A real shyster for you: Muslim attorney in the Netherlands refuses to rise when judge enters

*  He wants to be a kadi, an Islamic judge ruling over dhimmies. Needless to mention that his studies were financed by the same filthy kuffars that he despises and whose system of law he wants to destroy. Our problem is not only with him, but with the people who allowed him to get that far. There are ways and means to nip this in the bud. 

                                 He won’t stand for Dutch law

Mohammed Enaït refuses to rise for Dutch judges — a clear indication that he does not respect them, or the system of law they represent. He respects only the law he considers to be divine law, the Sharia, and is no doubt working to bring about its triumph.

* 2nd article: Italian court rules according to sharia law

* Sharia’s Inroads Around the World

“Muslim attorney refuses to rise for judges,” a translation of this Dutch article, with bracketed comments in bold from the Dutch Freedom Blog, via Jihad Watch:

THE HAGUE – Mohammed Enaït, the ’sitting attorney’ still refuses to rise for the court when it comes in session. He will continue to do so even if he were to be reprimanded by the Council of Discipline. He is prepared to continue litigating up to the European Court of Human Rights. [oooooh……]This, at least, is what the lawyer from Rotterdam told the Council of Discipline, the Dutch Order of Advocates’ internal court. It is common practice to rise for the court when the judges enter the Chamber as a sign of respect [respect for the rule of law in the Kingdom of the Netherlands actually] . Because Enaït refuses to do so [why? Doesn`t he respect the rule of law?] , the dean of the Order of Advocates started disciplinary proceedings against him six months ago. [good!]

Enait is an orthodox muslim [No, really?] and says he does not rise for a judge for religious reasons.[showing disrespect for the rule of law … for religious reasons!]. According to the novice lawyer[he’s actually a trainee attorney. My question is who the heck offers a pupillage to a wingnut of this stature?] the complaint was lodged solely because of religious reasons and white colleagues are never approached about similar complaints. [ehr… are there any examples of ‘white’ attorneys – or black ones for that matter that refuse to rise for the court? No? I didn`t think so.]

The dean, W.H. Claassen, emphasized that this case is about general rules of behaviour in a court of law and that this case is not about human rights issues, religion or freedom of expression. [if you want freedom of expression, try a less offensive way] The Council of Discipline will rule on this matter May 4 next. [I can`t wait]

* Another case of creeping sharia law in action from Italy:


Sharia: Coming soon to a neighborhood near you

Creeping sharia update. “Sharia’s Inroads Around the World,” by Olivier Guitta for the Middle East Times, via JW:

You heard of the German judge who allowed a Muslim man to beat his wife according to the Koran?


*  BERLIN  —  Politicians and Muslim leaders denounced a German judge for citing the Koran in her rejection of a Muslim woman’s request for a quick divorce on grounds she was abused by her husband.

Pakistan recently gave in to the pressure of Islamist militants. Indeed to buy off peace, Pakistani authorities allowed the imposition of Sharia (Islamic law) in the Swat valley. 

How long the cease-fire will last is anyone’s guess. But in any case, Pakistan has allowed a precedent that could extend to other provinces; in fact the Swat valley is only about 100 miles away from Islamabad, the capital. But Sharia is not just making inroads in Pakistan but actually creeping in the West and in particular in Europe.

One area particularly touched by this phenomenon is the judicial system in Europe. Two recent cases in Italy and France are particularly troublesome. First, in Italy, three members of a Brescia-based Maghrebi family (father, mother and eldest son) were accused of beating up and sequestering their daughter/sister Fatima because she wanted to live a “Western” life.

In the first trial, the three were sentenced for sequestration and bad treatment. The court acknowledged that the teenager was “brutally beaten up” for having “dated” a non-Muslim and in general for “living a life not conforming with the culture” of her family. But on appeal, the family was acquitted because the court deemed that the young woman was beaten up for “her own good.” The Bologna public prosecutor’s office then disputed the acquittal of the three accused parties, but the Italian Supreme Court of Cassation dismissed it and ruled in favor of the charged parties.

Interestingly two Italian political leaders on the opposite side of the political spectrum, Isabella Bertolini, vice president of the MPs of the right-wing party Forza Italia, and Barbara Pollastrini, a post-communist former minister agreed to condemn the Supreme Court decision: “This verdict writes one of the darkest pages of history of the law in our country.”

Isabella Bertolini was upset that the court “allied itself with radical Islam” and Barbara Pollastrini is pushing for parliament to pass as soon as possible a law condemning violence against women: “Now more than ever, it is urgent to defend the rights of a large number of immigrant women victims of an intolerable patriarchal culture.”

Muslim women were quick to denounce the supreme court’s decision. Among them, Souad Sbai, president of the Organization of Moroccan Women in Italy.

She said, “It is a shame, this verdict is worthy of an Arab country where the Sharia would be in vigor. In the name of multiculturalism and respect of traditions, the judges apply two kinds of rules: one for the Italians and one for the immigrants. A Catholic father that would have acted this way would have been severely sentenced.”…



*  Disclaimer: this is a commented newspaper article originally published in Dutch. The translation is mine unless otherwise noted. This translation is posted solely for the purposes of public debate and public information. This blog is and will remain strictly non-profit and I make no claim to the copyright of either the original text or any graphic material included herein – posting commented translations for non-commercial purposes of public debate constitutes fair use under US copyright law. This blog is hosted in the United States of America and is therefore constitutionally protected speech as defined under the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.

2 thoughts on “A real shyster for you: Muslim attorney in the Netherlands refuses to rise when judge enters”

  1. Islamics demand that we respect them. They show utter disrespect for us (the world that does not follow their ideology).

    This wanna-be “kadi” is nothing but a shitbird (un pajaro de mierda). The civilized world should stand up to him and his kind.

    No respect for Islamics, no fear of them (Islamophobia), no hatred (eats up the hater), only disdain. Islamics disgusts. Its followers evoke physical revulsion.

  2. Part of Antichrist’s “job description” is to seek to change laws (this is happening), but he will
    also seek to change times. 2009 AD (or CE) simply will not do in a diverse, multi-culti world.

    “He will speak against the Most High God, oppress the holy people of the Most High, and plan
    to change the appointed times and laws. The holy people will be handed over to him for a
    time, times, and half of a time.” (Daniel 7:25)

Comments are closed.