« on: June 10, 2010, 06:07:14 PM »
http://loganswarning.com/2010/05/05/louisiana-bans-sharia-law/Some of the main points of my plan against Islam, are to become energy independent, end Muslim immigration, and officially ban Sharia Law. Thankfully the state of Louisiana has done their part, with Sharia Law. To preserve Western Civilization, we are going to have to vote in more politicians that are willing to fight Islam head on. The Netherland’s Geert Wilders would be one, and Vijay Kumar of Tennessee, would be another. We are finally heading in the right direction, keep on speaking out!
Picture by Bosch Fawstin.
Hat tip to Gary.
Libel on tour: James Gill
By James Gill
Within minutes Monday a legislative committee repudiated both Islamic and British law.
Neither, perhaps, represents an immediate threat to justice in Louisiana, but it was not entirely an alarmist and xenophobic stunt when the committee approved two bills by Rep. Ernest Wooton, R-Belle Chase. Mostly, but not entirely.
One of Wooton’s bills, which provides that no foreign law shall be applied here if it violates a right guaranteed by the American Constitution, is by any rational measure superfluous. But it is not unknown for immigrant litigants to invoke the tenets of Sharia to which, the committee was told, the Maryland courts deferred in a child custody case.
The Louisiana Supreme Court has so far insisted that cases in America are settled according to American law, but the committee figured it was wise to commit future jurists to that sound principle. At least the bill does no harm.
Wooton’s other bill may be largely symbolic too, although it is worth passing just in case. It does not single out the Limeys, but its refusal to enforce foreign defamation judgments that are “repugnant to the public policy of this state” is clearly aimed at them. Other states have passed, or are considering, similar legislation in response to a libel award rendered in London against the American writer Rachel Ehrenfeld.
It must be embarrassing for the British when American legislators lump them together with the avatars of medieval repression, but plenty of them are evidently aware it is fair, at least in the context of libel law. As a general election approaches, all three major parties in the UK promise to reform laws that have created “libel tourism” on the very island where John Milton wrote the book on press freedom, “Areopagitica.” That was in 1644, so it’s about time the government got the hang of it.
Instead the law enables large corporations or deep-pocketed individuals to stifle freedom of expression far beyond the shores of Britain, increasingly so in the Internet age, as Ehrenfeld discovered when her book “Funding Evil” identified Saudi billionaire Khalid bin Mahfouz as a financial supporter of al-Qaida.
bin Mahfouz was not about to sue in this country and not just because he would have had to contend with the First Amendment. He has such an unsavory past that he would probably have been ruled libel-proof in any case. No need to go into detail here. You can take my word for it. He won’t sue me.
Ehrenfeld’s book was not even published in Britain but, since a few copies had made their way there through Amazon, bin Mahfouz was able to play the libel tourist and take advantage of laws that so favor the plaintiff that the burden of proof is on the defendant.
The costs of defending such suits over there is so high that the mere threat of litigation generally suffices to squelch inconvenient opinions if the slightest grounds exist for British jurisdiction.
Thus plaintiffs rush to the British courts on the slightest pretext, as, for instance, when an Icelandic bank took offense to a story in a Danish tabloid.
Ehrenfeld declined to attend the proceedings in London and was ordered to pay a hefty sum by Justice Eady, the bete noire of British liberals. Eady has done much to galvanize the campaign for libel reform by ruling against an English journalist who asserted there was no evidence to support the miraculous curative powers claimed by chiropractors over there. Eady is so off the wall — he required the journalist to prove that the chiropractors had set out to deceive the public — that he was recently overturned on appeal.
But Ehfrenfeld is the cause célèbre for Americans. New York took the lead in refusing to recognize libel awards from the British courts, and all hail to our legislators for joining in to strike a blow for freedom of expression. Maybe they love the press after all.
It won’t matter much if the next parliament does indeed reform the antique libel law. But our legislators are not dumb enough to rely on promises made in election campaigns.
http://loganswarning.com/2010/06/08/oklahoma-set-to-ban-sharia-muslims-not-happy/ <<<Video in article. This Muzi needs to pipe the F down.
Oklahoma lawmakers have seen the light, and are looking to follow in the footsteps of Louisiana and ban Sharia Law. This is a great step in our war with Islam. The reason is that, not only does it protect us from Islam, it will also expose the pro-Sharia Muslims. Personally I would like to take it one step further though. After the law is passed, I would arrest and deport if possible, any Muslim that calls for Sharia Law. All Sharia loving Muslims are to be looked upon as enemies of the state, just like Nazis were.
Here is a little preview of how Sharia loving Muslims, will treat us infidels.
Sharia law, courts likely on 2010 ballot
Mark Schlachtenhaufen
The Edmond Sun
EDMOND — State lawmakers say it’s a pre-emptive strike against Sharia law, needed to prevent here what has happened in the United Kingdom.
An Islamic leader says it’s another example of a rising tide of anti-Islamic bigotry in America.
State Question 755, which likely will be on the ballot in November, would make in-state courts rely on federal and state laws when deciding cases and forbid courts from using international law or Sharia law when making rulings.
The proposal, which has an Edmond connection, would amend Article 7, Section 1 of the Oklahoma Constitution, and stems from House Joint Resolution 1056, dubbed the “Save Our State” amendment, passed during the just-finished legislative session.
State Rep. Lewis Moore, R-Edmond, a co-author of HJR 1056, said he wanted to express his support very early for the legislation, which is needed because of the “onslaught” coming Oklahoma’s way.
“I don’t think we should accept or encourage Sharia law in any way, shape or form,” Moore said.
State Rep. Rex Duncan, R-Sand Springs, primary author of HJR 1056, said Oklahoma is the first state to pass such legislation and he hopes other states will follow.
Duncan, an attorney who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, said the amendment is needed because judges in other states and on the federal bench have increasingly cited international law in their decisions. He said he feels that action is inappropriate in a sovereign state.
Duncan said Sharia law is entrenched in the United Kingdom.
“It is a cancer upon the survivability of the UK,” Duncan said. “SQ 755 will constitute a pre-emptive strike against Sharia law coming to Oklahoma.”
State Sen. Anthony Sykes, R-Moore, a co-author of HJR 1056, said American courts are being more frequently challenged that international law should trump U.S. law.
“Sharia law coming to the U.S. is a scary concept,” Sykes said. “Hopefully the passage of this constitutional amendment will prevent it in Oklahoma.”
Council on American-Islamic Relations spokesman Ibrahim Hooper said he has been working on Muslim civil rights issues for several decades and anti-Islam rhetoric is approaching “Nazi-like” levels.
“This is just the flip side of the anti-Semitic coin,” Hooper said.
Hooper said Duncan is voicing a misconception of Sharia, which is based on the Quran, the traditions of Muhammad and interpretation of scripture, that it is comparable to laws related to other religions.
Regarding unintended consequences, Hooper wondered aloud what the amendment would mean for Muslims who want to wear a scarf in a driver’s license photo, for Muslims who want to pray in the workplace, if Muslims attending Oklahoma’s public schools will be forced to eat pork.
Saad Mohammed, director of Islamic information for the Islamic Society of Greater Oklahoma City, said 80 percent of the U.S. Constitution is compatible with Sharia, which leads to justice and equality for all. Mohammed said extremists have distorted Sharia.
“Sharia is more of a protection than something used to oppress,” Mohammed said.
Razi Hashmi, of Edmond, executive director of CAIR-Oklahoma, said the Sharia law proposal is a distraction from more urgent issues facing the state such as the economy, job creation and immigration.
Hashmi said the proposal is a way of promoting division and bigotry instead of promoting unity and understanding of other faiths and cultures.
Logged
"You must keep the arab under your boot or he will be at your throat" -Unknown
"When we tell the Arab, ‘Come, I want to help you and see to your needs,’ he doesn’t look at us like gentlemen. He sees weakness and then the wolf shows what he can do.” - Maimonides
“I am all peace, but when I speak, they are for war.” -Psalms 120:7
"The difference between a Jewish liberal and a Jewish conservative is that when a Jewish liberal walks out of the Holocaust Museum, he feels, "This shows why we need to have more tolerance and multiculturalism." The Jewish conservative feels, "We should have killed a lot more Nazis, and sooner."" - Philip Klein
Topic: Lousiana and Oklahoma to ban sharia law! (Read 440 times)