Some of the confirmed speakers at the London Rally: Nick Cohen (Writer), A C Grayling (Philosopher), Kenan Malik (Writer), Rhys Morgan (Student activist), Maryam Namazie (One Law for All and Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain), Pragna Patel (Southall Black Sisters), Yasmin Rehman (Campaigner), Gita Sahgal, (Centre for Secular Space), Terry Sanderson/Keith Porteous Wood (National Secular Society), and Anne Marie Waters (One Law for All). There will be a message from Richard Dawkins and the Jesus and Mo cartoonist.

The call for action follows an increased number of attacks on free expression in the UK, including a 17 year old Rhys Morgan being forced to remove a Jesus and Mo cartoon or face expulsion from his Sixth Form College and demands by the UCL Union that the Atheist society remove a Jesus and Mo cartoon from its Facebook page. It also follows threats of violence, police being called, and the cancellation of a meeting at Queen Mary College where One Law for All spokesperson Anne Marie Waters was to deliver a speech on Sharia. More recently, the LSE Student Union has asked the atheist society to remove its affiliation to the union again due to a Jesus and Mo cartoon.

[To read Maryam Namazie's recent speech on how accusations of offence and Islamophobia are secular fatwas, click here.]

The Day of Action has already been endorsed by nearly 100 groups and individuals including Jessica Ahlquist, Richard Dawkins, Equal Rights Now, Taslima Nasrin, National Federation of Atheist, Humanist and Secular Student Societies, National Secular Society, Salman Rushdie, Southall Black Sisters, and Peter Tatchell. To see the list and add your own, click here.

In addition to the London rally, there will be actions and acts of solidarity in other cities, including Australia, France, Gambia, Germany, Poland and South Africa. To see the list or to add your own action or event, click here.

Clearly, the time has come to take a firm and uncompromising stand for free expression and against all forms of bogus accusations, threats and censorship.

The right to criticise religion is a fundamental right that is crucial to many, including Muslims.

11 February is our chance to take that stand.

You need to be there.

Enough is enough.

NOTES:

1. Join 11 February Free Expression Day of Action Facebook page here and Tweet #11FebFEDay.

2. The rally is sponsored by The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Science and Reason UK.

3. See recent media coverage of the rally and/or attacks on free expression:

A Day to Stand up for Free Expression, South African Times Live, 24 January 2012 [external link]

How freedom goes, The Spectator, 22 January 2012 [external link]

Strong religious belief is no excuse for intimidation, The Independent, 22 January 2012 [external link]

11 February: A Day to Defend Free Expression, New Zealand’s Scoop, 20 January 2012 [external link]

Islamist stops university talk with threats of violence, National Secular Society Newsline, 17 January 2012 [external link]

3. For more information, and details of the Day of Action, contact:
Maryam Namazie
Anne Marie Waters
One Law for All
BM Box 2387
London WC1N 3XX, UK
Tel: +44 (0) 7719166731
onelawforall@gmail.com

One Law for All is calling for a rally in defence of free expression and the right to criticise religion on Saturday 11 February 2012 at Old Palace Yard, opposite the House of Lords from 2-4pm.

We are also calling for simultaneous events and acts in defence of free expression on 11 February in countries world-wide.

The call follows an increased number of attacks on free expression in the UK, including a 17 year old being forced to remove a Jesus and Mo cartoon or face expulsion from his Sixth Form College and demands by the UCL Union that the Atheist society remove a Jesus and Mo cartoon from its Facebook page. It also follows threats of violence, police being called, and the cancellation of a meeting at Queen Mary College where One Law for All spokesperson Anne Marie Waters was to deliver a speech on Sharia. Saying ‘Who gave these kuffar the right to speak?’, an Islamist website called for the disruption of the meeting. Two days later at the same college, though, the Islamic Society held a meeting on traditional Islam with a speaker who has called for the death of apostates, those who mock Islam, and secularist Muslims.

Whilst none of this is new, recent events reveal an increased confidence of Islamists to censor free expression publicly, particularly given the support received from universities and other bodies in the name of false tolerance, cultural sensitivity and respect.

The right to criticise religion, however, is a fundamental right that is crucial to many, including Muslims.

Clearly, the time has come to take a firm and uncompromising stand for free expression and against all forms of threats and censorship.

11 February is our chance to take that stand.

You need to be there.

Enough is enough.

NOTES:

Contact us for more information or with details of actions or events being organised outside of London:
Maryam Namazie
Anne Marie Waters
Spokespersons
One Law for All
BM Box 2387
London WC1N 3XX, UK
Tel: +44 (0) 7719166731
onelawforall@gmail.com
www.onelawforall.org.uk

To help with the costs of the rally and donate to the crucial work of One Law for All, please either send a cheque made payable to One Law for All to BM Box 2387, London WC1N 3XX, UK or pay via Paypal.

The One Law for All Campaign was launched on 10 December 2008, International Human Rights Day, to call on the UK Government to recognise that Sharia and religious courts are arbitrary and discriminatory against women and children in particular and that citizenship and human rights are non-negotiable. To join the campaign, sign our petition here.

From the 1989 book burnings of Salman Rushdie’s The Satanic Verses, to the murder of filmmaker Theo Van Gogh and the controversy of the ‘Muhammad cartoons’ in 2005, DV8’s production will examine how these events have reflected and influenced multicultural policies, press freedom and artistic censorship.

In the follow up to the critically acclaimed To Be Straight With You, this documentary-style dance-theatre production is based on interviews, thoughts and speeches of individuals such as Maryam Namazie, the director of ‘One Law for All,’ which fights for the rights of women, and against Sharia courts and Sharia law being introduced in Britain.

For more information, visit here.

For dates and tickets, visit here.

Their accusation that the publication of a cartoon featuring Jesus Christ and the Prophet Mohammed amounts to ‘racism and discrimination on campus’ is both absurd and dangerous.

The right to offend is fundamental to the right to free expression. Indeed, offence is a highly subjective concept, thereby rendering every word, drawing, or speech potentially offensive.

The LSE SU should understand the difference between prejudice against a group of people and criticism of a set of beliefs.

The ASH must be allowed to continue their activities unhindered and any action against them dropped.

For more information, contact:
One Law for All
BM Box 2387
London WC1N 3XX, UK
Tel: +44 (0) 7719166731
onelawforall@gmail.com
www.onelawforall.org.uk

Following the death threats made against One Law for All during Tuesday’s talk at Queen Mary University, (which were extended to members of the audience and caused the meeting to be shut down), ‘Stop Islamization of America’ director Robert Spencer, who also runs the website ‘Jihad Watch’, has initiated an email campaign to try and discredit our work in combating Islamism. He has also published an article on the subject to which this statement is a response.

Mr. Spencer’s ‘points’ can be summarised thus: 1) Maryam Namazie is a communist, 2) she is also an anti-semite, 3) One Law for All have “libelled” and published lies about Mr. Spencer “and others” which we “refuse to retract”, and 4) the death threats we received were made by “one gang of thugs” on “another” as part of a “turf war.”

That Maryam Namazie is now and has long been a member of a communist party, namely the Worker-communist Party of Iran, is common knowledge and is not something she would ever deny, (nor do I think she should be expected to). Someone will have to break it to Mr. Spencer that not all communists want to “enslave people in gulags and shoot them in the back of the head for being ‘enemies of the people’.” He really ought to have got this right by now, especially since he likes to portray himself as a historian. But then given his views on Muslims, it’s clear nuance is not a part of his repertoire. [Here is Maryam's response to Mr. Spencer.]

Spencer’s charge of anti-semitism is based solely, from what I can tell, on the fact that in 2008 Maryam published on her blog a polemical statement by an Iraqi communist party on the Gaza war, which called for an end to the violence there, a ‘two-state solution’, and condemned both Israeli policy and “the barbaric Islamic movement Hamas, which spares no opportunity to fire rockets at Israeli populated neighborhoods.” If Mr. Spencer is going to make accusations of anti-semitism, he had better have more persuasive evidence than this. The idea that Maryam Namazie has a racist attitude towards Jewish people is absurd, as Mr. Spencer knows perfectly well, as is his claim that she supports “the jihad against Israel.” Her record of opposing the forces of Jihad wherever they operate is second-to-none, and includes demonstrating against the Khomeinist ‘al-Quds day’ parades of Hamas and Hezbollah. (Mr. Spencer’s comrades were conspicuous by their absence.)

If Mr. Spencer insists on posing as defender of the Jewish people, he may want to ask his colleague Pamela Geller to stop comparing Jewish journalists, Rabbis and the Community Security Trust to Nazi appeasers when they speak out against the anti-Muslim rallies of the English Defence League and Stop Islamisation of Europe.

People are welcome to consider the language of the LWPI’s Gaza statement to be hyperbolic or to take issue with its assertions. But Mr. Spencer is hardly in a position to be making such criticisms. A mere glance at the output of SIOE, for example, (which is the umbrella group that entrusted SIOA to Spencer and Geller in 2010), will reveal it to be the kind of material that most people avoid like the plague.

There is also a distinction to be made between exaggerating the deaths of civilians to try and arrest their suffering, and recommending the murder of civilians including women and children, as did SIOA board member John Joseph Jay in 2008.

Mr. Spencer has lied about this and much else repeatedly, despite the clear evidence for the charges as made, pretending his cohorts have dealt with the accusations already, linking to supposed refutations which do no such thing, and changing the subject to Israel, safe in the knowledge that there are enough useful idiots who will stop thinking when the word is mentioned.

The reason One Law for All have not “retracted” our claims about Mr. Spencer “and others” (to come to point three), is that what we have said is true.

A SIOA board member really did call for the “wholesale slaughter” of Muslim civilians, “down to the last Muslim, if necessary.” Mr. Spencer really did say that the EDL are champions of free speech and human rights who “deserve the support of all free people.” SIOA really is the American branch of a group that believes all Muslims are liars and “Nazis.” Pamela Geller really does say the international community fabricated the Srebrenica genocide in order to libel the “Christian Serbs.” Mr. Spencer really does publish the work of Milosevic fanciers on his website.

Given a record like this, it is Mr. Spencer who has charges to answer, and he would do well to start by clarifying his opinions:

- Does he agree with the leaders of SIOE that banning the Qur’an, a boycott of “Islamic countries” and the deportation of immigrants would “Stop the Islamisation of Europe”, (a political programme which he endorsed in 2007), and if so, does he recommend a similar remedy for the United States?

- Does Pamela Geller believe that President Obama is a secret Muslim (as she often implies), does she consider him to be an American-born citizen, and does Mr. Spencer agree or disagree with her on these matters?

- Does he accept the plain meaning of John Joseph Jay’s words? If so, are these remarks to be taken as representative of the SIOA board, (where Mr. Spencer has confirmed Jay holds a seat), and if not, in what way does he disagree with them? Why does he continue to work with a person who recommends mass murder?

- Does he consider the tactics of the EDL to be a useful way of combating Jihadism? Is anything done in the name of ‘anti-Jihad’ alright as far as he’s concerned?

- Does Mr. Spencer believe that there was a plan by the Milosevic forces to extirpate the Muslim population of Bosnia as part of their war for a Greater Serbia? Does he agree with Ms. Geller that any massacres of Bosnians which did take place were self-inflicted to bamboozle the western media?

(When confronted with what Geller had been saying, Mr. Spencer replied in typically evasive fashion that he thought it was a plausible theory. How does he expect to be taken seriously as a scholar of Islamic history when he can’t even get the 1990s right?)

- Why do hatred, bigotry, lies and paranoia run through everything Mr. Spencer does and says like Brighton through rock?

On Mr. Spencer’s last point – the suggestion that One Law for All are as thuggish as the men who interrupt our meetings – he undoes himself completely. By drawing a direct equivalence in this way, it seems Mr. Spencer can’t tell the difference between the issuers of death threats and victims of death threats. That is of course, if he honestly meant what he wrote, which would be a break with convention.

]]> http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/like-brighton-through-rock-a-reply-to-robert-spencer/feed/ 1 http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/a-jesus-and-mo-cartoon-dedicated-to-one-law-for-all/ http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/a-jesus-and-mo-cartoon-dedicated-to-one-law-for-all/#comments Thu, 19 Jan 2012 14:19:39 +0000 MaryamNamazie http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/a-jesus-and-mo-cartoon-dedicated-to-one-law-for-all/ A new Jesus and Mo comic ‘dedicated to Rhys Morgan, Jessica Ahlquist, One Law for All, and Salman Rushdie. Heroes, all.’

On 17 January 2011, I was due to give a talk on sharia at the University of London on behalf of One Law for All. The talk was on ‘Sharia and Human Rights’. If I had been able to go ahead with my talk, I would have said that sharia law tramples on the rights of women and denies them the right to divorce, child custody or even personal safety by allowing domestic violence as a ‘right’ of husbands. I would also have said how sharia poses a threat to children – it gives custody of children to men from a preset age regardless of the circumstances, and regardless of the behaviour of their father. I would have shown how sharia allows men to rape their wives and how all of these abuses are acknowledged by the sharia tribunals and councils operating in this country with the craven capitulation of our Government.

I would have described sharia’s criminal code – enforced in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan and other places – where women are imprisoned for being raped, homosexuals are hanged in public squares, and small children are ‘married’ in to lives of sexual and domestic slavery. I would also have mentioned how sharia amputates the limbs of thieves and buries people to their chest while a group of big brave men throw stones at their head until they die.

I would also have said that sharia law imposes the death penalty on anyone who dares to criticise Islam – and as if to prove my case for me, in came a man with his camera. He filmed the audience and told them he would hunt them down if they insulted the prophet. He then left, threatening a few more people on his way out.

Our talk was cancelled (notes will be made available by the organisers Atheism, Secularism and Humanism Society at Queen Mary, University London in the next few days) and the police were called.

No doubt, the little coward thinks he has won. However, rest assured that plans are already being made for another talk – only this time with a much larger audience. Thanks to this publicity, our message will reach greater numbers and our campaign will grow and gain in momentum. When people hear the truth about sharia law, we have no doubt they will give us their support.

So whoever you are, thank you for your help in promoting our campaign!

January 13th 2012

Dear Sir/Madam,

Re: Sharia Law

I write this open letter on behalf of the One Law for All campaign (www.onelawforall.org.uk). We campaign for an end to discriminatory religious laws in the UK and for all people to be treated with equality under the law regardless of race, religion, or ethnicity.

I read with interest your position on a case, originating in the state of Oklahoma, in which a Federal Appeals Court upheld an injunction against a ban on the use of Islamic sharia law in that state. Several important questions are raised regarding your support for this injunction and I would be grateful if you could lend me your thoughts on the following issues.

Here in the United Kingdom, sharia courts have been operating for several years with the full backing (or at least without the disapproval) of successive Governments. Their decisions are enforceable in UK law under the Arbitration Act; arbitration being used until now almost exclusively for the resolution of commercial disputes. One Law for All is deeply concerned about this, and aims to reverse the situation, for the following reasons:

1) Under sharia law, as it is practised in Britain, a woman’s testimony in family matters is worth only half of that of her husband. In practise, this means that a woman must provide a witness to back up her evidence, but her husband is not required to do the same. In family law, where a wife almost always finds herself in opposition to her husband, this places her at a distinct disadvantage. If you are minded to argue that this is not true, or that it represents propaganda or anti-Muslim prejudice (which we condemn unequivocally), I refer you to the words of the Islamic Sharia Council, which operates the largest network of ‘mainstream’ sharia courts in the UK. It states: “(Surah Al-Baqara 2:282) which requires two female witnesses in place of one male witness, gives a clear reason for it i.e. “if one of them forgets, the other reminds her.”” In her evidence to a fact-finding group facilitated by Baroness Caroline Cox, a member of the British House of Lords, “Sania” – who experienced sharia law first-hand – stated the following: “The Sharia Council then insisted that I brought along two Muslim witnesses to attend the Sharia Council with me to confirm that I was telling the truth. However, [my husband] did not require any witnesses because he is a man”.

2) Under sharia law, a man has a unilateral right to divorce, whereas for a woman obtaining a divorce is extremely difficult; she needs either the permission of her husband or of a sharia judge. Again, I refer you to the words of the Islamic Sharia Council on this: “the right of divorce is vested in the hand of the man while she is allowed to ask for divorce either directly or through a Qadi (Judge). Why? Because the women are kind-hearted human beings who are governed by their emotions, a character strongly needed for bringing up the children.” In her evidence to Baroness Cox, “Fozia” stated: “Despite all the time, money and emotional energy and the fact that Abdul is remarried with a child, the Islamic Sharia Council still refused to give me an Islamic divorce”.

3) In sharia law, women are not party to their own marriage contract – it is a contract between her husband and her male “guardian”. In her evidence to Baroness Cox, “Sami” said: “Khaled [Sami’s intended husband] travelled to Jordan to gain written permission from my 11 year old son, who represented my guardian according to the Imam”.

4) Domestic violence is trivialised in sharia law, and does not constitute grounds for divorce. Indeed, many sharia judges in Britain consider domestic violence to be the ‘right’ of a husband. Violence within marriage is a serious offence in Britain which can, and does, result in the imprisonment of offenders. However, the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal (the UK’s second largest network of sharia courts) takes a rather different view. In an interview with the (London) Telegraph newspaper, Sheikh Faiz-Ul-Aqtab Siddiqi said that in the cases of domestic violence heard by his tribunal, judges had ordered husbands to take anger management classes, with no further punishment. Sheikh Siddiqi also told the BBC that his organisation wants full jurisdiction over domestic violence cases involving Muslims in the UK, and has openly called for this. He also said that his group intends to expand and to cover “smaller” criminal cases in the future. (He confirmed that women receive half the amount of men in inheritance cases as well).

5) In October 2010, Sheikh Maulana Abu Sayeed, president of Britain’s Islamic Sharia Council, told the (London) Independent newspaper that rape within marriage is “impossible”. Marital rape is a criminal offence in the United Kingdom and carries the same prison term as rape under other circumstances. The president of the Islamic Sharia Council – who acknowledged that his council deals with these cases – stated: “Clearly there cannot be any rape within the marriage. Maybe aggression, maybe indecent activity… Because when they got married, the understanding was that sexual intercourse was part of the marriage, so there cannot be anything against sex in marriage.”

6) Under sharia law, custody of children is awarded to fathers from a preset age regardless of the circumstances of the case. Not only does this deny women custody and access rights to their children, but it represents a danger to the children themselves. On this issue, the Islamic Sharia Council’s statements are too long to outline here, but please see the following page http://www.islamic-sharia.org/children/islamic-perspective-on-child-custody-after-divorce-3.html. You will note that the “period of female custody” (i.e. the mother’s custody rights) ends when the children are around 7 – 9 years old. In her evidence to Baroness Cox, “Miri” stated: “Then I was sent a letter to say that I had to give him full access if not hand over my children for him to raise – I thought my life had ended and I was thrown in to deep water and there was no way out”. “Miri” had applied for divorce alleging that her husband was both physically and emotionally abusive.

Apologists often claim that opposing sharia law represents an attack on Muslims. However, both in Britain and across the world, it is Muslims – or those living under Sharia laws – who are at the forefront of the fight against sharia law and who suffer most from its application. All of the women who testified to Baroness Cox above are Muslim women and all of them are seeking a ban on this law in the UK. Indeed, our campaign is widely supported by Muslim groups.

I should also point out that the sharia law I describe above – again as apologists state ad nauseum – is not the sharia that hangs gay teenagers (as in Iran) or stones adulterers to death (as in Saudi Arabia) but the sharia civil code that is practised openly here in the west.
Given the above, I am interested to know how the ACLU intends to square the circle on this, and how you can support the application of sharia law in US Courts while also standing up for the rights of women, and fighting gender-based violence and discrimination.

It would also be helpful to know which amendment to the US Constitution guarantees a citizen’s right to be governed by a separate – and deeply misogynist – legal system.

As you know, the first amendment of the United States Constitution states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…. “ While we do not claim to be experts on the US Constitution, is there not an argument that in allowing sharia law to be applied in the Courts of the United States, this amendment is in fact breached as it may represent an “establishment of religion”?

Can you also tell me the ACLU’s position on where the right to the free exercise of religion ends, and where a woman’s right to live without violence (see the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights, Articles 3 and 5) begins? Do you agree that the right to practise one’s religion does not provide a right to commit violence or exercise sexist discrimination in the name of that religion, nor does it provide a right to have such discriminatory laws enshrined in a country’s legal system?

I await your response to the issues raised above with great interest. Failure to respond may lead people to conclude that the ACLU does knowingly support a misogynistic legal system, and that it does so at the expense of the rights and equality of Muslim women in the United States.

Yours faithfully,

Anne Marie Waters
Spokesperson
One Law for All
BM Box 2387
London WC1N 3XX
UK
www.onelawforall.org.uk

Sources:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/baroness-cox-if-we-ignore-wrongs-we-condone-them-2299937.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8686504/Sharia-a-law-unto-itself.html
www.islamic-sharia.org
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2957428/Sharia-law-courts-operating-in-Britain.html
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/rape-impossible-in-marriage-says-muslim-cleric-2106161.html
www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAE9S478MKk
www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/2010-2012/0072/2012072.pdf (House of Lords)
Evidence of How Arbitration Tribunals Operate in the UK (Baroness Caroline Cox – confidential)
http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/new-report-sharia-law-in-britain-a-threat-to-one-law-for-all-and-equal-rights/

We want to thank you for your support throughout 2011 and to give you a reminder of the important steps we took throughout the year, none of which would have been possible without you.

One of the most significant events this year was the introduction of the Arbitration and Mediation (Equality) Bill which was introduced to the House of Lords by Baroness Caroline Cox. Baroness Cox has said that she was inspired by the work of One Law for All. I, along with Keith Porteous Wood of the National Secular Society, have been working closely with Baroness Cox in recent months to assist in her efforts, within Parliament, to shore up support for the Bill. Last week, I addressed a meeting of Peers at the House of Lords and further talks and information sessions will be held in the New Year. The Bill aims to end discriminatory practices, particularly against women, in arbitration and mediation carried out in the UK. This would mean that the sharia practice of giving the testimony of women only half the weight of that of men would be unlawful. The Bill will also create a criminal offence which will prevent people from pretending to have lawful jurisdiction that they do not have. This would carry a five year prison sentence and is aimed at protecting vulnerable women. We will continue to push this incredibly important Bill in 2012, which promotes equal rights for all.

Also in 2011, One Law for All began studying the effects of sharia on the rights and protections of children. Sharia law awards child custody to fathers at a preset age regardless of the circumstances of the case. This is entirely contrary to the requirements of the Children Act 1989 which instructs all UK courts to place the best interests of the child as the primary consideration in all cases. One Law for All has decided to expand its written report in to this issue and we are currently inviting experts in this area to contribute to this important document, which we hope to hand over to the Government in early 2012. We held a successful seminar in November this year with the aim of introducing the issues surrounding sharia and the rights of children. We will continue to work on this in 2012.

Throughout the year, Maryam and I have debated sharia law at UCL, the House of Commons and the Liberal Democrat conference. We have given talks on sharia at Oxford University, How the Light Gets in Philosophy Festival, London School of Economics, Amnesty International, and various other educational and human rights institutions. We have also organised a successful seminar, ‘Enemies not Allies: The Far-Right and Pro-Islamist Left’, an international conference on ‘Women’s Rights, Sharia Law and Secularism’ as well as the third edition of our art competition ‘Passion for Freedom’.
In August, Maryam brought One Law for All to Australia, where increasing demands for sharia are being made. She spent a week there on a highly successful speaking tour, and was interviewed by many TV stations and other media. We have also been to Italy, Denmark and Norway this year and plan to speak in Belgium, Canada and Sweden on Sharia in the coming year.

It has been a busy and extremely important year for us and we very much intend to step up the pace in 2012 and continue to insist that our voices against sharia are heard – by Parliament and also by the Islamists themselves; but as always we can only do this with your help. Please help us to continue our essential work and end sharia courts for good. To donate to the work of One Law for All, please either send a cheque made payable to One Law for All to BM Box 2387, London WC1N 3XX, UK or pay via Paypal. We need regular support and also for supporters to commit to giving at least £5-10 a month via direct debit. You can find out more about how to join the 100 Club here.

If you shop online, please do so via the Easy Fundraising’s website. It won’t cost you anything extra but can help raise much needed funds for One Law for All.

Once again, thank you for your vital support and we would like to wish you a very happy festive season and a prosperous 2012.

Very best wishes,
Anne Marie Waters
Spokesperson
One Law for All
BM Box 2387
London WC1N 3XX, UK
Tel: +44 (0) 7719166731
onelawforall@gmail.com
www.onelawforall.org.uk

10 December 2011 will be One Law for All’s third anniversary. We were established in 2008 to oppose Sharia and religious law courts and demand one secular law for all.

Several years back, a campaign similar to ours (and one that I was involved with) managed to push back religious courts in Canada’s Ontario province. The same can and must be done here.

Whilst Sharia courts and religion’s role in society is more entrenched here in Britain, the battle is one that must continue to be fought until we are able to get rid of Sharia and religious courts and uphold one secular law for all.

As you can imagine all of this takes time and hard work. Just this past month, we organised the third edition of the Passion for Freedom art competition, co-initiated a manifesto in support of a free and secular Middle East and North Africa, held a seminar on the Childrens Act and Sharia law courts, and joined a campaign calling for a ban of sex-discrimination and gender apartheid at the Olympics.

In the comings weeks, we will be debating the Left’s support of Islamism, and whether Sharia law negates human rights. On 13 December, we will also be briefing Peers in the House of Lords on the adverse effects of Sharia law in support of the Cox Equality Bill.

We are grateful to the many committed volunteers who have made it all possible and to the over 18,000 groups and individuals who have supported us. We are especially grateful to those of you who have donated to our cause. Thank you!

To celebrate our third anniversary, we ask that supporters send us an end-year donation so that we may continue our campaign with full force over the upcoming year. Please give generously.

To donate to the crucial work of One Law for All, please either send a cheque made payable to One Law for All to BM Box 2387, London WC1N 3XX, UK or pay via Paypal.

We need regular support that we can rely on and are asking for supporters to commit to giving at least £5-10 a month via direct debit. You can find out more about how to join the 100 Club here.

If you shop online, please do so via the Easy Fundraising’s website. It won’t cost you anything extra but can help raise much needed funds for One Law for All.

Thanks again.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

Warmest wishes
Maryam Namazie
Spokesperson
One Law for All