IN A FLAP
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Muslim man attacks a guy during a parade - Judge rules in favour of Muslim

+2
Mystic Moon
Tess
6 posters

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

Go down

Muslim man attacks a guy during a parade - Judge rules in favour of Muslim - Page 2 Empty Muslim man attacks a guy during a parade - Judge rules in favour of Muslim

Post  Tess Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:39 am

First topic message reminder :

The Pennsylvania State Director of American Atheists, Ernest Perce, was assaulted by a Muslim while participating in a Halloween parade. Along with a Zombie Pope, Ernest was costumed as Zombie Muhammad. The assault was caught on video, the muslim man admitted to his crime and charges were filed in what should have been an open-and-shut case. That's not what happened though.

The defendant is an immigrant amd claimed he did not what that his actions were illegal, or that it was legal in this country to represent Muhammad in any form. The case went to trial and, as circumstances would dictate, Judge Mark Martin is also a muslim. What transpired next was surreal. The Judge not only ruled in favour of the defendant, but called Mr Perce a name and told him that if he were in a muslim country, he'd be put to death.

http://atheists.org/blog/2012/02/22/muslim-attacks-atheist-muslim-judge-dismisses-case-blames-victim
Tess
Tess
.........
.........

Posts : 8654
Location : The end of the rainbow

Back to top Go down


Muslim man attacks a guy during a parade - Judge rules in favour of Muslim - Page 2 Empty Re: Muslim man attacks a guy during a parade - Judge rules in favour of Muslim

Post  Mystic Moon Sun Apr 01, 2012 9:29 pm

Scholar of Islam Andrew Bostom, interviewed recently about Islamic anti-Semitism here and here at FrontPage, has brought to our attention a revealing, 47-page Arabic-language document discovered by the Center for Security Policy and translated into English by his colleague at Translating Jihad. The paper was published by the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America (AMJA) in 2007, and presented at their 2008 careers conference in Houston. The document makes it clear that AMJA’s ultimate goal, as Bostom puts it, “is nothing less than the eventual subversion of the American legal system” to sharia law.
AMJA’s website explains that the group’s purpose is to service the growing Muslim population living in the non-Muslim Americas, giving them authoritative guidance as to what is allowable under the manmade laws of “infidel lands.” The organization also offers itself as “an authentic source of Islamic learning and thought for all peoples of the Americas.” All peoples who understand Arabic, that is. For those who do and who care to investigate, the organization reveals its subversive agenda.

As Translating Jihad notes about the newly discovered document from AMJA, the paper

<BLOCKQUOTE>
makes clear that according to Islam, the only legitimate law is that which comes from Allah, and in fact authority to make laws rests with Allah alone. This renders every other legal system — including the American system — illegitimate.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
Naturally, in the United States everyone is expected to abide by the law, under which all are equal, Muslims included. But AMJA’s authoritative rulings require all Muslims to defer to the law of infidels only according to darura, the doctrine of necessity, for “it is required for a Muslim to be hostile to courts which rule by man-made law.” As Translating Jihad states in his assessment,

<BLOCKQUOTE>
Throughout the paper it is made abundantly clear that Muslims should view the American and other non-Muslim legal systems as infidel systems, and that they are only to participate in them in specific circumstances in order to benefit Islam and Muslims generally. They are specifically instructed to feel hatred in their hearts toward such infidel legal systems, and to do everything within their power to make the Islamic Shari’a supreme, even if that means engaging in deception in certain cases.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
Even if it means engaging in deception. It is disturbing enough that such direction is being given to, say, the average Muslim called in for jury duty, but this is expected to apply to Muslims higher up the legal ladder as well – from legal aide to attorneys all the way up to judges. A Muslim judge too, according to the document, “must in his heart hate the man-made law”:

<BLOCKQUOTE>
He must also do everything in his power to enact laws that allow the Muslims to practice their Shari’a. He must keep it in his mind that he was not permitted to take this job except to serve Islam and Muslims. He must also… judge by the rulings of the Shari’a as much as possible, even if by a ruse.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
So a Muslim judge is allowed to participate in the infidel system of justice only to serve Islam and fellow Muslims, not everyone who comes before his bench without discrimination, and he must rule as much as possible according to the dictates of sharia without attracting undue attention to his true intentions and loyalty.

<BLOCKQUOTE>
makes clear that according to Islam, the only legitimate law is that which comes from Allah, and in fact authority to make laws rests with Allah alone. This renders every other legal system — including the American system — illegitimate.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
Naturally, in the United States everyone is expected to abide by the law, under which all are equal, Muslims included. But AMJA’s authoritative rulings require all Muslims to defer to the law of infidels only according to darura, the doctrine of necessity, for “it is required for a Muslim to be hostile to courts which rule by man-made law.” As Translating Jihad states in his assessment,

<BLOCKQUOTE>
Throughout the paper it is made abundantly clear that Muslims should view the American and other non-Muslim legal systems as infidel systems, and that they are only to participate in them in specific circumstances in order to benefit Islam and Muslims generally. They are specifically instructed to feel hatred in their hearts toward such infidel legal systems, and to do everything within their power to make the Islamic Shari’a supreme, even if that means engaging in deception in certain cases.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
Even if it means engaging in deception. It is disturbing enough that such direction is being given to, say, the average Muslim called in for jury duty, but this is expected to apply to Muslims higher up the legal ladder as well – from legal aide to attorneys all the way up to judges. A Muslim judge too, according to the document, “must in his heart hate the man-made law”:

<BLOCKQUOTE>
He must also do everything in his power to enact laws that allow the Muslims to practice their Shari’a. He must keep it in his mind that he was not permitted to take this job except to serve Islam and Muslims. He must also… judge by the rulings of the Shari’a as much as possible, even if by a ruse.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
So a Muslim judge is allowed to participate in the infidel system of justice only to serve Islam and fellow Muslims, not everyone who comes before his bench without discrimination, and he must rule as much as possible according to the dictates of sharia without attracting undue attention to his true intentions and loyalty.

As Translating Jihad points out, AMJA is not some fringe group. Its scholars are considered authoritative and influential, and it enjoys mainstream acceptance not only in the American Muslim community (including endorsement of the organization’s seventh annual American conference in Houston in late 2010 to train American imams), but internationally. This report from the Muslim Observer asserts that AMJA

<BLOCKQUOTE>
has a list of scholars associated with it which stretches from Al-Azhar University to Virginia’s Open University, and back across the ocean to the professors at Saudi universities.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
The organization has issued fatwas which sanction the killing of apostates, of blasphemers (including non-Muslims guilty of it), and of adulterers (by stoning, no less), and which condone marital rape. Those, from a mainstream Muslim authority. Somehow such rulings are always swept under the carpet by the chic and slick academic apologists for Islam like John Esposito or Reza Aslan, or President Obama’s Muslim advisor Dalia Mogahed, who offer slippery, whitewashed defenses of sharia.

Based on these rulings, it’s difficult to see that the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America is doing anything but fighting the long war against the infidel, secretly undermining our legal system now as much as possible, in tiny but accumulating increments, with an eye toward the day when fundamentalist Muslims can openly install sharia.

I think we have already seen the first case of this? Unbelieveable.
Mystic Moon
Mystic Moon
......
......

Posts : 2643
Location : Wherever here is, that's where I am.

Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum