Tweet
Currently many Americans hold a rather low opinion of Shariah Law, a system of jurisprudence used in Muslim countries that appears to be rather harsh, especially with regard to the rights of women and the common man. However, this all-encompassing system of laws is not, as many have assumed, based on the teachings of the Qur’an but, according to Islamic scholar Ziauddin Sardar, was conceived, developed and established by the powerful Abbasid Caliphate (749-1258) in order to help caliphs run their empire — which at that time stretched from India to Spain.
As I understand it, the Abbasid caliphs of that time became more and more concerned with consolidating their hold over the vast territories under their control and with subduing their opposition — and less and less concerned with the niceties of religion. With this new imperial goal in mind, Abbasid top dogs and their jurists began inventing laws mainly designed to make the accumulation of wealth and seizure of power easier for themselves and harder for anyone else.
The Qur’an’s emphasis on community and justice for the common man (and woman) was thus set aside and replaced with more Draconian laws geared to subdue the main population, women, the working class and minorities in favor of the Abbasid Caliphate’s top one percent.
Sound familiar?
And now, as the American empire continues to expand under the leadership of its own modern caliphate, jurists in Washington are once again developing Shariah Law — a system of laws basically designed to strengthen the top dogs and to subdue the rest of us.
And just like the Abbasid powers-that-be pretty much ignored the Qur’an when developing Shariah, so the U.S. Supreme Court seems to be pretty much ignoring the Constitution in order to develop their own brand of Shariah Law.
While the Qur’an speaks idealistically about all people working together for justice and for the good of the community, Shariah Law was originally designed as a power-grab and a war on the working class, women and anyone else who tried to rise above their station.
And although many Shariah laws do appear just and fair, we must always remember the basic reason why Shariah Law was invented: To maintain and control an expanding empire and to benefit the caliphs.
Likewise, the purpose of many current Supreme Court decisions — from the illegal appointment of George W. Bush to Citizens United and beyond — appears to be the same one that drove those men in black robes over 1,200 years ago: To seize and maintain the power of the few over the many.
Both the Constitution and the Qu’ran were originally intended to set men’s souls free — not to enslave them.
PS: At the Berkeley-Albany Bar Association luncheon the other day, our guest speaker told us about some of the decisions made by the U.S. Supreme Court over the past year. Some of these decisions were actually quite fair and good, but many of them only seemed designed to allow the new American Caliphate to consolidate its power more quickly.
For instance, there’s the Supreme Court’s recent strip-search law validation wherein anyone taken into custody, no matter what their alleged crime was, can expect to be strip-searched automatically. Ugh. And apparently “Expectations of Privacy” is a thing of the past as well, to be replaced by Judge Scalia’s favorite “Tresspass to Chattels,” whatever that is. And you used to either have to get a warrant or show probable cause in order to search premises — but not any more.
And with regard to voter-redistricting in Texas, the Supremes didn’t want to get into that one at all. “That’s a states’ rights issue,” they earnestly declared, a really big turn-around from when the high court chose to overrule states’ voting rights in 2000 and foist GWB off on us.
But we still have a right to petition our government. However, we now apparently no longer have the right to get an answer from it. And now it’s gonna be much harder to mount a class-action lawsuit against a corporation too — especially one against WalMart!
PPS: Speaking of Shariah Law justice here in America, according to an article by Chris Hedges ironically entitled, “First they came for the Muslims,” Muslim-Americans are now being falsely persecuted by the U.S. judicial system right and left http://readersupportednews.org/off-site-opinion-section/257-justice/10978-focus-first-they-come-for-the-muslims
According to Hedges, “[Attorney Stephen Downing stated that], ‘I was unprepared for the fact that the government would put together a case that was just one lie piled up on top of another lie…. And when you pointed it out to them they didn’t care. They didn’t refute it. They knew that it was a lie. The facts of most of these pre-emptive cases don’t support the charges. But the facts are irrelevant. The government has decided to target these people. It wants to take them down for ideological reasons.’” Reasons like keeping the American Caliphate up and running? Yeah.
PPPS: If you want to understand some of the higher goals and wisdom of Islam, I highly recommend Ziauddin Sardar’s enlightening (and very entertaining) book, “Desperately Seeking Paradise” http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/reviews/desperately-seeking-paradise-by-ziauddin-sardar-6167246.html.
25 Comments
Nice article, Jane.
Recommended
Thanks for the history lesson, Jane. I feel a bit more enlightened.
May I as a practitioner of Shariah law point out to you that this is a garbage article. Written by somebody without the slightest idea of what she is writing about.
I find it profoundly offensive that in common with every other bigoted American you should try to use Islam as an insult.
I find it profoundly offensive that you should attempt to drag our legal system down into the gutter with yours.
You disgusting little bigot. Your revolting attitude epitomises why I and every one else who lives in Irak despises you and your so-called values.
You’ve got the government and the judges you deserve – American.
Mohammed Ibn Laith
I have flagged this post as unsuitable for its bigotry and thinly concealed racism.
Mohammed Ibn Laith
I find it difficult and unpleasant to deal with any and all religious nutjobs.
Sure you may. And you did. But without any explanation, what you say is garbage.
Good article, Jane. Rec’d.
OK – Do you not acknowledge that the success of converting Christian populations to Islam over the 300 years it took to get even 50% of the conquered by the sword populations to claim to be Muslim rather than Christian was based on the changes to Shariah Law that made life easier if one was Muslim – including the lower or no tax one paid as one watch those that insisted on continuing as Christian continue to be taxed? Toss in laws that made conversion from one faith to another a one way street to Islam under pain of death for going the other way, and then toss in the favoritism to Muslim business folks over Christian or Jew, and I am wondering just where you see error in what was posted.
If you are familiar with Ottoman Law and the child tax on Christian communities we can discuss just how much more control the rich need in the US to approach that which the Ottoman Law provided.
No I do not acknowledge what is a flat out lie. I also note that in the period of history you are referring to that both the Ottoman and the Safavid empires received and welcomed entire populations of Christian and Jewish refugees both from the Western lands and from those controlled by the Orthodox church. The bigotry hatred and Religious discrimination that led up the concentration camps and the slaughter of 6 million innocent Jews is part of your western culture’s history not part of mine.
The problem you have is that as you have proved repeatedly with all your hasbara talking points in the threads dealing with the barbaric way the Zionist government treats the Palestinians that you’re an Islamophobe, and when it comes to the Palestinians racist.
I will not engage with such as you.
Mohammed Ibn Laith
I note that nobody has yet attempted to engage me on my objection to the fact that this is an Islamophobic post which differs only in emphasis and degree from the sort of rubbish one finds on freerepublic, redstate, and similar redneck trash sites.
But then there is no difference other than one of emphasis and degree between the so-called “liberal” Americans and their so-called “conservative” opponents.
Mohammed Ibn Laith
Indeed. Most Americans are never told by their school teachers that the first thing Ferdinand and Isabella did in 1492, upon conquering the Iberian Peninsula (what in America is usually described as “retaking for Christian Spain”), was to evict or kill both Muslims and Jews. The Spanish Jews fleeing newly-Christianized Spain knew better than to try their luck in the rest of Europe or Russia; they instead fled to Muslim-controlled lands.
So how are you tonight, Mohammed — or rather, how are you this morning? It must be around 9:30 Friday morning where you are. I was thinking about you earlier today, and wondering if I should tell you about an idea I had for hand-cranked charging of cellphones and other small electronic devices (or anything that might be useful to you), but then realized that if it was truly a good idea, then you or any electronically-skilled friends were probably already doing it.
If by “engage” you mean “attack”, there was no reason for me to engage you because you happen to be right as far as I can see.
English and American laws and freedoms, such as they are, are accidental in nature. They rest in large part on an English document called Magna Carta, and that came about because some Norman-English nobles were unhappy with how King John Lackland circa 1200 AD was running the country. They forced him to sign a document that chipped away at his absolute authority, but it certainly wasn’t their intent to grant any freedoms in turn to the common people. Greater freedoms for the masses came about only as a by-product of the nobles’ chipping away at the powers of the crown, not as something generally intentionally given to the masses. (And in fact these freedoms could and can be taken away at any time, as we have seen during various historical epochs, not to mention our own time.)
And I will not allow the rape of 6 year old boys via a village tax that part of Ottoman law to occur in the US.
As to tolerance, the rich of Europe did death and torture to groups a great deal more than in the Muslim world – you are correct – but it was usually not the law as it was for 300 years in the Ottomam world. The shame of how the Janissary recruitment made sex slaves of 7 year old Greek boys and if you survived you became soldiers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janissary – did not end until the Greek rebellion of 1826 – all under Sharia law – indeed the Stockholm syndrome meant they were very loyal and often became Viziers – guess that made it OK – being raped as a way to a good job.
“May I as a practitioner of Shariah law point out to you that this is a garbage article. Written by somebody without the slightest idea of what she is writing about.”
I find it profoundly offensive that in common with every other bigoted American you should try to use Islam as an insult.”
Ahhhhhhh, OK, but you haven’t refuted any specific points. Maybe further …
“I find it profoundly offensive that you should attempt to drag our legal system down into the gutter with yours.”
Ya but seriously, “your” legal system has the same problems as ours – the 1%, “your” 1%, own it.
“You disgusting little bigot. Your revolting attitude epitomises why I and every one else who lives in Irak despises you and your so-called values.”
Ok, but any specific issues? Can you elaborate on specific points? That would be helpful to elucidate your points.
“You’ve got the government and the judges you deserve – American.”
Well that I do agree with. It’s a real bloody mess over here. And we, yes we, either through apathy and non-action, are responsible for all the blood. We all have blood on our hands.
However, I still wish you would be more specific as to your critique. It’s over the top as it stands.
“Mohammed Ibn Laith”
Yup, that’s your name.
Ferdinand and Isabella united the part of Spain controlled by Christians – Castile and Aragon.
Ferdinand & Isabella did order the expulsion from Spain of all Muslims (1480)and Jews (1492), with Conversion to Catholicism as the way of avoiding expulsion (a treatment of the other practiced in Muslim countries prior to that point but sans expulsion – just extra taxes and death if you did not get out of street to let a muslim walk by) – Several hundred are known to have died. more imprisoned (crimes of crypto-Judaism, heresy, Protestantism, blasphemy, and bigamy), and the 1492 Alhambra Decree gave the Jews in Spain four months with Tens of thousands of Jews going to Christian Portugal, Muslim North Africa, Christian Italy and the Ottoman Empire.
Not quite what you posted so I thought the above might interest you. I do not approve of Christian bias – even if copied from the Muslim world – and Spain’s evil walk down that path did not end until the early 1800′s just before the Ottoman’s stopped the formal policy of kidnapping and raping Greek 7 year olds.
I always suspect name calling. Red flags go up. Mohammed Ibn Laith reads like a religious extremist. Change a few words here and there and I would pronounce it American Taliban.
He’s lost several friends and close relatives as a direct result of the US-led invasion of Iraq, losses which would make anyone angry. Yet his anger doesn’t keep him from guarding groups of non-Muslim worshipers as they travel to and from their places of worship; he was seriously, and nearly fatally, injured in the course of one such day of guardianship.
And as shown here, among other places, he and other Gorilla’s Guides members are perfectly willing to engage with persons asking polite and informed questions concerning Islam and Muslims.
Ok, I perceive that your post is a flame.
It is better to refute to pints made. The major point I took from the post was that the ruling class in the past “tweaked” the laws to favor themselves.
And they are doing it again.
I’m not an America by birth, but I am experienced in living in countries with very strong “ruling classes” who “tweak” the laws the their advantage (Nigeria, UK, South Africa, US).
Let’s cut through all of the name calling and religious extremism:
Religion, all religions, then, now, and forever is the gracious gift of the ruling class to sedate the masses into accepting as the natural order of things the authoritarian, totalitarian tyranny of the ruling class.
Herr Marx got it 100% on target when he wrote:
“Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.”
Furthermore, it really doesn’t matter what brand of primitive, mindless, superstitious, imbecilities to which you subscribe, it’s all the same: control of the masses for the benefit of the ruthless, murderous, self appointed masters of mankind.
And once again the distant, compelling, completely relevant voice of Clarence Darrow rings true: “To think is to differ.”
I’m not convinced, but I’m not getting into a protracted argument in this setting.
Interestingly, you’re the only person I’ve encountered who claims that rape was a part of Janissary training. Here is a more typical account of the Janissaries:
It’s all true. Here is Laura Doty’s report of September 21, 2010 (emphases mine):
More about Mohammed ibn Laith in the comments thread of the post announcing his having been grievously wounded while escorting — information provided by markfromireland:
Mohammed’s since authored some 2009 & 2010 Seminal diaries.
Maybe papau is confusing Janissaries with Mamluks.
Still not convinced. Personally don’t know anything about Mohammed Ibn Laith and I’m unwilling to take other people’s about whom I know nothing words for it.
I read The Ottoman Centuries: The Rise and Fall of the Turkish Empire, Lord Kinross. Just on a reader’s inspection, it’s not a particularly reliable source. The British are presented as beneficent purveyors of peace and civilization, Island angels, as it were. Even before I went to class with Africans from Nigeria and Côte d’Ivoire, I knew better than that.
But it’s an interesting book and it gives the Ottomans their due. If not always accurately, at least enthusiastically. I believe the book has a short excursion into Egypt and the Mamluks who, if memory serves, bought/recruited their numbers from the Caucasus. Young boys.
Empires, after reading about some of them, all follow the same trajectory. Only the timeline changes. They are always fascinating at their beginnings and boring thru their declines: complex, petty, personal, cult ridden, ignorant, sociopathically cruel. They crush anything in their paths and they often employ vile characters to do their work. When I refer to America as late stage empire, as I have for some years now, I have the facts of late stage empires in hand. And there’s absolutely nothing exceptional about the process. You could interchange one with another and not miss a beat or a paragraph.
I believe slavery, in all its facets and histories, was the mortal wound of the American experience and our failure to acknowledge the sin is killing us. We aren’t the only people so afflicted and we certainly won’t be the last, but that doesn’t excuse and we can’t escape the consequences.
If Kinross is correct, everyone who served the Sultan was his slave. It was an irrevocable condition of serving the Sultan in any capacity, and it was not a demeaning position. It was an honor.