Sharia:

A Muslim's life is worth twice that of a Jew or Christian, and fifteen times

more than that of a Hindu or Buddhist

November 1, 2010

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/11/sharia-a-muslims-life-is-worth-twice-that-of-a-jew-or-christian-and-fifteen-times-more-than-that-of.html

With all the talk of Sharia in the news lately -- the measure to outlaw it in Oklahoma, the ongoing attempts by Islamic apologists to whitewash it -- it is useful to recall some of its more notable aspects.

One of these is qisas, or retaliation, which allows for blood money to be paid by the perpetrator to the relatives of the deceased in cases of accidental death or even murder.

In such cases, the compensation is higher if the victim was a Muslim than if he was a non-Muslim.

Only the Hanafi school of Islamic jurisprudence allows for the possibility of capital punishment in the case of a Muslim who has murdered an unbeliever.

The Maliki and Hanbali schools set a Muslim's life as worth twice that of a non-Muslim -- hence this Saudi Hanbali ruling below.

The Shafi'i school sets a Muslim's life as worth two-thirds that of a Jew or Christian. Polytheists, as here, are valued less. The Shafi'i Sharia manual 'Umdat al-Salik dictates: "The indemnity for the death or injury of a woman is one-half the indemnity paid for a man. The indemnity paid for a Jew or Christian is one-third the indemnity paid for a Muslim. The indemnity paid for a Zoroastrian is one-fifteenth that of a Muslim." (o4.9)

From the website of the Consulate General of India, Jeddah, who is recording these matters because they come up in connection with his people who are working in Saudi Arabia (thanks to bestproject):

4. Mode of Pavment [sic] :

All Death Compensation cases (except industrial accidents) in Saudi Arabia are settled through concerned Shariat Courts in accordance with the Shariat Law.

5. Maximum Amount admissible :

The maximum amount of Death Compensation (Diyya) generally admissible in Saudi Arabia, in respect of road/traffic/fire accident, murder, etc. is as under:

Death Compensation in respect of a male person:

i. Muslim - SR. 100,000/-

ii. Christian/Jew - SR.50,000/-

iii. Other religions : such as Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, etc. - SR 6666.66

In the case of death of a female, death compensation allowed is equal to half the amount as admissible to males professing the same religion.

Further the amount of compensation admissible, is based on the percentage of responsibility fixed on the causer e.g. if the causer is held 50% responsible for the accident resulting in the death of a Muslim, the amount of Death Compensation admissible will be SR 50,000 only.

100,000 Saudi riyals = $26,665.25
50,000 Saudi riyals = $13,332.62
6,666.66 Saudi riyals = $1,777.69

The Iranian Shi'ite Sufi Sheikh Sultanhussein Tabandeh explains: "Thus if [a] Muslim commits adultery his punishment is 100 lashes, the shaving of his head, and one year of banishment.

But if the man is not a Muslim and commits adultery with a Muslim woman his penalty is execution..

.Similarly if a Muslim deliberately murders another Muslim he falls under the law of retaliation and must by law be put to death by the next of kin.

But if a non-Muslim who dies at the hand of a Muslim has by lifelong habit been a non-Muslim, the penalty of death is not valid. Instead the Muslim murderer must pay a fine and be punished with the lash....

Since Islam regards non-Muslims as on a lower level of belief and conviction, if a Muslim kills a non-Muslim...then his punishment must not be the retaliatory death, since the faith and conviction he possesses is loftier than that of the man slain...

Again, the penalties of a non-Muslim guilty of fornication with a Muslim woman are augmented because, in addition to the crime against morality, social duty and religion, he has committed sacrilege, in that he has disgraced a Muslim and thereby cast scorn upon the Muslims in general, and so must be executed...

.Islam and its peoples must be above the infidels, and never permit non-Muslims to acquire lordship over them." -- Sultanhussein Tabandeh, A Muslim Commentary on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

www.shoebat.com

Friends

Here is one Muslim who is not afraid to speak the truth about his religion.

He is breaking the code of Al Taqiyah which might upset his fellow Muslims who do the "doublespeak" thing.

http://www.shoebat.com/videos/whatsIslam.php

Please spread this to your lists.

Nov 21st Ft Hood Memorial Event is fast approaching. We need all our friends in Texas and those that can afford to come to Killeen to support this event by attending. Attendance is key. If you have not purchased your ticket yet please call us at 877 832 7200 for tickets or purchase on web site at www.ffmu.org.

Thanks

Keith Davies

www.shoebat.com

November 1, 2010

"Moderate Muslims or Not?"

I have decided here to visit a subject that I've been struggling with for some many weeks now. It began when I reported on a talk here in Jerusalem by Daniel Pipes, director of the Middle East Forum.

To combat radical Islam, he said, we must deny legitimacy and forums to radical Muslims and those who front for them, and at the same time give legitimacy to, provide forums for, and promote moderate Muslims.

No way! cried many of my readers. Is he kidding? What "moderate" Muslims?

Now, Daniel Pipes is one very sharp guy; although I had hesitation with regard to what he said, I was not prepared to discount his position without further investigation. And so, I have read a good deal of material and dialogued with several persons more knowledgeable on the subject than I. It was important to me to achieve some sort of clarity for myself, and for you, my readers.

~~~~~~~~~~

My conclusion at this point -- with regard to whether there are moderate Muslims -- is both "Yes and No." This is a matter of enormous complexity.

Broadly, on an international scope, what we are looking at when we talk about radical Islam is the Arab world, plus Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan. We're dealing with Shia Islam and a radical, fundamentalist form of Sunni Islam, Wahhabism. Even Hamas right here in Gaza is Islamist and seeks an international caliphate governed by Sharia law.

But these places I've just alluded to do not constitute the whole of the Islamic world -- which is not a monolith.

As one expert I communicated with put it, there are actually several different Islamic worlds, or spheres, which differ in their nature. It had already been apparent to me that Israel is forging excellent relationships with Muslim states in Central Asia -- part of the former Soviet Union. Such states as Khazakhstan and Uzbekistan. But I've learned more: that, for example, Morocco has passed a law against polygamy even though this is permitted by Sharia law.

~~~~~~~~~~

This is ultimately encouraging information. It tells us that a more moderate Islam is possible. It comes, however, with a qualifier: The question is whether the existence of these more moderate Muslim nations remotely impacts the radical Islamic world with which we must contend. And the answer, as far as I can see, is that it does not.

Neither the mullahs of Iran, nor Nasrallah of Hezbollah, nor Mashaal of Hamas, etc. etc., are even marginally influenced by Muslims in Central Asia or northern Africa. We must deal with this radical bloc of Islamic states as if it were a monolith, and with utmost seriousness and stringency.

~~~~~~~~~~

As to Muslims in the US, there are people -- such as the courageous psychiatrist and author Wafa Sultan (originally a Muslim from Syria, today religiously non-practicing in the US) -- who say there are no moderates.

But a more nuanced view is possible. The expert I cited above, who is from a major US think tank and spoke on background, began by pointing out that many Muslims in the US come from places such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, where a radical perspective prevails.

However, perhaps more pernicious, he said, is "the hijacking of the Muslim 'voice' writ large in the US.

This has a great deal to do with the emergence of Muslim Brotherhood fronts like CAIR [Council on American-Islamic Relations, which acts ostensibly as a 'Muslim civil liberties organization'] and their activism. Simply put, there is no alternative Muslim voice here in the US currently, so the Muslim Brotherhood ideology rules the day by default.

"I think there is a great deal more plurality in the Muslim population in the US than meets the eye. However, drawing out these difference requires us to break the monopoly currently held by the Muslim Brotherhood...

"There’s much more that can be done on this score, but it’s very much a trickle down phenomenon. After all, it’s bound to be difficult to discourage Islamist political action groups – or to encourage moderate ones – when Islamists are getting appointed to government office and being feted by the FBI, State, etc."

~~~~~~~~~~

And here, my friends, we have essentially the point of view embraced by Daniel Pipes. It's a more optimistic view than that of someone who says no Muslim is a moderate. Some hope, however dim at the moment, does exist.

But, if the situation is to change, there is much required of conscientious,aware and concerned Americans. As long as "Islamists are getting appointed to government office and being feted by the FBI, State, etc." the attempt to bring moderates to the forefront will be stymied.

Americans cannot allow themselves to be intimidated any longer by political correctness, which at present has run totally rampant in the US. I cannot think of any situation more shameful than what happened at Fort Hood:

Doctors at the hospital knew the radical views of terrorist Major Nidal Malik Hasan but were afraid to speak out;

because of their fear, people died.

What is dangerous for American freedoms and heritage must be recognized.

Those who have associations with or provide a front for groups that are dangerous must be identified. Where radical Muslims work within the system, they must be exposed.

And when elected official provide a cover of legitimacy for those associated with radicalism, they must be called to accountability.

~~~~~~~~~~

And then, presuming we would like to encourage the moderates, how do we actually identify them?

Seems a simplistic question, but most assuredly, it is not.

I myself was caught not long ago. I had written about Raheel Raza -- a Muslim woman who is a member of the board of the Muslim Canadian Congress -- after seeing a video of a talk she gave. She had seemed great -- voicing opposition to the Ground Zero mosque and embracing rights for women. Surely a moderate. But someone familiar with the Muslim Canadian Congress wrote to tell me it is anti-Israel: supports boycotts and participated in a hateful anti-Israel march.

Uh oh. Is it possible to be a "moderate" Muslim and anti-Israel? One lawyer I communicated with, who had experience in anti-terror work, thought perhaps yes.

But Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch says absolutely not -- that this is part of the Jihad mentality. And in the end, I would concur.

Spencer went on to speak about another influential member of that same Congress, whom he would not trust at all. Because I then googled him, and found what seemed to be impressively moderate credentials, I was left aghast at the absolute complexity of what we are dealing with here. These people are highly skilled at dissembling.

~~~~~~~~~~

I share here comments from an article -- entitled "Rep. Keith Ellison, the Islamists Man on Capitol Hill" -- found on the website of the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT), established and directed by anti-terrorism expert Steve Emerson:

"As a U.S. representative, Keith Ellison's primary responsibility is to represent his constituents in Minnesota's 5^th congressional district.

"The first Muslim elected to Congress, Ellison, a Democrat, also seems to feel an obligation to be the voice of Muslim Americans in Washington. That alone would not be an issue. But in his two terms, he has established a disturbing record of promoting and defending radical Islamists who hide beneath a veneer of moderation.

"When those organizations are criticized, Ellison often jumps to their defense. He also travels the country to raise money on their behalf.

In 2009, Ellison spoke at three fundraising dinners for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and provided videotaped remarks at others..."

And there's more. For example:

"In November 2008, Ellison, interviewed at CAIR-Tampa's

6^th Annual Banquet by a local radio station, urged support for Sami Al-Arian, who pleaded guilty in April 2006 to conspiring to provide goods and services to the terrorist group Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ). Evidence in Al-Arian's 2005 criminal trial showed he was a member of the PIJ's governing board and that he solicited donations by praising the group's terrorist attacks."

This is how far it has come.

http://www.investigativeproject.org/1533/rep-keith-ellison-the-islamists-man-on-capitol

~~~~~~~~~~

Not surprisingly, Ellison is one of those who knows how to play the political-correctness card: According to the IPT article, at a banquet during which Ellison touted "Muslim finance" as a solution to the US subprime mortgage crisis, he also stated that

"Americans should 'thank God' for groups like CAIR who were working to safeguard their liberties against a reprise of the Salem witchcraft trials.".

~~~~~~~~~~

I have become convinced that there are Muslims who are genuinely opposed to terror, but support the institution of Sharia law. Spencer certainly says this is the case -- although he hastens to caution that such persons, who certainly appear more moderate than Muslims advocating violence, are not moderates. Understood.

Those promoting Islamic law would dispense with the liberal democracy that is America and replace it with a repressive, authoritarian system.

Who, then, are moderate Muslims? Definitions would vary, but I would suggest that they are persons who:

[] Support rights for women

[] Are opposed to terrorism and do not lend support to groups that do advocate terrorism

[] Do not seek to institute Sharia law and will honor the law of the land in which they reside

[] Are genuinely pluralistic -- honoring the rights of other religious and cultural groups without intention to impose their beliefs and practices

[] Are not anti-Israel

~~~~~~~~~~

see my website www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

FREEMAN CENTER BROADCAST - NOVEMBER 1, 2010 For Zion's sake will I not hold my peace and for Jerusalem's sake I will not rest." Isaiah 62. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ FREEMAN CENTER FOR STRATEGIC STUDIES P.O. Box 35661 * Houston, Texas 77235-5661 Phone or Fax: 713-723-6016 * E-mail: bernards@sbcglobal.net OUR WEB SITE (URL): < www.freeman.org> THE MACCABEAN ONLINE: URL:http:// www.freeman. org/online. htm Freeman Center Blog http://www. freeman.org/ serendipity / ============= Ignorance Is Weakness - Know The Truth Self-Inflicted Ignorance Is Suicide The Freeman Center Is A Defense Against Ignorance ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ They deem him their worst enemy who tells them the truth... ...Plato "The hardest thing to explain is the glaringly evident which everybody had decided not to see." ...Ayn Rand )))))))(((((((!!!

To Make a tax deductible contribution to the

Freeman Center's important educational work, mail check to address above or go to our website www.freeman.org to pay by credit card or paypal.

We need your help to continue our Zionist work.

=========

Kind words and comments do not take the place of financial

contributions to help us pay our bills.

Please do your part, no matter how small,

to keep the Freemanlist in your email box

~~~~~~~~~

Transcript: IDF Radio Interview with Former US Undersecretary of Defense Lawrence Korb
J4JPnews release - Courtesy of IMRA - November 1, 2010

Former US Undersecretary of Defense Lawrence Korb was interviewed by IDF
Radio's Ilil Shachar on 31 October 2010 for the morning news magazine "Ma
Boer" (What's Burning?). Although the program was in Hebrew, the segment
with Dr. Korb is in English.

This interview was part of a wave of publicity following the publication of
a 27 September letter which Korb wrote to President Obama calling for the
immediate release of Jonathan Pollard.

Korb wrote that Pollard has served far too long for the offense he committed
by passing classified information to an ally, Israel, and he stated that
Pollard's sentence was politically biased and unfair. “Based on my
first-hand knowledge," Korb told the President, " I can say with confidence
that the severity of Pollard's sentence is a result of an almost visceral
dislike of Israel and the special place it occupies in our foreign policy on
the part of my boss at the time, Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger.”
See full text of letter here >>
http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2010/092710a.htm.

When there was no response from the President, the letter was released
publicly and followed by op-eds in the LA Times and the Jerusalem Post and
by this interview with IDF Radio. The transcript below was provided courtesy
of Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director of IMRA.

TRANSCRIPT:

IDF RADIO: In the article that you wrote for the LA Times ou are saying
that in Pollard’s case the punishment does not fit the crime. Why not?

KORB: Well, because Jonathan Pollard was not charged with treason. He was
charged basically with giving information to a friendly country. And while
you cannot give away secrets to classified information to another country,
If it’s given to an ally of the United States, which Israel is, the sentence
usually is something like about seven or eight years, not life in prison.
Also the prosecutors, to get him to plead guilty and not have a trial which
could have released a lot of embarrassing information agreed not to ask for
a life sentence but when he was given a life sentence by the judge the
prosecutors didn’t complain. So Jonathan has been in jail for longer than
anyone in our history who has given information to a friendly country

IDF RADIO: You are saying that information that Casper Weinberger, the
Secretary of Defense, at the time of Pollard ‘s arrest gave to the court
implying that some of the information that Pollard had supplied to Israel
made its way to the Soviet Union was incorrect. Did Weinberger know that he
is giving false information to the court back then?

KORB: Not at the time because he knew that there was information getting to
the Soviet Union and he assumed that since Pollard had given this
information to Israel that somehow either the Soviets penetrated the Israeli
government or maybe Israel was trading information with the Soviet Union so
that Jewish people could be released from the Soviet union. But what
happened was there were two other spies actually working at the CIA, Aldrich
Ames and Robert Hanssen, and when they were arrested years later we found
out that in fact they were the ones who were giving the information . It
was not coming from Pollard to Israel to the Soviet Union.

IDF RADIO: Is there any security reason that the information that
Weinberger gave to court is still classified?

KORB: Probably people are concerned about what we call sources and methods.
My personal opinion is no. I mean, so many years have passed that whatever
information should have been classified then could be released now.

IDF RADIO: It is obviously not easy to stand for someone who has spied in
your country. But you sent a letter to President Obama and a few days ago
published the article in the LA Times. Why did you do that? Why did you
decide to do that?

KORB: I did it because I think that Jonathan Pollard has served way too
long for the crime that he committed. I think, as I put in that article, he
deserves to be severely punished, but I don’t think that he should be
punished more than people who have given information to Saudi Arabia or
China or other countries. He is being punished like people who provided
information to an enemy of the United States. And so therefore I think that,
basically, justice demands that he be released after having served twice as
long as anyone who has ever provided information to a friendly country.

SEE ALSO:

Video: IDF Radio Interview with Former US undersecretary of Defense Lawrence
Korb http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2010/103110b.htm
Text: Letter from Lawrence Korb to President Obama
http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2010/092710a.htm
Korb: Declassify documents that incriminated Pollard - Jerusalem Post
http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2010/103110.htm

--
JUSTICE FOR JONATHAN POLLARD
Website: http://www.JonathanPollard.org
Follow J4JP on Twitter:http://twitter.com/J4JPollard

--------------------------------------------
IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis
Website: www.imra.org.il