To the anti-Muslim crowd here: what say you of this?

British law supercedes both Sharia and Beth Din tribunals. If you don't want to attend a Sharia tribunal there is nothing within the law compelling you to do so.
Rightist scaremongering at its best and most pathetic.

 

Is this the first time you've come across rightwing "logic"?

This is nothing out of the ordinary for them, quite intelligent compared to the usual drivel, in fact.

 

No it means he's either a Marxist or a useful tool for Marxists, either way the logic is sound.

 

It's a version of the plain old "guilt by association" fallacy.

 

Or completely idiotic, which is just a very poor logical fallacy.

Would you be making that same statement if I said "John McCain has support from neo-Nazis therefore he's a Nazi?"

 

2. WHAT IS GENOCIDE?

Genocide is foremost an international crime for which individuals, no matter how high in authority, may be indicted, tried, and punished by the International Criminal Court (ICC). According to Article 6 of the ICC Statute, This crime involves, "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."

There are a number of things to note about these acts.

(1) The perpetrator is not necessarily a state's government or its military, but may be an international organization, such as a UN peacekeeping one, NATO, or a terrorist or guerrilla organization, among others.

(2) Regardless of under what authority genocide is done, it is formulated, planned, and conducted by individuals, and it is individuals that the ICC will prosecute for the crime of genocide. Unlike the International Court of Justice that only adjudicates disputes between states, the ICC is a criminal tribunal that will indict individuals, issue international warrants for their arrest, try, and punish them. This is made explicit in Article 27: "This Statute shall apply equally to all persons without distinction based on official capacity. In particular, official capacity as head of state or government, a member of a government or parliament, an elected representative or a government official shall in no case exempt a person from criminal responsibility under this statute, nor shall it, in and of itself, constitute a ground for reduction of sentence."

(3) The perpetrator's intent (purpose, goal, aim) is critical. According to the Report of the Preparatory Commission for the International Criminal Court (PCICC), the ICC may infer such from "conduct took place in the context of a manifest pattern of similar conduct directed against that group or was conduct that could itself effect such destruction," (Article 6a) including "the initial acts in an emerging pattern" (Article 6 Introduction).

(4) The limitation of genocide to only national, ethnical, racial or religious groups is to groups that one is born into. These may be called indelible groups. In the case of a religious group, while one may choose to leave a religious group as an adult, it is rarely done and one may nonetheless remain identified with the religious group by virtue of physical characteristics, as for Jews. The crime of genocide does not apply to the intent to destroy political, ideological, economic, military, professional, or other groups. Thus, the mass murder of perhaps a million or more "capitalist roaders," "rightists," and counterrevolutionaries during the Chinese Cultural Revolution (1966-69) would not be genocide. Neither would the systematic murder of tens of thousands of communists and leftists by death squads in Latin American during the 1960s to 80s. The rational often given for excluding such groups is that one joins or becomes a member of them as a matter of choice, and the nature and membership in such groups is not as clear as it is for indelible groups.

(5) In the definition of genocide, the term "as such" is important. It means that the defined groups are by intention explicitly targeted for destruction, and such destruction is not the unintended outcome, byproduct, or spillover of the intent to achieve some other goal, such as in defensive operations o attacks on military targets during a war or rebellion.

(6) Also critical is the word "destroy." The acts that are carried out with this intent are carefully defined in (a) to (e), above. They exclude attempts, for example, to eliminate an indelible group from a territory by ethnic cleansing (that which involves their forced or coerced removal), or the destruction of the culture of a group, as by forced education of their children in a different language and customs. While "culture" is unmentioned in the articles of the ICC's Statute and the Report of the PCICC, and may well be included as the case law of genocide develops, "ethnic cleansing" would seem to be a crime against humanity in the Statute. Under Article 7.1.d, it is unlawful to deport of forcibly transfer a population.

I hope this helps you in your inability to understand what YOUR AIPAC leaders are doing to nations through out the world.

ITS AMERICA MILITARY GENOCIDE!!!!

Regards
Highlander

 

So, your saying the US is trying to get rid of muslims living in Isreal? Or something similar to that?

 

No, I was not......I was talking about the American genocide in Iraq.

Some have a misunderstanding of the word...... Genocide!

Perhaps you might read the previous posts.


Regards
Highlander

 

Yeah, I read it, I just didn't understand it.

 

try again ... so why is there a 15% increase in NON MUSLIMS accessing sharia law?

 

The increase has been in commercial cases.
I guess that these tribunals offer a cost-effective alternative to the standard legal procedure, which can also take a long time to be settled.
Both parties would have to agree, submitting to a tribunal is voluntary, which some of the rabid Islam-haters here like to 'forget'.

 

Stroll ... are you telling me that the 15% of non muslims using sgharia law were not FORCED to do so under threat of decapitation?

but but but ... that can't be true!

Islam wants to take over the world using threats and violence!

it will FAIL if people (I mean real ones - not Muslims) use sharia law by choice!

 

I reckon we could go at the Islamic financing industry as well - usury is not permitted. I bet that goes down a treat on the stock exchanges of the west. I reckon it's why this hysteria about sharia has been put about. Once we dumbarses work out that finance can be managed without plunging us as individuals into unmanageable and risky debt, using the Islamic (sharia) form of financial management it will be goodnight to the huge bonuses for the Wall Street Casino masters.

Better keep on hatin' them Muslims and their bad ideas folks, we don't want to see the pinstripe suits missing out no those fabulous bonuses!

 

lols that is a dangerous idea!

how soon before a bank near you issues one of these?

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/nonusury-sharia-mastercard-for-canada-20100414-s85a.html

 

I'd give up bacon for a go at that card!

 

The card is prepaid and interest-free?

 

It wasn't even a 15% overall increase, unlike falsely asserted earlier, it was an increase in commercial cases, this says nothing about disputes concerning domestic and other affairs.

 

but surely they were forced!

 

Of course, and Sharia will replace the British legal system in the foreseeable future, it's the same as is happening in the rest of Europe, Australia and elsewhere, isn't it?

(Except for the most advanced nation in the world, White Judeo-Christian AMERICA!)

 

oh - definitely.

it has its upside though ... now that I have to wear a burkha to work it doesn't matter if I don't brush my hair.

 

Say, is there actual and full Sharia law implemented in Australia or the UK?

 

no. there is the MAT in the UK. if you are interested here is a link:

http://www.matribunal.com/index.html

 

What I say of this (link to Raw Replay article) is that Stephen C. Webster does not know what he's talking about. "Fox News has been keen in months past to gin up stories about Islamic tribal laws being implemented across the United States" ? And "this is in fact not happening anywhere in the US" ?

Wow ! Amazing how such nonsense can make it into print, and then have thousands of people read it and believe it.

EARTH TO STEPHEN C. WEBSTER : Fox News isn't "ginning up" anything, and Islamic law being implemented not only HAS been happening, it's been happening in thousands of instances for over 20 years now. Here's a few examples :

1. http://www.clickorlando.com/money/3614199/detail.html

2. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16472393/#.TpwJguxyX2c

3. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,291569,00.html

4. http://www.omegatimes.com/article.php?intid=1330

5. http://blogs.washingtontimes.com/weblogs/aviation-security/2008/jul/19/the-flying-imams---act-two/

 

None of the Muslims I know are interested in "special treatment" or establishing Sharia Law anyway.

However, I know a number of Christians who want to fully establish the 10 commandments into American law. Should we send them out of the country?

 

Before they attacked the Jews, and now they are attacking the Muslims. Same people, same problem but a different target.