Islamic Tolerance Alert from modern, moderate Malaysia: The New York Times (thanks to A.), of all places, has just picked up on a story we first told you about here in September 2005. Better late than never, eh, Pinch?
KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia, Aug. 19 — From the scant personal details that can be pieced together about Lina Joy, she converted from Islam to Christianity eight years ago and since then has endured extraordinary hurdles in her desire to marry the man in her life.Her name is a household word in this majority Muslim country. But she is now in hiding after death threats from Islamic extremists, who accuse her of being an apostate.
Five years ago she started proceedings in the civil courts to seek the right to marry her Christian fiancé and have children. Because she had renounced her Muslim faith, Ms. Joy, 42, argued, Malaysia’s Islamic Shariah courts, which control such matters as marriage, property and divorce, did not have jurisdiction over her.
In a series of decisions, the civil courts ruled against her. Then, last month, her lawyer, Benjamin Dawson, appeared before Malaysia’s highest court, the Court of Appeals, to argue that Ms. Joy’s conversion be considered a right protected under the Constitution, not a religious matter for the Shariah courts.
“She’s trying to live her life with someone she loves,” Mr. Dawson said in an interview.
Threats against Ms. Joy had become so insistent, and the passions over her conversion so inflamed, he had concluded there was no room for her and her fiancé in Malaysia. The most likely solution, he said, was for her to emigrate.
Read it all.
"Her name is a household word in this majority Muslim country."
Her name should be a household word in the West too. Why isn't it? Why aren't 'progressive' newspapers taking an interest in this? Malayasia, of course, is first on the list when commentators need a 'moderate' Muslim country to which to refer.
I just typed 'Lina Joy' in the BBC Online search engine. Nothing. Zilch. Diddly Squat.
Obviously given the fact this story is in the NYT, I should have written 'Why aren't more 'progressive' newspapers taking an interest in this?' The point stands nonetheless.
The fact that the BBC has nothing in its search engine does not surprise me. After all, if the politically correct media posts such newsworthy information on its websites, it will prove that all of the assumptions held by those who believe in political correctness are not only false but dangerous.
Another case -- there are so many -- now completely forgotten, but it actually managed to create a small stir in England and America at the time, is that of the Kuwaiti Mr. Qambar:
KUWAIT
Hussein Qambar 'Ali:
Death threats
August 1996
AI INDEX: MDE 17/05/96
DISTR: SC/GR/CO
On 29 May 1996, a Kuwaiti Islamic court declared "Robert" Hussein Qambar ' Ali, a convert to Christianity, an apostate. This is the first legal case of its kind in Kuwait.
Hussein Qambar Ali, a 45-year-old Kuwaiti businessman, converted from Islam to Christianity more than a year ago. In his interviews with the news agencies, Reuters and Agence France Presse (AFP), in March 1996, he said that since reports about his conversion had appeared, he had received numerous death threats and was in constant fear for his life. His conversion was also reportedly denounced in Kuwaiti mosques by preachers and in parliament by some Islamist members of parliament. According to Reuters he said that he was forced to change his accommodation often as a security measure and that his marriage had broken up because of family opposition to his conversion.
A law suit to declare him an apostate and strip him of his civil rights was brought against him by three independent Islamist lawyers. Hussein Qambar 'Ali first appeared in an Islamic family court, which has jurisdiction over personal status and family matters, on 6 March 1996 to answer the case against him. Representing himself, he confirmed that he had become a Christian and proposed changing his name to "Robert Hussein", but he insisted to the three-judge panel that it had no jurisdiction in the case. He asked for his case to be sent to the Constitutional Court on the grounds that Article 35 of the Kuwaiti Constitution allows for freedom of thought and belief. (Article 35 states: "Freedom of belief is absolute. The state protects the freedom of practising religion in accordance with established customs, provided that it does not conflict with public policy or morals".)
At a further hearing before the Islamic court on 24 April, the case against Hussein Qambar ' Ali was led by
' Abd al-Latif al-Saleh and Mohammad al-Jadai, who called for Hussein Qambar 'Ali to be stripped of his nationality and civil rights for offending against Islamic Law by abandoning his Islamic faith. Hussein Qambar 'Ali, conducting his own defence, reportedly argued again that the charges against him should be put before the Constitutional Court. He was reported to have said that he felt he was being punished as if the court had already found him guilty of apostasy. He added, "...for six months I haven´t seen my kids, my family, my home. I blame the Kuwaiti Government. They do not come forward and say "this man is protected by the Constitution". He was also reported to have told AFP that there were few lawyers willing to defend him and even then they asked for exorbitant fees of up to one million dollars, which he was unable to pay.
Following a hearing on 29 May, the Islamic court declared Hussein Qambar 'Ali an apostate and ordered him to pay the costs of the case. The presiding judge of the Islamic court, Ja´far al-Mazidi, was later asked by the press if the ruling would be taken as permission to kill Hussein Qambar 'Ali. He was reported to have replied, "that is possible" but added that killing an apostate would be a violation of Kuwaiti criminal law. Judge Mazidi is reported to have explained that there was no legal penalty for apostasy under criminal law in Kuwait although there was in Islamic law. Regarding Hussein Qambar ' Ali´s request for the case to be sent to the Constitutional Court, the Islamic court´s verdict reportedly stated the following:
"According to his memorandum, the defendant maintains that the court is incompetent to decide his case due to Constitutional issues, however, the court finds that apostasy is covered in the constitution.
The defendant has a narrow point of view and does not clearly understand the provision and articles of the constitution which focus on freedom of religion and its rituals. These constitutional freedoms stem from Muhammad´s teaching. The constitution respects freedom of religion without fear of being closely monitored, but it does not mean that a Muslim should be allowed to convert from his religion to another. Everyone understands that there is a clear difference between these two points. In fact what the plaintiff said was right, "If the case is elevated to the constitutional court it will not make any difference", because his conversion is absolute, and because he confessed by his tongue and by his actions. There is no dispute about it. "The witness is his own testimony". He did not deny it. He stressed firmly more than once and he did not produce any new evidence to contradict the charges".
The three lawyers who brought the law suit against him were reported to have said that they did not want Hussein Qambar 'Ali killed but wanted him stripped of some civil rights, including his Kuwaiti nationality. When asked about this, Judge Mazidi is reported to have replied, "Those demands can be addressed by a civil court". Hussein Qambar 'Alilodged an appeal against the Islamic court decision to the Court of Appeal. The first hearing is due to take place on 15 September 1996.
Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which Kuwait ratified in May 1996, upholds freedom of religion, including the right to change one´s religion. (General comment 22 (48) on “Freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief”, made by the United Nations Human Rights Committee on 20 July 1993 expressly recognizes that Article 18 of the ICCPR entails the right to replace one’s current religion or belief with another, or to adopt atheistic views.) Amnesty International has noted that, according to its information, Hussein Qambar 'Ali is not facing any penalty imposed by the Kuwaiti authorities. It is, however, concerned that a state institution, such as an Islamic family court, has labelled him an "apostate", which has legal consequences in Islamic law, and which may make him a target for human rights abuses by non-governmental actors. In this regard, Amnesty International is extremely concerned at the reports that Hussein Qambar 'Alii has received death threats following statements from religious figures that apostates from Islam should be punished by death. It has also been reported that earlier this year, a member of the National Assembly said, during a speech before that body, that Hussein Qambar 'Ali should be stoned to death. These threats are all the more worrying in the light of the court´s subsequent verdict declaring Hussein Qambar 'Ali to be an apostate.
On 8 July 1996, following press coverage of the case in the United Kingdom, the Embassy of the State of Kuwait issued a press release which stressed that Hussein Qambar 'Ali had not received a death sentence by being labelled an "apostate"; that the Kuwaiti Constitution guarantees freedom of faith; and that Kuwaiti law does not punish a person in Kuwait who converts from Islam to another faith. It also stated that the Kuwaiti authorities had not received any complaints from Hussein Qambar 'Ali regarding his well-being, nor were they aware of there having been any threats against his life. Should any such threats be made public, the statement said, the relevant authorities in the country would take appropriate measures to ensure Hussein Qambar 'Ali´s safety.
According to a Reuters report on 11 July 1996, the English-language newspaper, Kuwait Times, reported that Hussein Qambar 'Ali´s safety was guaranteed by the Kuwaiti Government, as outlined in a letter to the Foreign Ministry, dated 3 July, from the government´s department of legal advice and legislation, which said:
"It (the government) protects the freedom of practising the rituals of the three heavenly religions, Islam, Christianity and Judaism, and does not prevent individuals from practising other religions, including Christianity.
As to what has been said about this Kuwaiti citizen being subjected to persecution and death threats due to his conversion from Islam to Christianity, this is baseless."
Amnesty International wrote to the Kuwaiti authorities on 21 March 1996 urging them to take all necessary and appropriate steps to ensure Hussein Qambar 'Ali´s safety. Specifically such steps should include:
publicly affirming Hussein Qambar 'Ali´s right to safety, and ensuring that he is protected from harm;
investigating any threats made against Hussein Qambar 'Ali, and bringing to justice anyone found responsible."
Of course none of those making the threats "against Hussein Qambar 'Ali" were ever investigated, were ever brought to justice. The case died; one has heard that he dropped his attempt to take seriously that phrase which is always used by Muslim apologists on innocent Infidels, who have no idea that what seems to be its literal meaning is given quite a different interpretation in Islam, and has been for the entire 1350-year history of Islam.
You know that phrase, that ridiculous -- in light of what Islam teaches, and what Muslims do, to apostates:
"There is no compulsion in religion."
Everywhere there are Lina Joys and Hussein Qambars -- almost all of them are never noticed by the Infidel press. One or two are mentioned, as Hussein Qambar was, but are given less attention than is given to the dresses worn by JonBenet Ramsay, or the Bronco driven by O. J. Simpson, or the sunglasses of Valerie Plame. Now JW has managed to have stories about Lina Joy twice.
But if her name is a "household word" in Malaysia, then presumably all of those well-paid newspaper and television correspondents who criss-cross Asia, or who are based in Singapore or even Kuala Lumpur itself, would also have heard of her. Yet not a single story about her has been in the BBC, and hardly one in the American press or radio or television. Surely the treatment given to this one apostate tells us someting about the treatment all apostates in Islam must endure. Surely what happens in supposedly "mild" Malaysia --- with its "Asian Islam" -- should be covered, if that is, one thinks that Infidels should be properly informed about the practice, if still not yet the doctrine (oh, that's just too tough a nut for mere reporters and mere columnists to crack, that would require reading books), of Islam.
"There is no compulsion in religion."
It is absolutely crucial that these kind of stories are covered prominently in the Western media. Because without them it is effectively complicit in the growth of victimhood that Muslims have come to see as almost an appendage to their belief-system. For every bleat about 'Palestine' or 'Iraq', infidels should be able to have a whole raft of come-backs. It can include Lina Joy and any others from countless stories featured at JW/DW that have been overlooked by the MSM.
Much like the Abdul Rahman case (if I recall correctly, I may not - either way I'm sure most here will recall the recent case of apostasy in Afghanistan) it's nice that it makes its appearance in the news to prompt the ignorant to ask "do muslims really kill people for leaving the religion?" - that sort of cult-like behaviour is not something people usually think of happenning in a major religion.
My objection to this sort of thing is that these scattered and scant reports (essential though they are) give the impression that these events are somehow extraordinary. That they are newsworthy because they are anomolies. It fails to convey the reality behind these individual cases; that this is not unusual, it's just a matter of Islamic policy.
Although, as I said, anything that gets people asking questions about this "no compulsion in religion" bollocks.
You wonder where Amnesia Intentional is when it comes to Mohammedan excesses & blatant violations of human rights as depicted above.
AI is quick to condemn Israel but with little, if any intention to apply any standards at all to Mohammedan behavior: Are they all in the enemy camp or simply on the take?
I'd say they are guilty in both cases....
on a similar note, many facts of muslim women in italy marrying christian men that DON'T want to convert have to face harassment, insults from people at their embassies actually denying visas or document required because they are dirty muslims marrying infidels.
And those countries are the "modern" and moderate Tunisia and Morocco.
Guys, this is very serious,
Muslims have special conventions for this special case, Lina Joy.
They even went to the extream to print her picture & try to shame her.
As far as I know, Malaysia gurantees religious freedom.
They allow openly religious conversion from non-islam to islam with tax money. They have huge buildings with hundreds of staff just focusing in converting non muslims. THEY EVEN HAVE A QUOTA VS PERFORMANCE REPORT.
They successfully implemented the law preventing possibilities of trying to convert a muslim to a non muslim in 11 of 14 states.
Whats worse is that the Islamic court overules the Civil court.
Lina Joy appeared in court many many times, the loves her fiance & wants to marry him. She was subjected to insult & humilation by many muslims. She has the guts many should have.
ISLAM is a lie. They tricked us & used dirty tactics to strentern their presense. It connot co-exist with other religions. period.
Lina has suffered enough. Its high time that the International parties voice out this issue & support the poor lady. She deserves it.
Important part of that New York Times article, describing an Islamic Gulag:
"One 38-year-old convert, who said in an interview at a Roman Catholic parish that he would provide only his Christian names, Paul Michael, and not his surname, for fear of retribution, described how he led a double life.
“Church members know us as who we are, and the outside world knows us as we were,” he said. He was fearful, he said, that if his conversion became public the religious authorities would come after him, and he could be sentenced to a religious rehabilitation camp.
One such place, hidden in the forest at Ulu Yam Baru, 20 miles outside the capital, is ringed like a prison by barbed wire, with dormitories protected by a second ring of barbed wire. Outside a sign says, “House of Faith,” and inside the inmates spend much of their time studying Islam. "