making people sick.
Kepha says
Rather unfair to lots of people with antecedents from anywhere between Haifa and Hualian who do not share the jihadist ideology.
gravenimage says
UK: Judge frees Muslim honor attackers, says honor violence “against your religion”
………………..
No wonder the violent Mohammedans in that picture are wearing such sh*t-eating grins.
And even if this judge understands nothing about Islam, why isn’t he holding them just on the basis of their crimes? Would he let members of any other religions go because their faiths don’t condone “Honor Killings”?
Not only is this judge *dead wrong* about Islam’s not sacralizing “Honor Killings”, he is *specifically* going easy on these pious thugs *because* they are Muslim. Madness…
Tommo says
The verdict shows how our systems of law and government have been infiltrated by Islamic enables who are willing to demonstrate their total commitment to subject our culture to change and have no fear of censure or ridicule from their colleagues for making such an outrageous decision.
sidney penny says
“Sentencing them at Preston Crown Court Sessions House, Recorder Julian Shaw told them: ‘There is no place for any religious or honour based violence. It’s abhorrent, it’s against your religion, it’s unlawful.” Did Julian Shaw study Islam? He seems to know all about it, but it is unlikely that he is aware of these facts:”
.
He may be a friend of Justice Imam Sweeney.
Mr Justice Imam Sweeney said that their crime was a “betrayal of Islam”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/02/uk-judge-tells-jihad-murderers-of-soldier-that-they-betrayed-islam-they-start-screaming-allahu-akbar-and-fighting-prison-guards
The Imam Sweeney told them: “You each converted to Islam some years ago. Thereafter you were radicalised and each became an extremist, espousing views which, as has been said elsewhere, are a betrayal of Islam.” This enraged them, and they began a fight in the courtroom. It would have been interesting to see Mufti Sweeney explain what exactly was a betrayal of Islam in the actions of Mujaahid Abu Hamza and Ismail ibn Abdullah, aka Adebolajo and Adebowale. Right after the murder, Mujaahid Abu Hamza invoked the Qur’an and made specific reference to the Islamic doctrine that one must fight against those who fight against Islam.
Oppressaphobe says
So we have Sharia Law now. What’s to see here–move on!!
Jerry says
We already know well enough that there is no true honour in Islam.
Now we also know that there is honour left in the British legal system.