Tampere Islamic Society spokesman, Mustafa Kara: “Size of Islamic community dictates whether or not Muslims are justified in demanding sharia law.” (paraphrased)YLE’s Ajankohtainen Kakkonen talk show host, Jyrki Richt, brought out Tampere Islamic Society spokesman, Mustafa Kara, for a brief interview before he was allowed to join the discussion panel. Here is a portion of his interesting and very revealing statements.
Jyrki Richt: Britain has accepted portions of Sharia law in which they are able to handle civil matters, should in your opinion, Finland allow Sharia courts to be used? Mustafa Kara: Well first, sharia courts sounds like… where sharia is concerned, generally non-Muslims understand it to be about criminal cases, sharia is the organizer of the whole of society, criminal cases are just a small portion of sharia. What has taken place in Britain, pertains to inside family matters, division of property, marital matters etc., in our opinion we don’t need anything apart from the rule of law. A faithful, devout Muslim in his own life and within his family acts according to sharia, it’s not a contradiction.Jyrki Richt: But Finland doesn’t need this kind of laws, sharia?Mustafa Kara: No. Well first of all, the demands of sharia… of course the Muslim community (in Britain) are rather large, they have lived there for tens of years, they are considered British subjects, they are in parliament, they can therefor demand it, allows them that right.[TT: Notice that Kara does not reject outright that sharia law is not acceptable with democracy, but he does begin step back from the edge… somewhat.]But normally a Muslim will not go for an Islamic state. He has a responsibilty to follow sharia in his own personal and family life, and other laws, criminal laws are matters for the state and those governing. When society is arranged according to sharia, example: social security, welfare, security issues, income etc., they (government) can demand from the people, since they handle their welfare in governing, the people have to accept sharia, and if someone goes against the laws then they are punished.
Richt: Does extremist Islam threaten society, Kiba Lumberg?
Kiba Lumberg: This is an interesting aspect found in many minority cultures, also in Gypsy culture as well as in Muslim…well there are many different types of Muslims, from the very liberal to the very extreme Muslims.. the umbrella is huge. But that captures what is so tragic and sad, and I’ll say it again, the parents pressure the children into a particular way of being, according to their own outlook, which puts the child into terrible conflicts. They want something else, the Western outlook is European, Northern European and the parents are withdrawn, or not withdrawn but want to keep hold of their own culture, and the children want something else.This is the conflict in all minority cultures, that’s the problem. Swedish Finnish children do not have this problem, nor do Tatars nor in the Jewish community. But unfortunately in the Gypsy culture there are these old traditions which lead to a “Custom Culture”, and then there is a Custom Culture which is joined with religion. It’s so sad that children in a way, are having their wings cut off, from a girl or a boy, and that human rights are never going to be developed like that.And I’m sorry, it’s regrettable, a certain radicalization is happening because these youths are so tightly squeezed through the parents’ conservative system and Western ways, that they don’t belong anywhere and therefor the rage erupts into violence. That has happened in France and elsewhere, and I say it now, it’s going to happen in Finland within 5 to 10 years, and we are going to have to react to it is some way and I’m of the opinion that we have to save the children.
Veikko Vallin: I’m sure that the people watching, listening to and thinking about this discussion on TV between all these wise people, that democracy is no longer working in these matters. I wonder how many of the people watching this are ready for the Swiss model of voting in a national referendum, about this issue. Question: What do you mean by a national referendum?Veikko Vallin: I mean is to ask the people their opinion of the issue..[…] is the present immigration policy on the right track or should it be tightened?
Iivi Masso weigh in:
Iivi Anna Masso Political analyst (Estonian/Finn) Eh….not so fast Mustafa
Iivi Anna Masso: About Sharia laws, that argument has been heard quite a lot, that, it’s not criminal law that’s in question, not amputation of hands and stoning people to death adulterers, but what’s in question “is only inheritance laws”, and according to sharia laws, girls inherit two times less than a boys. In marriage, a man and a woman are on different levels, it’s easier for a man to get a divorce than a woman, and a man according to sharia can have four wives, and woman has no such rights at all. It’s good to be aware that even though it’s only family inheritance issues, because under sharia, a man and a woman have a completely different status. So what’s in question is about a major decision on principles, do we go down that road, do we want to give up the legal principle of equality for all, and go for a system where every group has its own laws and on whose discretion these laws are made, or in other words, do we go for a conservative religious leader who wants religious laws, or do we take notice of the points of view of the individuals, the women and children in the group?
Husein Muhammed: I’m of the same opinion with Iivi, that we’re clearly on the wrong track if we even begin to voluntarily allow such a system and adapt sharia. You should remember that not even hardly anywhere in Muslim countries is an adaptation of sharia like that. Why in the world should we be crazy enough to do that?When we think about about should we be acting according to the customs of the land, or should we be multiculturalist, we should remember one thing, as a lawyer its a matter that’s quite clear to me, what you’re allowed to do and not allowed to do under Finnish law, should be obeyed. On other things, people are free to do what ever pleases them.
The only problem with Husein Muhammed’s line of thinking, is that laws can be changed. Mustafa Kara pointed to it early on, that when a Muslim community expands demographically, so does their clout in changing society to better suit their own interests, which means sharia. Simply obeying laws is not the entire answer, but to ensure that the Muslim population never reaches critical mass where they can begin tampering with our Western values and systems that derive from them. It was an interesting event, and I believe that the folks who were warning about the pitfalls of blindly following the multicultural bandwagon held the day. Mustafa Kara ended the talk about Sharia law, by further proving Iivi Anna Masso’s point on just how unfair and anti-Western values Sharia law is, by ironically trying to prove the opposite:Mustafa Kara: Division of inheritance was mentioned, it’s true that in Islam a woman receives 1/3 when a man receives 2/3, but that is Sharia, Islamic law, a women’s inheritance is fully her own. She can invest it, put it under a pillow or build a business, what a man gets, what I get, is jointly used.Well now Mustafa, the reason a woman’s dowry is all her own, is because a woman without it, is left totally defenseless due to inequality between a Muslim man and woman under Islamic law. As Iivi Masso stated earlier, the man has a much more easy time in divorcing his wife, and if she’s without a dowry, she lives at the mercy of her relatives. It’s also great to note that Mustafa Kara proves that Masso knew what she was talking about, when it admitted that Sharia law does discriminate against women. You need no further proof than the very words of the spokesman of the Tampere Islamic Society himself, Mustafa Kara.
Yup. KGSNOTE: During the segment, a Lutheran pastor asked Mustafa Kara about what happens to a Muslim who converts to Christianity, what would be his status? He answered that the apostate would suffer great pain and judgement if he did not reprent, and only after being asked, did he mention that he was talking about the after life.