Islamic Supremacists in Nashville

[Danang Sailor]

The following video runs a little over 15 minutes and watching it should be required for everyone who loves the ideals upon which this country was built.

[FONT=&quot][ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4TLQbVs5LQ"]YouTube - Losing Our Community[/ame]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT][FONT=&quot] These people are serious in their desire to set the clock back 1400 years by making the entire world a new Islamic Caliphate, ruled by Sharia Law. They want to destroy the Constitution and all that we hold dear in the way of freedom because it clashes with their "perfect Islamic world".

This is NOT the way I want my children (or yours) to have to live. If you feel the same way please pass this link along to any like-minded people you know. This threat to our entire way of life is serious and cannot be taken lightly!

[/FONT]

 

[muleman]

Insightful and amazing how easily they use our freedoms against us. This is just one small area. For sure there are many operating under the radar.

 

[Danang Sailor]

Insightful and amazing how easily they use our freedoms against us. This is just one small area. For sure there are many operating under the radar.

True, and they're actually gaining ground, which is truly frightening. A couple of examples:

1. A judge in New Jersey acquitted a Muslim man for beating and then repeatedly raping his wife. Even though it was a clear case of domestic abuse, the judge sided with the husband's argument that all this was permitted by his Muslim religion.
2. Another judge in Florida ruled that a civil suit, filed under Florida law, had to be settled instead by the precepts of Sharia since both of the parties in the suit were Muslims.

Both of these are easily verifiable if anyone believes I'm making them up, and there are more. These cases are the reason the citizens of Oklahoma recently passed an amendment to their state Constitution forbidding any foreign/religious laws from being used in any legal proceeding in the state, and reaffirming that the Oklahoma and U.S. Constitutions were the supreme legal documents in the land.

 

[joec]

Those judges should be removed from the bench since they do swear to protect and uphold the constitution of the US. This is what happens when religion, any religion takes control of the government. I'm for protection to practice ones religion but draw the line when it infringes on others rights to not follow said religion. Wives are not property but partners period and have the right to bow out when not treated properly. Again just my opinion on this crap.

 

[Lia]

These cases are the reason the citizens of Oklahoma recently passed an amendment to their state Constitution forbidding any foreign/religious laws from being used in any legal proceeding in the state, and reaffirming that the Oklahoma and U.S. Constitutions were the supreme legal documents in the land.

Send me details of realtors and listings for Oklahoma immediately!!!

 

[thcri]

1. A judge in New Jersey acquitted a Muslim man for beating and then repeatedly raping his wife. Even though it was a clear case of domestic abuse, the judge sided with the husband's argument that all this was permitted by his Muslim religion.

It seems to me that everything women have fought for in the US as far as rights will go right down the tube.

Those judges should be removed from the bench since they do swear to protect and uphold the constitution of the US. .

I agree but who and when will anything be done about this?

 

[jimbo]

Those judges should be removed from the bench since they do swear to protect and uphold the constitution of the US. This is what happens when religion, any religion takes control of the government. I'm for protection to practice ones religion but draw the line when it infringes on others rights to not follow said religion. Wives are not property but partners period and have the right to bow out when not treated properly. Again just my opinion on this crap.

The problem, Joe, is that those who would remove the judges have little respect for the Constitution. Barry, supposedly a Constitutional lawyer and instructor, has said that his problem with the Constitution is that it gets in the way of what he wants to do. Nancy, when asked the question directly, busted out laughing.

It's all about power, and the main purpose of the Constitution is to limit power.

I think we need to remember the last governments that decided that these tactics were acceptable. 3 million dead in Cambodia, 8 million in Germany, and around 40 million in USSR.

 

[mak2]

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/may/16/opinion/la-ed-sharia-20110516


The latest case of U.S. paranoia
Editorial Americans' fear that Sharia, or Islamic law, will work its way into U.S. courts is delusional.

May 16, 2011

A federal appeals court will soon consider a challenge to an Oklahoma measure prohibiting the use of Sharia, or Islamic law, in the state's courts. The constitutional amendment is part of a national trend in which politicians — including Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich — argue that it is vital to prevent Sharia from insinuating itself into the administration of justice in U.S. courts. Never mind that there is scant evidence that American judges are resolving cases on the basis of Sharia.




Like the belief that President Obama wasn't born in the United States, the fear that Islamic law will become a touchstone of American justice is delusional. What is depressing is how widespread it is. The American Civil Liberties Union, which is representing a Muslim man challenging Oklahoma's law, says 24 states have adopted or considered measures forbidding the use of Islamic law. In the paranoid anti-communism of the 1950s, it was said that Americans feared a Red under every bed. Now the dark fantasy is an imam on the bench.

Are American judges applying Islamic law? Rarely, if ever. In New Jersey last year, a judge declined to issue a restraining order against a Muslim man accused of forcing himself on his wife; the judge said his behavior was "consistent with his [religious] practices." An appeals court overturned the decision, rejecting the idea that courts should take religious law into account.

Speaking of the courts, they may be the undoing of anti-Sharia laws. The plaintiff in the Oklahoma case made two arguments: that the amendment favored one religion over another, thus violating the 1st Amendment's ban on an establishment of religion, and that it interfered with his free exercise of religion. The first argument is more persuasive than the second, which is based on the idea that the courts might not probate his will because it refers to elements of Islamic prophetic traditions. But a federal district judge found both arguments persuasive enough to issue a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of the law while the case moves through the courts.

The courts may save Oklahoma from itself by continuing to block the anti-Sharia amendment. But a legal test of such measures wouldn't be necessary if politicians stopped pandering to Islamophobia. Almost 10 years after 9/11, and despite the preachments of two presidents, too many Americans still regard their Muslim fellow citizens as subversive strangers. That attitude is a bigger threat to American values than Sharia is.

 

[jpr62902]

True, and they're actually gaining ground, which is truly frightening. A couple of examples:

1. A judge in New Jersey acquitted a Muslim man for beating and then repeatedly raping his wife. Even though it was a clear case of domestic abuse, the judge sided with the husband's argument that all this was permitted by his Muslim religion.
2. Another judge in Florida ruled that a civil suit, filed under Florida law, had to be settled instead by the precepts of Sharia since both of the parties in the suit were Muslims.

Both of these are easily verifiable if anyone believes I'm making them up, and there are more. These cases are the reason the citizens of Oklahoma recently passed an amendment to their state Constitution forbidding any foreign/religious laws from being used in any legal proceeding in the state, and reaffirming that the Oklahoma and U.S. Constitutions were the supreme legal documents in the land.

Per mak2's posted article, the New Jersey case is not accurately represented in this post. That said, the New Jersey trial judge needs some remedial training.

Regarding the Florida case, the issue was between former and present trustees of a mosque raised by an agreement between them that called for disputes to be settled pursuant to Sharia law. Alternative dispute resolution terms in contracts are not unusual. The judge was simply enforcing the contract as agreed to by the parties to the contract.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/03/23/florida-judge-defends-decision-apply-islamic-law-tampa-case/

 

[Adillo303]

As JPR said it reads a little different. Here is a link.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/5670250/new_jersey_family_judge_accepts_sharia.html

With that said, this alone.

The "practices" being referred to that "was not prohibited" is the provision in Sharia Law that makes a woman the absolute chattel of her husband, even insofar as sexual relations are concerned.

will rain on the parade enough. There are way too many women that have worked for what they have gained, way to hard for this to work here.

 

[fogtender]

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/may/16/opinion/la-ed-sharia-20110516


The latest case of U.S. paranoia
Editorial Americans' fear that Sharia, or Islamic law, will work its way into U.S. courts is delusional.

It already has, that is why we are having this conversation.

May 16, 2011

A federal appeals court will soon consider a challenge to an Oklahoma measure prohibiting the use of Sharia, or Islamic law, in the state's courts. The constitutional amendment is part of a national trend in which politicians — including Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich — argue that it is vital to prevent Sharia from insinuating itself into the administration of justice in U.S. courts. Never mind that there is scant evidence that American judges are resolving cases on the basis of Sharia.

Even once is too often, the law of the United States should be based/decided on the US Constitution, not a Country/Religion that wants to remain in the 6th Century.

Like the belief that President Obama wasn't born in the United States, the fear that Islamic law will become a touchstone of American justice is delusional. What is depressing is how widespread it is.

Well Obama took the job based on his being an American Born Citizen, yet he spent millions to fight showing his birth certificate. What shows up two years later is a copy printed on modern paper. When that copy was "Copied" in that era of the early 1960's, it should have been microfiche to a film and that quality wasn't as good as a modern laser printer and a proof that some kid with a computer and photo suite couldn't make in his bedroom.

Millions of people don't think he is American Born, and he himself has promoted that fact by failing to show a real birth certificate and this new one does little to quell that fact.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which is representing a Muslim man challenging Oklahoma's law, says 24 states have adopted or considered measures forbidding the use of Islamic law. In the paranoid anti-communism of the 1950s, it was said that Americans feared a Red under every bed. Now the dark fantasy is an imam on the bench.

Yes, an on 9/10 you would have been laughed at for telling what was going to happen the next day.... That was the same as "Now the dark fantasy is an imam on the bench".

On 9/12 is wasn't something to laugh at anymore.

Are American judges applying Islamic law? Rarely, if ever.

Once it too often, but that is just a first step....

In New Jersey last year, a judge declined to issue a restraining order against a Muslim man accused of forcing himself on his wife; the judge said his behavior was "consistent with his [religious] practices." An appeals court overturned the decision, rejecting the idea that courts should take religious law into account.

Rape is just that, Rape in any religion. The Judge should have been disbarred for not doing his job in appling the rule of American Law. Had that man been a "Christian" and did what he did, a restraining order would have been granted in the blink of an eye.

Speaking of the courts, they may be the undoing of anti-Sharia laws. The plaintiff in the Oklahoma case made two arguments: that the amendment favored one religion over another, thus violating the 1st Amendment's ban on an establishment of religion, and that it interfered with his free exercise of religion. The first argument is more persuasive than the second, which is based on the idea that the courts might not probate his will because it refers to elements of Islamic prophetic traditions. But a federal district judge found both arguments persuasive enough to issue a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of the law while the case moves through the courts.

The courts may save Oklahoma from itself by continuing to block the anti-Sharia amendment. But a legal test of such measures wouldn't be necessary if politicians stopped pandering to Islamophobia. Almost 10 years after 9/11, and despite the preachments of two presidents, too many Americans still regard their Muslim fellow citizens as subversive strangers. That attitude is a bigger threat to American values than Sharia is.

We look at a long term plan of a few months or years, the Islamic as well as other cultures think in Centuries. These are just a first step in the long road that they are on to enforce Sharia here in the United States as well as other Countries World wide.

No, to laugh it off as a bunch of people being paranoid about a pesky religion is just stupid to think like that, and dangerous.

 

[Cowboy]

It already has, that is why we are having this conversation.



Even once is too often, the law of the United States should be based/decided on the US Constitution, not a Country/Religion that wants to remain in the 6th Century.





Well Obama took the job based on his being an American Born Citizen, yet he spent millions to fight showing his birth certificate. What shows up two years later is a copy printed on modern paper. When that copy was "Copied" in that era of the early 1960's, it should have been microfiche to a film and that quality wasn't as good as a modern laser printer and a proof that some kid with a computer and photo suite couldn't make in his bedroom.

Millions of people don't think he is American Born, and he himself has promoted that fact by failing to show a real birth certificate and this new one does little to quell that fact.




Yes, an on 9/10 you would have been laughed at for telling what was going to happen the next day.... That was the same as "Now the dark fantasy is an imam on the bench".

On 9/12 is wasn't something to laugh at anymore.



Once it too often, but that is just a first step....




Rape is just that, Rape in any religion. The Judge should have been disbarred for not doing his job in appling the rule of American Law. Had that man been a "Christian" and did what he did, a restraining order would have been granted in the blink of an eye.



We look at a long term plan of a few months or years, the Islamic as well as other cultures think in Centuries. These are just a first step in the long road that they are on to enforce Sharia here in the United States as well as other Countries World wide.

No, to laugh it off as a bunch of people being paranoid about a pesky religion is just stupid to think like that, and dangerous.

Very well said .

 

[Lia]

I'm gonna get ya back for that one Foggy, see if'n I don't! You stole my thunder! I was gonna do exactly what you did! Grrr....


lol. Nicely put! I still hate you, but nicely put!

Like the belief that President Obama wasn't born in the United States, the fear that Islamic law will become a touchstone of American justice is delusional. What is depressing is how widespread it is.

If its that widespread, then it isn't depressing to the majority of folk, for starters mak! And your argument that it is delusional to fear that Sharia Law will become a touchstone of American Justice (not to mention throughout the western world if Muslims have their way), falls down lamentably, since as Foggy said, it already has one foot in the door!

The American Civil Liberties Union, which is representing a Muslim man challenging Oklahoma's law...

How dare he! *scratches head in frustration* What if we settled over there in his country, and demanded that they change their laws, what would he have to say about that? It beggars belief! Why should we change our laws just to suit his religious fanaticism? Give me one good reason! And, if he was born here, or is an American citizen, it still doesn't give him the right to try to enforce his fanatical views and principles of religion onto the majority!

...says 24 states have adopted or considered measures forbidding the use of Islamic law.

As is their right! lets not forget that this is AMERICA here!!!! Not the middle east!!! if he wants Sharia Law, and all that that entails there are countries that are perfectly willing to supply that criteria! But this is America, you know, the land of the free? A Christian country, with its own laws, cultures and traditions.

In the paranoid anti-communism of the 1950s, it was said that Americans feared a Red under every bed. Now the dark fantasy is an imam on the bench.

That wasn't an irrational fear, nor was it paranoid. And, furthermore, what is wrong with being anti-communist? I am anti-communist, yet no-one has ever called me paranoid! No, lets face it, by bringing this ludicrous case before a court of law in the first place shows us that he and his peers would like to bring Sharia Law here. That isn't paranoid! Thats a fact!

Are American judges applying Islamic law? Rarely, if ever.

Do you have a link or source for that statement?

In New Jersey last year, a judge declined to issue a restraining order against a Muslim man accused of forcing himself on his wife; the judge said his behavior was "consistent with his [religious] practices." An appeals court overturned the decision, rejecting the idea that courts should take religious law into account.

Quite right too! But, the fact that the case even came to court in America, when the laws on rape are clear and precise is frightfully sinister imho; and even more worrying was that a Judge (albeit overturned on appeal), agreed with the plaintiff. It may have been consistent with his religious practices, but what about the Judge being CONSISTENT WITH THE WIFE'S HUMAN RIGHTS? Oh wait, she's a woman, a 'non-person' in fanatical Muslim eyes.

 

[jpr62902]

Here's a link to the New Jersey appellate court decision: http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/courts/appellate/a6107-08.opn.html