Hemmelig overvågning kan også ske i Danmark

Af Jacob Mchangama, Justitia 27

I sidste uge kunne den engelske avis the Guardian afsløre, at National Security Agency (NSA) foretager massiv statslig overvågning af datatrafikken på tele- og internettet.

Dokumenterne, den tidligere CIA-ansatte Edward Snowden lækkede, afslørede to overvågningsprogrammer.

For det første havde den hemmelige domstol – Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) – udstedt en retskendelse, der pålagde den amerikanske telegigant Verizon løbende i tremåneders perioder at udlevere metadata om opkald, sms’er samt sporingsdata for alle selskabets kunder. Idet der er tale om ufiltreret indsamling af data, må det formodes, at Verizon ikke er den eneste teleudbyder, der er blevet pålagt denne udleveringspligt.

De oplysninger, Verizon udleverede til de amerikanske myndigheder, svarer til de oplysninger, danske teleudbydere er pålagt at opbevare i et år i medfør af logningsbekendtgørelsen. Logningsbekendtgørelsen, der trådte i kraft i efteråret 2007, implementerer EU’s logningsdirektiv og var en del af Terrorpakke II. Danmark valgte, modsat flere andre vesteuropæiske lande, at implementere direktivet fuldt ud straks, og gik videre end direktivet kræver i forhold til opbevaring af data. Modsat sagen om Verizon kan de danske myndigheder dog alene indhente en retskendelse på baggrund af en konkret mistanke.

For det andet indeholdte de lækkede dokumenter en PowerPoint præsentation om et hemmeligt internetovervågningsprogram kaldet PRISM. Programmet er underlagt kontrol af et udvalg i kongressen svarende til Folketingets Udvalg vedrørende Efterretningstjenesterne, der er det danske parlamentariske kontrolorgan med PET og FE, men udvalget har tavshedspligt

Et af slidesene indikerede, at NSA har direkte adgang til data hos ti af de største it-virksomheder, herunder Microsoft, Google, Apple og Facebook. Der har været mange spekulationer om, hvor omfattende dette program har været, ikke mindst fordi selskaberne er underlagt tavshedspligt samt afviste beskyldningerne herom i identiske vendinger. Efter massivt pres de seneste dage har Facebook og Microsoft fået lov til at give visse oplysninger om denne dataudlevering. Således oplyser Facebook i en blog den 14. juni, at de i andet halvår af 2012 har modtaget et sted mellem 9-10.000 anmodninger fra de amerikanske myndigheder, samt at dette har berørt omkring 18-19.000 brugere. Microsoft har i samme periode udleveret oplysninger på ca. 31.000 brugerkonti.

Mens sagen om Verizon primært har afsløret overvågning af amerikanske statsborgere, har PRISM indsamlet oplysninger over hele verden. For så vidt angår EU-borgere, er denne indsamling sandsynligvis sket i strid med EU databeskyttelsesregler. EU’s justitskommissær Vivian Reding har derfor afkrævet USA svar omkring denne overvågning. I fredags mødtes hun med USA’s justitsminister Eric Holden i Dublin. I den forbindelse gjorde Vivian Reding opmærksom på, at:

“The concept of national security does not mean that “anything goes”: States do not enjoy an unlimited right of secret surveillance.”

Hvad de færreste imidlertid ved er, at Danmark i forsvarslovens § 17 har en endnu videre adgang til at indsamle data, end hvad der er sket i USA. Således siger bestemmelsen, at:

”Under krig eller andre ekstraordinære forhold kan forsvarsministeren

1)      uden retskendelse træffe foranstaltninger som omhandlet i grundlovens § 72 over for telefonsamtaler, postforsendelser og anden kommunikation”

Således kan forsvarsministeren giver FE adgang til ikke blot at indsamle metadata, men også til at læse private mails eller aflytte telefonsamtaler uden retskendelse, og dermed gribe langt dybere ind i kerne af borgernes privatliv end metadata.

Hverken nuværende forsvarsminister Nick Hækkerup (S) eller tidligere forsvarsminister Søren Gade (V) har ønsket at oplyse Forsvarsudvalget om, hvad der nærmere skal forstås med ”krig eller andre ekstraordinære forhold”, eller om hvordan bestemmelsen nærmere anvendes eller bør/ikke bør anvendes. Da Pernille Skipper (EL) i april sidste år stillede spørgsmål om dette, henviste Nick Hækkerup til Søren Gades besvarelse af samme spørgsmål stillet af Holger K. Nielsen (SF) i 2009. Heraf fremgår det, at:

”Der findes ikke i forsvarsloven eller forarbejderne hertil en klar og entydig definition af begreberne ”krig” og ”ekstraordinære forhold”. Mere generelt kan det imidlertid antages, at forsvarslovens § 17, stk. 1, nr. 1, vil kunne finde anvendelse under forhold, hvor statens handlefrihed og sikkerhed er truet. Det må således bero på en konkret vurdering…”

Forsvarsministeren anførte endvidere, at:

”Oplysninger af den omhandlede karakter giver regeringen, såfremt det måtte være aktuelt, alene til Folketingets Udvalg vedrørende Efterretningstjenesterne…”

Problemet med dette udvalg er imidlertid, at dets medlemmer, i lighed med den amerikanske kontrolinstansen, der overvåger PRISM, er underlagt tavshedspligt. Offentligheden kan således ikke få oplyst, om forsvarsloven § 17 er taget i anvendelse. Det har (forhåbentligt) formodningen mod sig, men faktum er, at i kraft af at Danmark er udsat for en alvorlig terrortrussel og vores internationale militære engagement, så kan vi potentielt være under en massiv overvågning netop nu. Og vi ved det ikke engang.

27 kommentarer RSS

  1. Af PREBEN F1 JENSENH

    -

    Ja, det hele kan måske se en smule mørkt ud, men nu skal vi jo huske på at “overvågningen” er blevet mindsket flere steder, efter at mørklægningsloven er blevet vedtaget. Fra nu af er statens, partiernes og ministeriernes privatliv sikret. Så det går vist den rigtige vej.

    (Desuden er kineserne parate til at investere i og overtage vores PC- og IT-systemer, busruter, togbaner og meget andet)

    Og så vil truslerne mod Danmark jo nok også aftage, efterhånden som Danmark bliver et mere og mere multi-etnisk og islamiseret samfund. Et samfund hvor asylanterne og de kulturfremmede bestemmer, og hvor danskerne kun er statister, betalere og dhimmier.

    Så vil der ligesom ikke være grund til at gøre Danmark noget, og surheden rundt om vil nok aftage. Så det går altså den rigtige vej, der er lys for enden af tunellen. Hurra, hurra.

    (ironi kan forekomme)

  2. Af Balther Jensen

    -

    Ja Jacob!

    Hemmelig overvaagning af hele det Danske samfund, det er jo det som de kalder ‘ Demokrati’, og det er jo det som Danskerne er saa glade for.

  3. Af Hemmelig overvågning kan også ske i Danmark - Dagens overskrifter

    -

    […] Kilde: Berlingste blog Global […]

  4. Af Mona Lisa

    -

    Størstedelen af min internetaktivitet bliver opsamlet hos Microsoft, google og facebook. Og i og med at jeg har en smartphone så kender de vel også til mit telefoni.

    PET behøver ikke gøre sig ulejlighed med en dansk dommerkendelse. De kan bare spørge NSA og dermed omgå det danske retssystem.

    Og når PET beder om profileringsdata, kan jeg uforvarende komme til at havne i PETS database fordi jeg på et tidspunkt har siddet med den forkerte person i en virtuel udgave af en café i Køge :-(

  5. Af Oscar P.

    -

    Selvfølgelig skal vi have overvågning. Her passer Jydske lov faktisk:
    ’Med lov skal land bygges; men ville hver mand nøjes med sit eget
    og lade mænd nyde samme rettigheder, da behøvede man ikke en lov’.

  6. Af Jens Hansen

    -

    Gudskelov for den overvågning der foregår. Som tingene og mennesket udvikler sig, vil den i fremtiden blive endnu mere udbredt – og godt for det.

  7. Af PREBEN F1 JENSENH

    -

    Staten kan være en god tjener, men kan også være en ond herre. En meget ond herre. Eller dame.

    Staten kan også være et rablende skrupskørt og virkelig ubegavet/ sindssygt foretagende. Læs derom på Lilleørs og Bent Winthers blogs.

    Et folk der ikke forstår at værdsætte og bevare demokratiske værdier, er et folk på vej ud i en bundløs sump dækket af tynd is.

    I over 100 lande har mangel på folkelig opmærksomhed og medbestemmelse været årsag til enorme og grufulde katastrofer, hvor millioner af mennesker blev knust af politiske damptromler.

    Det kan enhver selv overbevise sig om ved at læse bøger om kommunisternes, fascisternes, nazisternes, islamisternes, pladderhumanisternes og diverse andre barbarers udskejelser, i de lande hvor det lykkedes dem at køre alt med sandhed, demokrati og folkelighed ud på et sidespor.

    Det hedder sig at Danmark er et smørhul, et yndigt land, et lykkeligt samfund.

    Men rødradikale kliker har anbragt en række tidsindstillede mekanismer under Danmark, der kan ende med at at forvandle vores land til eet stort katastrofe-område.

    Trygheden og velfærden i Danmark er på vej til at blive en illusion, ligesom vores folkestyre.

  8. Af søren sørensen

    -

    Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor but must be demanded by the oppressed…
    Martin Luther King JR.

    Og endnu engang vigtigt at erindrer at loven om at få retskendelser MV i USA gælder kun angørende Amerikanske statsborger men ikke fx mod Danskere. Så NSA er jo rettet mere mod verden end dem selv og det er spion tjenester jo tilfældigvis også……

    Fra tech president…
    “Half a decade after Denmark passed a law mandating that telecommunication companies retain and store their customers’ personal data for up to one year, local advocacy groups and the telecom industry are pushing for immediate changes to the legislation. The practice of keeping records of private citizens’ Internet use is an unjustifiable invasion of privacy, they say. The police, meanwhile, have concluded that requiring telecoms to store Internet subscriber data has not helped them track criminals, which was the the ostensible purpose of the practice. But the Danish government still wants to postpone an evaluation of the law for another two years.

    The practice of tracking and storing Internet users’ personal details is called data retention; in the case of telecommunications, it refers to Internet, banking (ATM, credit card) and mobile phone use, with the latter including SMS records plus incoming and outgoing phone calls. In the case of Internet user data, the service provider keeps a record of Internet users’ online activity. This is called session logging. In other words, when a subscriber logs on to the Internet, the service provider tracks and stores the user’s personal details — such as the location from which they logged on, the pages they visited and the length of time they stayed online.

    With big data comes big responsibilities. When it came to the reality of managing and trying to use the data collected by the Internet service providers, some difficulties became apparent. According to a recent report produced by the Danish Ministry of Justice, five years of extensive Internet surveillance have proven to be of almost no use to the police.

    “Session logging has caused serious practical problems,” the ministry’s staffers write in the report. “The implementation of session logging proved to be unusable to the police; this became clear the first time they tried to use [the data] as part of a criminal investigation.”

    The findings outlined in this report have provided new fuel to opponents of the data retention law. They argue that in addition to being an invasion of citizens’ privacy, it is inconsistent: Libraries and schools, for example, are exempt from the law, so Internet use in those places is not logged and thus not traceable. But the same users will have their data logged when they surf the ‘net at home. The law’s opponents have targeted session logging in particular because it is not required by the 2006 European Data Retention Directive, which compels all EU member states to register telecommunications and Internet traffic. But the means used to collect the data and the scope of the data targeted for retention is left up to the individual member states.

    The EU Data Retention Directive has aroused a great deal of controversy in Europe, where EU member states are engaged in an ongoing debate about the right to privacy versus security concerns. Legislators in the European Parliament have argued, as the digital rights NGO Electronic Frontier Foundation puts it, that the directive “fosters a surveillance society and undermines fundamental rights.”

    The European Parliament is now trying to address this issue.

    Six months ago, the Justice Commission of the European Parliament published a detailed proposal for comprehensive reform of the EU’s 1995 data retention rules. The Commission advocates a single law for all the member states rather than the current situation, with different laws leading to high costs of enforcement and a negative impact on business initiatives in the EU. One law for all would “…strengthen online privacy rights and boost Europe’s digital economy.” In other words, the Commission is taking a pragmatic approach by appealing to both business and privacy advocates.

    “Session logging is a massive invasion of everyone’s privacy. Instead of placing surveillance on a single suspect, we now register and store information on every Danish citizen when they go online,” explained Troels Møller, spokesperson for Bitbureauet, an independent NGO working to keep the Internet open and secure user privacy.

    He noted that the justice ministry’s report mentions only two cases in which session logging proved useful to the police — and both were cases of financial crimes, not terrorism.

    Background

    Denmark was one of the driving forces behind the 2006 European Data Retention Directive. The idea behind the directive was to make Internet users’ data available to the police and security agencies as a means of fighting crime, particularly terrorism.

    The directive compels all Internet service and telecommunication service providers operating in Europe to collect and retain subscribers’ incoming and outgoing phone numbers, IP addresses, location data, and other key telecom and Internet traffic data for a period of six months to two years. This applies to all European citizens, including those neither convicted nor suspected of any crime. With a judge’s warrant, police and security agencies can obtain the data and use it in their investigations.

    Denmark’s Data Retention Law, which was passed in 2007, exceeds the requirements of the European directive in several respects, making it the most comprehensive law of all the member states.

    According to the Danish law, all Internet traffic must be logged, registered and stored for one year. As mentioned above, this practice is called session logging. But a casual Internet user can, and usually does, generate an enormous amount of data in a single sitting of casual web surfing. As a result, the police and security services are drowning in a tsunami of user data that they cannot sort and therefore cannot use. According to the above-cited report compiled by the Danish Ministry of Justice, 90 percent of the data collected under the Data Retention Law is acquired via session logging — i.e., Internet surveillance. But the software used by the Danish police has proven inadequate for the task of handling and analyzing the majority of the data, rendering it useless — even as the privacy rights of ordinary citizens not suspected of any crime is routinely violated.

    In an interview with Danish media outlet Version 2, Justice Minister Morten Bødskov explained why he continued to defend the law. “Internet surveillance is extremely important to the Danish Security and Intelligence Service in cases concerning economic crimes and child pornography and it will continue to be important as the criminals move their communication online,” he said.

    For security reasons, the report from the Danish Ministry of Justice does not mention any cases involving the Danish Security and Intelligence Service, but they do confirm that while logging phone calls has proven useful in their investigations, the value of session logging as a tool for tracking criminals is “very limited.”

    Evaluation Postponed

    But while Justice Minister Morten Bødskov is finding it difficult to justify his government’s surveillance of Danes’ digital habits, he is in no hurry to remove session logging from the data retention law. Instead, he wants to postpone re-evaluation of the law for the third time, for two more years. Bødskov admits that session logging has not been useful to the police, but says that Denmark should wait until the EU has finished its evaluation of the European Data Retention Directive before revisiting its own law.

    The Danish telecommunication industry, which bears the expense and responsibility of retaining its subscribers’ data, has a hard time coming to terms with Bødskov’s argument.

    “Right now, the government is awaiting an evaluation from the EU, which might be completed in 2014, before they will even consider removing session logging from the Danish law. This is meaningless. Session logging is not a part of the EU’s directive, so it won’t be a part of the evaluation, and the report from the Ministry of Justice clearly states that session logging has zero investigative value,” says Jakob Willer, Director of Telecom Industry Association Denmark.

    But last week Bødskov offered his critics a little bit of hope — if not for actual amendment to the law, at least for an end to his ministry’s stalling on its re-evaluation.

    “If the evaluation [of the European Data Retention Law] from the EU is delayed further, we will initiate an evaluation of session logging in the parliamentary year of 2014-2015,” he said.

    Until then the session logging continues.

    Torben Olander is a freelance Danish journalist. He lives in Copenhagen.

    Personal Democracy Media is grateful to the Omidyar Network for its generous support of techPresident’s WeGov section.”

  9. Af Jan Petersen

    -

    NSA = George Orwell x 1000 …. en global slavefarm skabt af galninge og psykopater …. ved ikke lige om man skal le eller græde :(

  10. Af PREBEN F1 JENSENH

    -

    Endnu et Søren Sørensk forsøg på at oversvømme, overplastre og sabotere/afspore debatten med tidsspildende tekster, maskinoversættelser og citater samt lange indlæg, der er en blanding eller pærevælling af fornuft og galskab, eller hvad? Ihvertfald kan en del tid spares ved at springe kommentarerne fra hr. S-S over.

  11. Af PREBEN F1 JENSENH

    -

    Har en kommentar til Jacob Ms oplæg og den elektroniske-digitale udvikling. ( se under Mads Holgers blog kl. 9.16 ). Den burde egentlig have været placeret her, men det gik lidt for stærkt.

  12. Af Allan Hansen

    -

    Islam kender kun til had, vold, blod og
    terror. Over alt hvor islam er kommet til magten, er det
    sket ved had, vold, blod og terror.
    Derefter spredes vold og terror til nabo
    landene, den såkaldte evige jihad.
    Det har nu stået på 1.400 år – lige siden
    røverhøvdingen Ma-hund sagde “underkast jeg
    elle vi slagter jer derefter voldtager vi jeres kvinder
    og børn og sælger dem som slaver.
    Hver dag ser vi islams had, vold, blod og terror over alt
    i verden. Det må og skal stoppes nu!

  13. Af Allan Hansen

    -

    Nu kan man læse M. A Khan´s bog online.

    M. A Khan er en god ven af mig. Han er ex muslim og forfatter

    født i Indien og uddannet i USA. Jeg fået lov til at bringe hans bog over alt i verden.

    Islamic slavery has been the most horrible, yet the least known slavery in history. So, author M. A. Khan decided to publish the chapter “Islamic Slavery” from his book “Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism and Slavery”. This part contains: 1) INTRODUCTION, 2) THE QURANIC SANCTION OF SLAVERY, 3) THE PROPHETIC MODEL OF SLAVERY. (Part 2)

    ————————————-

    “Allah sets forth (another) Parable of two men: one of them dumb, with no power of any sort; a wearisome burden is he to his master; whichever way he directs him, he brings no good: is such a man equal with one who commands Justice, and is on a Straight Way?” — Allah, in Quran 16:76

    “(Allah) brought those of the People of the Scripture… and cast panic into their hearts. Some (adult males) ye slew, and ye made captive some (women and children).” — Allah, in Quran 33:26–27

    “It is written in the Quran that all Nations who should not have acknowledged their (Muslims’) authority were sinners; that it was their right and duty to make war upon whoever they could find and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners; and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.” — Tripoli’s London ambassador Abd al-Rahman to Thomas Jefferson & John Adams (1786) on by what right the Barbary States enslaved American seamen.

    ——————————-

    INTRODUCTION

    The cover image shows Muhammad & his followers on a
    Jihad raid, in which he used to plunder and capture the
    women and children as slaves.
    Slavery is a socio-economic institution, in which some human individuals, called slaves, become property of others, called masters or owners. Devoid of freedom and liberty, slaves are expected to provide loyal and diligent service for the comfort and economic well-being of their masters. Deprived of any human rights, slaves are the unconditional possession of their owners: mere chattels, having no right to leave, refuse work, or receive compensation for their labor. The position of slaves in society in many respects is akin to that of domesticated animals. Just as cows, horses and other beasts of burden are trained and utilized for economic advantage, such as for pulling carts or plowing fields—slaves are exploited for the benefit, comfort and economic well-being of the owner. Slave-trade, integral to slavery, involves buying and selling of human beings as a commodity like any other commercial transaction. Slavery, in essence, is the exploitation of the weak by the strong and has a very long history.

    One major criticism of the West by all, and particularly by Muslims, pertains to the trans-Atlantic slave?trade by European powers and their mindless exploitation and degrading treatment of slaves in the Americas and West Indies. Muslims are often quick to point fingers at the European slave-trade; they often claim that the exploitation of slaves enabled countries like the United States to amass the huge wealth they enjoy today. One young Muslim, born in America, wrote: ‘Do you know how the American slave-hunters went to Africa, seized the black people and brought them to America as slaves? America’s economic power owes a great deal to the labor of those slaves’ (personal communication). Terming the 350-year trans-Atlantic slave-trade ‘the worst and most cruel slavery’ in history, the Nation of Islam Minister Louis Farrakhan claims that some white Americans do not know that ‘they are in the privileged position… today based on what happened to us (Blacks)’ in the past.[1] An overwhelming majority of Muslims believe that Islamic history is devoid of the abhorrent practice of slavery. Rocky Davis (aka Shahid Malik), an Australian Aboriginal convert to Islam, told the ABC Radio that ‘Christianity were the founders of slavery. Not Islam.’[2] When Muslims in India talk about the practice of slavery in the subcontinent—they talk about the harrowing tales of how the Portuguese transported slaves from coastal areas of Goa, Kerala and Bengal in terrible conditions. It is already noted that history books in Pakistan teach that before Islam, there was exploitation and slavery, which vanished with the coming of Islam. They will never talk about the slavery that Muslim invaders and rulers practiced on a grand scale in India.

    This Muslim silence about the widespread practice slavery under Islamic rules, such as in India, likely results from their ignorance of historical facts. In modern history writing in India, there is extensive whitewashing of the atrocities that took place during the Muslim invasions and the subsequent Islamic rule. Such distortions of the true picture of Islamic history compound Muslims’ ignorance about Islamic atrocities in medieval India and create an erroneous perception amongst them about the extensive slavery practised by Muslim rulers. As recounted throughout this book, slavery was regrettably a prominent institution throughout the history of Islamic domination everywhere. It also had unique features, namely large-scale concubinage, eunuchs, and ghilman (described below).

    ___________________________

    THE QURANIC SANCTION OF SLAVERY

    The institution of slavery in Islam was formalized in the following Quranic verse, in which Allah distinguishes free human beings or masters, who exercise justice and righteousness, from the dumb, useless and burdensome ones, the slaves:

    Allah sets forth (another) Parable of two men: one of them dumb, with no power of any sort; a wearisome burden is he to his master; whichever way he directs him, he brings no good: is such a man equal with one who commands Justice, and is on a Straight Way? [Quran 16:76]

    Allah warns the believers against taking the slaves as equal partner in status and in sharing their wealth, lest they have to fear them as anyone else:

    …do ye have partners among those whom your right hands possess (i.e., slaves, captives) to share as equals in the wealth We have bestowed on you? Do ye fear them as ye fear each other? [Quran 30:28][3]

    Allah recognizes some human beings, namely the masters, as more blessed by Himself than the less favored slaves as part of His divine plan. He warns Muslims against sharing His gifts to them equally with their slaves. Those who would take slaves as equal, warns Allah, would deny Him:

    Allah has bestowed His gifts of sustenance more freely on some of you than on others: those more favoured are not going to throw back their gifts to those whom their right hands possess, so as to be equal in that respect. Will they then deny the favours of Allah? [Quran 16:71]

    Allah does not only sanction the institution of slavery, He also gave divine blessing to masters (Muslim men only can own slaves) to have sex with the female slaves:

    And those who guard their private parts, Except in the case of their wives or those whom their right hands possess—for these surely are not to be blamed [Quran 70:29–30]

    And who guard their private parts, except before their mates or those whom their right hands possess, for they surely are not blameable [Quran 23:5–6]

    Therefore, if there are women amongst the captives or slaves, Muslims are divinely sanctioned to have sex with them as they do with their wives. This verdict of Allah founded the institution of sex-slavery or slave-concubinage in Islam, which was widespread in the pre-colonial Muslim world and continued well into the mid-twentieth century. As far as legal marriage is concerned, there is a limitation of four wives for a man at one time [Quran 4:3], but no such limitation on the number of sex-slaves.

    Allah also gave a divine sanction to Muslims for acquiring female slaves for sexual engagement by waging wars against the infidels:

    O Prophet! surely We have made lawful to you your wives whom you have given their dowries, and those whom your right hand possesses out of those whom Allah has given to you as prisoners of war… [Quran 33:50]

    Muslims can engage in sex with the captured slave women even if they are married, but not with the married free Muslim women:

    Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess… [Quran 4:24].

    There are other verses in the Quran that talks approvingly of slaves and capturing them in wars. Thus, according to the divine commands of the Islamic God as enshrined in the holy Quran, Muslims are allowed to keep slaves. They can amass slaves by waging wars, have sex with the female slaves, and of course, use them as they wish. For Muslims, having sex with female slaves is as legal as having sex with their married wives. Slavery appears to be one of the most desired divine privileges in Islam, since Allah took the pain of reminding Muslims about this divine right time and again in so many verses.

    ___________________________

    THE PROPHETIC MODEL OF SLAVERY

    Allah did not rest with repeatedly reminding Muslims to engage in slavery, but also took the initiative to guide Prophet Muhammad on how to enslave the infidels, such as in the following verse:

    And He (Allah) brought those of the People of the Scripture (i.e., Banu Qurayza) who supported them (i.e., the Quraysh) down from their strongholds, and cast panic into their hearts. Some (adult males) ye slew, and ye made captive some (women and children)… [Quran 33:26–27]

    In this verse, Allah charged the Banu Qurayza Jews with supporting the Quraysh of Mecca “from their strongholds” against Muslims in the battle of the Trench (627). Based on this unsubstantiated accusation, Allah commanded that some of the Jews, the adult males, were to be slain, and the rest, the women and children, enslaved. The Prophet duly complied with this divine command. He distributed the enslaved women and children among his disciples, himself acquiring one-fifth of them. The young and pretty ones amongst the female captives were made sex-slaves; the Prophet himself took beautiful Rayhana, whose husband and family members had been slain in the massacre. He took her to bed on the same night.[4]

    After conquering Khaybar the following year, Muhammad carried away their women and children as slaves. In many other attacks, the Prophet and his followers enslaved and carried away the women and children of the vanquished. Therefore, after aggressively attacking and defeating the infidels, enslaving the women and children became a model of Muhammad’s wars. Some of the slaves could be sold or ransomed for generating revenues. The young and pretty ones amongst the female captives became sex-slaves.

    Since emulating Muhammad in action and deed is central to living a good Muslim life in Islamic thought, Muslims duly embraced his model of slavery (comprising enslavement, slave-trade and slave-concubinage) and perpetuated it during the later centuries of Islamic domination. Muhammad’s example of dealing with the Jews of Banu Qurayza or Khaybar became the standard template for capturing slaves. This led to a massive rise in enslavement, sex-slavery and slave-trade in medieval Islamdom. After Muhammad’s death, Muslims—armed with sanctions of the Quran and Sunnah—embarked on an unbridled mission of waging holy war to conquer the world for the purpose of spreading Islam and expanding Islamic rule. As Islam burst out of Arabia, Muslim invaders became adept at capturing the vanquished infidels, particularly the women and children, in large numbers as slaves.

    In Islamic thoughts (as noted already), the civilizations preceding and outside of Islam are jahiliyah or erroneous in nature, invalidated with the coming of Islam. Only Muslims were in the sole possession of truth in the form of the true faith of Islam. In their thoughts, the world outside the boundary and religion of Islam, notes Bernard Lewis, ‘was inhabited by the infidels and barbarians. Some of these were recognized as possessing some form of religion and a tincture of civilization. The remainder, polytheists and idolaters, were seen primarily as sources of slaves.’[5] Muslims captured slaves in such great numbers that slave-trade became a booming business enterprise; markets across the Muslim world became teeming with slaves. Accordingly, ‘it goes to the credit of Islam to create slave trade on a large scale, and run it for profit like any other business,’ writes Lal.[6]

  14. Af Michael Larsen

    -

    Expert, hvordan er Jacob blevet udnævnt til expert? Når jeg læser andre kommentarer fra Juridiske experter så er de ofte uenige, så handler det ikke mere om holdninger

  15. Af Balther Jensen

    -

    @ Skrevet af Allan Hansen, 18. juni 2013 kl. 13:05

    Ja Allan, og hele den Danske befolkning er okonomiske slaver til Dronningen og hindes Regering.

  16. Af Allan Hansen

    -

    @ Jensen.
    Du er syg i hovedet søg læge!

  17. Af Allan Hansen

    -

    En Buddha kender ikke til had – foragt måske?
    Men, der er stor forskel på had og foragt!
    Det har jeg så skrevet lidt om i mange år
    – på godt og ondt (…).

    Kort sagt: had er en syg mand/islam.
    mens foragt, er en kritiske sund mand
    – Buddha, Platon og Einstein.

  18. Af Frank K

    -

    Jeg glæder mig til redaktøren kommer hjem fra ferie

  19. Af Karsten Aaen

    -

    Mchangama – du er jo sikkert godt klar over at den hemmelige overvågning i DK ikke er spor hemmelig? I DK skal ISP-udbydere (som f.eks. TDC eller Stofanet) gemme alle logninger på internettet i cirka 1½-2 år (mener jeg). Og det er slet slet ikke nødvendigt, fordi EU’s lognings-direktiv slet slet ikke indeholder noget om dette.

    Andre europæiske lande som f.eks. Tyskland, Frankrig, Grækenland og Italien har Forfatnings-domstole, hvis berettigelse er, at de kan og skal gribe ind overfor politikerne, såfremt politikerne griber alt for meget ind i borgernes privatliv. I Danmark har vi et sølle udvalg som ikke engang må fortælle offentligheden om dets arbejde. Ja, selv i Sverige har man mere offentlighed om hele efterretnings-væsenets virke.

    Ud fra dine oplysninger Mchangama som du giver om EU’s databeskyttelsesregler mv. kan det så ikke være sådan, at § 17 i den danske forsvarslov er i strid med EU’s regler om databeskyttelse?

  20. Af Erik Larsen

    -

    Ja, kære Jacob, overvågning er – ER rigtig, rigtig forekommende idag i det danske samfund!
    Jeg kan ikke kommentere ASH’s skrækkelige blogs!
    Uanset om jeg bruger “høvisk, pæn taleform”. Der er censur, ingen ytringsfrihed overhovedet.
    jeg skal da lige sige at jeg f.eks. intet har fået at vide om hvorfor jeg ikke må sige MIN mening!
    Vi er jo nærmest tilbage til 30’erne.

  21. Af Thomas Larsen

    -

    Let’s take a deep breath and not go off the deep end.
    We are not talking about infringing on free speech, censure – while I certainly don’t like the direction and scope of PRISM or the collection of telephony metadata, nobody has yet to tell you what you can and cannot say as long as you don’t intend to participate in terrorism – most of us on this forum are speaking out against this abrogation of our rights and none of us will suffer any adverse effects from speaking our mind. What is troubling is that it gives the tools to do so later so it is appropriate we speak out against it but we still have a long way to go before we live in an Orwellian society. If we want to be taken serious we need to be precise in describing what we are against.

  22. Af Balther Jensen

    -

    @ Allan Hansen, 19. juni 2013 kl. 14:56

    Allan:

    Hvorfor valger Danskerne et folketing som ikke kan lave nogen lov som er gyldig, uden Dronningen underskriven saadan en lov ?

    Nej, Danmark er et Kongerige, dvs. det er et Diktatur, uden at Danskerne selv er klar over det.

    Danmark er ikke et Demokrati hvor befolkningen selv laver deres egne love.

  23. Af Erik L

    -

    Det kan næsten ikke mere klare, at der nu er censur i b.dk. Den kære dame ASH har tilsyneladende udelukket undertegnede fra at kommentere hendes ufatteligt udanske blog.
    Sådan er det, vil hendes kulturradikale venner jo sige )bl.a. Vestager).
    Men, men, men det KAN jo ikke være rigtigt at vi gamle danskere hele tiden skal have det snavs i hovedet, at vi er “rascister”, at vi er “DF’ere ” o.s.v. og HVAD hvis vi så VAR DF’ere????`Er vi så rascister, nazister??? NEJ, NEJ, NEJ – vi er danskere der synes at nu er det bare nok !!!! Og jeg kunne skrive 13 sider herom, men det de nok ønsker er vel at jeg ikke orker det! JEG FATTER SIMPELTHEN IKKE AT DANSKERNE FINDER SIG I DISSE TING. At man skal blive kaldt “rascist ” fordi man synes at ISLAM ikke skal bestemme noget som helst i Danmark. Hvad foregår der? Jeg ser i bloggene her at der jo er ekstremer der simpelthen er bestilt til at ødelægge al form for debat, men hvor svært er det dog at forstå, at DK – er slut , hvis disse mennesker får lov til at præge samfundet fremover.
    Jeg ved godt hvorfor DK er på vej mod “syriske tilstande” inden længe, men – det er håbløst, at fortælle det, når der som sagt findes “feminister”, der åbenbart er totalt ligeglade. Selvom det mest groteske jo er , at det LIGE PRÆCIS ER KVINDERNE DER TRYNES AF ISLAM!!!!!!!

  24. Af Balther Jensen

    -

    @ Erik L, 21. juni 2013 kl. 19:13

    Erik!

    Kvinder har kun en at gore, og det er, at sorge for at maden er paa bordet, naar manden kommer hjem fra arbejde, og saa ellers bare holde kaft,trit og retning, saa gaar alting godt. KAPISH !

  25. Af Lisa Ahlqvist

    -

    MEN, OBAMA LÆSTE IKKE DE EMAILS DE KIGGEDE I –
    LIGESOM CLINTON HELLER IKKE INHALEREDE, JO, TAK

    Du er godt nok en godtroende gentleman, Jacob, at “overvågning også kan ske i Danmark”, for ligesom det både kan være varmt og køligt i juni, ligegodt kan vi være sikre på, at Obamas Big Ears and Eyes in the Sky har været på arbejdet. Også her i Hønsegården.

    Du har vel hørt, at alle de store amerikanske IT firmaer, som Google, Yahoo, Hotmail, Facebook, Apple etc, etc, har sidejobs hos NSA, CIA, FBI. Og hvis du tror, vi smånaive nordboere ikke har fået vores familiebilleder i NSAs familiealbums, samt at Google fortæller onkel om alt, vi skriver til tante Oda og onkel Bent Carsten osv. Så er alt håb ude.

    Jo, Jacob, jeg så osse Banana Obama bin Uploading forsikre planeten Jordens befolkning, at “vi læser skam ikke dine mails og SMSere!”. Så, min gode ven, nu kan vi alle sove roligere, for de kigger nok? heller ikke med ved sengekanten. Eller gør de?

    Det der med, at “Vi læser selvfølgelig ikke dine mails”, minder ikke så lidt om, og lige så “sandrueligt og ærligt”, som da Bill Clinton indrømmede, at have røget marihuana, “Men, jeg inhalerede skam ikke!”.

    Jo, Jacob, derover i the US of Paranoia, lyver de skam ikke. For de går helt klart i kirke hver søndag.

    Men jeg har den mening, at når man ikke synder, skal man heller ikke gå i kirke. Det er vel logik selv for 3. klasserne ude i Kongelunden.

    Nu da NSA og CIA allerede har udstyret i orden, placeret øjne og ører i enhvers hjem, der overholder Menneskerettighederne, skulle vi kunne tegne en billig find-mig-hurtigt-igen-service hos NSA. Så vi hurtigt kan finde mobilen, IPaden osv igen, når vi har glemt, hvor vi lagde de små modbydelige tingester. De har det med at forsvinde.

    For vi kan ligeså godt benytte os af det, når de alligevel overvåger os i hoved og du ved, så de ved mere om os, end vi om os selv. Vi ringer bare til NSA og spørger om de enligst kan sige, hvor vi lagde mobilen sidst. Det da en smart service.

    Det er så det, Jacob, enhver US præsident kalder, “The land of the free”. Det lyder godt nok lidt tomt og hult pt. Men, når du tænker lidt over det, er Frihedsgudinden skam osse ligeså tom og hul indeni.

    Og så er der det helt store one million dollars question, hvad tror du Obama ville sige om og til Kina, hvis vores allesammens ærlige mr Snowden, var en kinesisk dissident, der blev jagtet af de væmmmelige kineser strømere og havde udsigt til at fængsel for livstid ventede den stakkels fyr, som kun har advaret os om, at regeringen er de værste kriminelle af alle?

    For at være helt ærlig kan jeg sagtens visualisere en nærmest tårevædet Obama beskylde kineserne for at være ækle og modbydelige vanskabninger og røde commies, der behandler borgerne som kvæg og låser dem inde i 20-30 år, eller sender dem over til Obama.

    Nu kan præsident Xi så bare få lov at låne disse mange amerikanske præsident grædetaler oversat til kinesisk og bytte lidt om på rollerne. Og så passer hykleriet sammen.

    LISA AHLQVIST, GLOSTRUP

    LISA AHLQVIST, GLOSTRUP

  26. Af Arne Rud

    -

    Brænd gamle kærestebreve.

  27. Af wholesale Packers cheap jerseys wholesale Packers cheap jerseys

    -

    cheap football jerseys wholesale

Kommentarer er lukket.