Solsticewitch13's BOS

http://www.stonegateinstitute.org/2837/palestinians-arab-spring

Be the first of your friends to like this.

Unequal justice under unequal laws.

On many occasions James Madison warned of the power of an "ecclesiastical establishment." Britain now is confronted by such a threat. The estimated Muslim population in Britain is now 2.9 million, nearly five percent of the total population, and an increase of about 75 percent in the last decade. In Britain, which has the third largest Muslim population in Europe, over twenty- five areas have Muslim populations so large that if they are not the majority yet, they are approaching it. The Muslim increase has resulted from a high birth rate, greater immigration and conversion. Over 5,000 people in Britain convert each year. Hundreds of mosques have been built. Islamic primary and secondary schools have been established; the schools devote part of the time each day to religious instruction.

The country is therefore challenged by a steadily increasing number of regions with considerable Muslim populations, by the influence of Islamic religious extremists, by the influence of religion in the society, by differences over social issues such as women's rights, marriage, and divorce, and by the trend towards a legal system for Muslims, separate from the rest of the British population.

Sharia (Path, in Arabic) law is the divine law of Islam. It comes from a number of sources: the Koran, the teachings (Sunna) of the Prophet Muhammad, the interpretations by successive imams of those teachings, and fatwas, the rulings of Islamic scholars. Practicing that law in Britain is legal. As a result of the 1996 Arbitration Act, which allows private disputes to be settled by an independent arbitrator, the rulings of religious bodies have legal force in disputes about inheritance and divorce, and can be enforced by county courts or the High Court, thus making them binding in British law.

Sharia law is practiced in Sharia councils, Muslim arbitration tribunals and informal tribunals. Since 1982, well before the 1996 Arbitration Act was passed, Muslims have been resorting to Sharia courts rather than the courts of the British government. There are now 85 Sharia courts acting in accordance with Muslim principles. The rules of these courts are legally binding. About 3,500 Muslims go each year to these courts for arbitration.

The procedures of these courts present problems. The presiding judges are imams; there is no agreed-upon selection process based on experience and credentials over their appointment. Furthermore, there is little or no access to legal representation for defendants and there is no real right of appeal even when there may not be genuine consent by both parties to the arbitration. The proceedings themselves are not even recorded.

Another issue is the fact that different legal systems for individuals of different religions living in the same country and under the same government promote division. Some of the rulings of the Sharia courts are both contrary to British common law, particularly those that are discriminatory against women and non-Muslims. Sharia courts and British courts hold different standards. Sharia courts have tried to ban alcohol, drugs, gambling, smoking, prostitution, pornography, homosexuality, and the mixing of sexes in public. Extremist Muslim groups, especially Muslims against the Crusades, have even called for the creation of a " Sharia controlled zone" in three boroughs in London (Waltham Forest, Tower Hamlets, and Newham), and in several towns including Bradford, Luton, Leicester, and Dewsbury. These would be autonomous entities operating outside British law. Their objective is to defeat " Western decadence" in Britain. These controlled zones would be the first step in the creation of an Islamic state.

Surprisingly, Dr. Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury, in February 2008, argued that the adoption of certain aspects of Sharia law seemed unavoidable, and that such adoption, or "constructive accommodation," would help maintain social cohesion. He held that Muslims should not have to choose between the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty. He sought "constructive accommodation with some aspects of Muslim law," even though the principle that there is only one law for everyone is an important pillar of social identity in a Western democracy, Williams held that people also hold other affiliations and loyalties which shape and dictate how they behave in society and the law must take account of that.

The fundamental question is whether Islamic courts should be forced to acknowledge the primacy of British common law, especially in relation to the issue of discrimination against women. Sharia law treats women as second class citizens. Already, about 17,000 Muslim women in Britain have become victims of forced marriages, have been raped by their husbands, or subjected to female genital mutilation.

The Sharia courts claim that their verdicts are officially binding in British law in cases involving divorce, financial differences between husbands and wives, and domestic violence that is a criminal, not a civil, offence. Lord Phillips, the former Lord Chief Justice, spoke of the "widespread misunderstanding" of Sharia law and approved the use of Islamic courts for cases of family, marital, and financial disputes. However, many disagree with that view and hold that British law is absolute. Should the rulings of those courts be officially enforced rather than simply accepted voluntarily?

British lawmakers are concerned about the pressure being exerted on women to accept the ruling of the Sharia courts. To this end Lady Cox in June 2011 introduced a bill in the House of Lords to acknowledge the primacy of British law; the bill will be discussed during the 2012 parliamentary year. She and others have deep concerns about the discrimination Muslim women suffer in Sharia courts, particularly in cases involving child custody and domestic violence. The custody of children reverts to the father at a set time, usually the age of seven, regardless of what would be in the best interests of the children. The bill would make it an offence to claim that Sharia courts have legal jurisdiction over British family or criminal law. It would end the Sharia practice of giving women's testimony less weight than that of men, and overcome the unequal access of women to divorce. Under Muslim Sharia law, a man can divorce his wife by repudiation: a woman must provide justifications. Female evidence is not permissible in a Sharia court in the case of rape. Women cannot become judges in those courts. The general principle is the concept that human rights laws should take precedence over religious law. The immediate point is that women should be free of coercion, intimidation, and unfairness.

Of course, Sharia law is interpreted differently by Muslim judges. Not all would accept the view of Judge, Dr. Suhaib Hasan, that the penal law should provide that women be stoned for adultery and that robbers have their hands amputated. Nor is it clear to what extent women go to Sharia courts voluntarily and accept unfair decisions. It is more probable that they are pressured by families to abide by those decisions, and even more probable that they do not know their rights under British law.

Will Sharia law become the dominant law in Muslim areas? Surveys show that most Muslim students in Britain want Sharia law to be introduced into British law. Sharia law reflects Muslim cultures abroad in which compliance is enforced. Opponents of Sharia law object to law derived from theocratic systems. Once confined to Saudi Arabia, enforcing theocratic rules through national laws has spread to democratic countries, thus becoming a troubling issue. It is not consonant with the true values of democratic systems—the rule of law, legal equality, and open justice.

Michael Curtis is Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Political Science at Rutgers University and author of the forthcoming book, Should Israel Exist? A sovereign nation under attack by the international community.

Related Topics: Michael Curtis

For Palestinians, No Arab Spring

by Khaled Abu Toameh
February 10, 2012 at 4:30 am

http://www.stonegateinstitute.org/2835/al-qaeda-east-africa

Be the first of your friends to like this.

Abbas collecting autocratic titles, including those he denied to Arafat.

At a time when Arab heads of state are facing popular uprisings demanding reforms and democracy, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has secured himself yet another job: Prime Minister.

Earlier this week, Palestinians were surprised to hear that Abbas had reached a deal with Hamas to form a unity government that would be headed by the Palestinian president.

The 76-year-old Abbas already holds several titles. In addition to his job as president, he is also the chairman of the PLO Executive Committee, head of the Fatah Central Committee and Commander of the Palestinian Armed Forces.

Abbas's deal with Hamas, which was reached under the auspices of Qatar, has drawn sharp criticism from many Palestinians. Moreover, the deal has divided Hamas into camps -- one that accepts the appointment of Abbas as prime minister and another that categorically rejects it.

As if not enough, Palestinian sources reported that Abbas may also serve as Finance Minister and Interior Minister in the proposed unity government -- raising the number of titles he would hold to eight.

Abbas's critics say his planned appointment as prime minister is in violation of the Palestinian basic law, which prohibits the president from serving as prime minister simultaneously.

Ironically, it was Abbas who in 2003 demanded that the basic law be amended to prevent his predecessor, Yasser Arafat, from serving as prime minister and president at the same time. Abbas's goal back then was to limit the powers of Arafat's autocratic leadership.

While most Palestinians have welcomed the reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas, the feeling in the West Bank and Gaza Strip is that Abbas is making a mockery not only of the same law that he fought so fiercely to approve, but also of calls for reform and change.

Many Palestinians are convinced that the Qatari-brokered deal is more about helping Abbas consolidate his grip on the Palestinian government than ending the Hamas-Fatah dispute.

The deal with Hamas does not only guarantee Abbas additional titles and powers, but also helps him (and Hamas) get rid of current Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad.

Both Fatah and Hamas regard Fayyad as a threat. Fatah does not like him because of his efforts to end financial corruption and reform Palestinian institutions. Hamas has never accepted Fayyad because of his moderate views and the Palestinian Authority's security crackdown on Hamas supporters in the West Bank.

In the end, Abbas succumbed to Hamas pressure to get rid of Fayyad. If and when the Qatari-sponsored deal is implemented, Fayyad will be forced to search for a new job.

By agreeing also to serve as prime minister, Abbas has chosen to swim against the tide. Instead of paving the way for the rise of new leaders, he is searching for ways to tighten his grip on the government.

It is hard to see how he will manage to get away with this new initiative at a time when a growing number of Palestinians and Arabs are demanding an end to the rule of autocrats and tyrants.

Related Topics: Khaled Abu Toameh

Al-Qaeda Takes Over East Africa

by Anna Mahjar-Barducci
February 10, 2012 at 4:00 am

http://www.stonegateinstitute.org/2836/turkey-calls-for-international-conference-on-syria

Be the first of your friends to like this.

Ethiopia of great interest to Al-Qaeda, which sees it as the gateway to the whole African Continent.

Al-Qaeda is expanding its presence in Africa. The Islamist terrorist group hopes to find in the African continent new safe havens from which to attack Western interests and build logistical bases. Al-Qaeda is already present in the North Africa and in Somalia. However, Al-Qaeda is looking for new countries in which to establish its own rule. It is now looking at Ethiopia, a country ruled by a cruel dictatorship, and situated in the Horn of Africa. Although Ethiopia has a Christian majority, a third of the population is Muslim. Ethiopia is, the oldest Muslim settlement in Africa and where the Prophet Mohammed found refuge when he was persecuted by the Meccans. It is also the country where the jihadist Abu Musab Zarqawi may be following in the Prophet's footsteps, and to which he is thought to have to relocated before being killed in Iraq.

Al-Qaeda Cell Uncovered

The Ethiopian government recently confirmed having arrested eight suspected Al-Qaeda members as they were attempting to launch an attack in Ethiopia. The Ethiopian state-run news agency, ENA, citing a statement by Ethiopia's Federal Police, reported that the National Intelligence and Security Service Taskforce of the Federal Police said the eight suspects had been arrested after they were found organizing, providing training to, and educating recruits, with the assistance of the Somali terror group, Al-Shabab. According to the same report, the suspects also had links with al-Qaeda cells in other parts of the world, including Kenya, Sudan, Philippines, Saudi Arabia and South Africa.

Ethiopia became one of Al-Qaeda's targets after intervening in the Somalia war in 2006, when the Ethiopian government sent in its army to counter another Islamist movement that ruled much of southern Somalia. Last November, media reported that Ethiopian troops again entered Somalia, this time to support, Kenya's offensive against the Al-Qaeda linked group Al-Shabab, which is fighting to overthrow the Somalia's U.N.-backed transitional government and impose Islamic law there. Reuters reported that "scores of Ethiopian military vehicles, ferrying troops and weapons, pushed at least 80 km into Somalia [...], according to local residents and elders." In response, Al-Shabab militants released a statement warning Ethiopia against military intervention in Somalia: "Let them come and sniff the kind of gunpowder we have here," the statement read. Despite the warning, media reported in December that Ethiopian troops in Somalia killed a member of a notorious Yemeni Al-Qaeda-linked family, Abu Al-Baraa Abdul Aziz bin Attash. In January, Al-Shabab, in return, killed 33 Ethiopian soldiers, during a suicide attack on a Somali army base.

Boko Haram

Last December, The Ethiopian Times, among other media outlets, reported that the Nigerian terrorist group Boko Haram, responsible for recent terrorist attacks against the Nigerian Christian community, opened training camps in Ethiopia. "A source revealed that the Boko Haram, in conjunction with Al-Qaeda in Islamic Magreb opened training camps in Ethiopia, besides the usual training grounds of Al-Qaeda in Sudan and Somalia."

The Sudan Tribune also mentions that "Africa's porous borders, poor security at sea and airports as well as luck of coordinated counter-terrorist task forces, conflict and political instability among others have created [a] conducive environment to terrorist groups."

Israel

In 2010, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz published an article mentioning that the Yemen-based arm of Al-Qaida was examining the possibility of infiltrating terrorists into Israel, coming from training camps in Somalia under the guise of new Jewish immigrants from Ethiopia or as Somali refugees.

Conclusion

Al-Qaeda's support for Somali jihadists has ensured the Islamist movement a base from which to expand its activities in Eastern Africa and West Africa, and from which to develop and stage attacks against local and U.S. interests in Ethiopia, Kenya and Tanzania. Because of its geographical position, Ethiopia in particular is of great interest and importance for Al-Qaeda, which sees the country as an opening gateway to the whole African continent.

Related Topics: Anna Mahjar-Barducci

Turkey Calls for International Conference on Syria
And more from the Turkish Press

by AK Group
February 10, 2012 at 3:00 am