Articles Index Sharia can never happen here?
ABC News recently quoted legal experts who said they did not know of one instance of a judge in the U.S. invoking sharia in rendering a decision. Since then, have they been made to look like fools?
How many times I have heard “Sharia law is not compatible with the U.S. Constitution or our judicial system, it cannot happen here.” Really? Let’s examine that for a moment.
Back in January, I wrote about Creeping Sharia here in America. In another article, I examined the case against Faleh Hassan Almaleki of Phoenix, Arizona accused of the murder of his own daughter, Noor Almaleki, in what was an admitted “honor killing”.
The death penalty was taken off the table after Almaleki's defense attorney, Billy Little, asked the court and the Judge not to seek the death penalty and to take special precautions to ensure that the County and Attorney's Office wouldn't wrongly seek the death penalty because…Almaleki is a Muslim.
I recently reported on the case of four Christians arrested in Dearborn, Michigan at the Arab Festival. The Thomas More Law Center stated:
“In what some have described as police enforcement of Sharia law at the annual Dearborn Arab International Festival, last Friday night Dearborn Police Officers arrested four Christian missionaries and illegally confiscated their video cameras which were recording the events surrounding their arrests.”
I was elated when Oklahoma State representative Rex Duncan saw the threat of Sharia law and wrote a bill that would ban Sharia law in his state. When I interviewed Rep. Duncan, he explained:
“It would have been a safe bet that Oklahoma would be the last State to enact this law, but if we waited until it was on our doorstep it would be too late.”
Those words mean more than you can imagine.
During the same time period that I interviewed Rep. Duncan, ABC news did a story on the Oklahoma anti-Sharia law as well. ABC reported that, after speaking to legal experts, they (legal experts) “did not know of one instance of a judge in the U.S. invoking sharia in rendering a decision.”
And now we have New Jersey.
According to Court documents:
“The plaintiff, herein known as S.D., and the defendant, herein known as M.J.R., are citizens of Morocco and adherents to the Muslim faith. They were wed in Morocco in an arranged marriage on July 31, 2008, when plaintiff was seventeen years old. The parties did not know each other prior to the marriage. On August 29, 2008, they came to New Jersey as the result of defendant's employment in this country as an accountant.”
The wife, S.D. accused her husband of domestic abuse that began on November 1, 2008. Court records show that defendant requested that plaintiff, who did not know how to cook, prepare three Moroccan dishes for six guests to eat on the following morning. After two unsuccessful attempts at cooking the husband angrily told her: “I'm going to show you later on, not now, I'm not going to talk to you right now until the visitors leave”.
After the visitors left the husband stated “now I'm going to start punishing you”. The punishment continued for approximately one hour. Although this occurred on November 1, some of the bruises remained at the time that a detective from the Hudson County Prosecutor's office took pictures of her body on November 22, 2008.
Also according to Court documents an additional incident of abuse took place on November 16, 2008 in which S.D. attempted to flee the bedroom and the husband locked the door and sexually assaulted her.
The husband was quoted as saying:
“You're still my wife and you must do whatever I tell you to do. I want to hurt your flesh, I want to feel and know that you're still my wife.”
Another incident occurred on November 22, 2008:
“That morning, following an argument with her mother-in-law, plaintiff locked herself in her bedroom. Defendant, having been refused entry, removed the latch from the door, entered the bedroom, and engaged in nonconsensual sex with plaintiff. Although plaintiff's mother-in-law and sister-in-law were in the apartment, and although plaintiff was crying throughout the episode, neither came to her assistance. Defendant and his relatives then left the apartment, and plaintiff started to break everything in the bedroom, including one of its two windows. After defendant returned with his mother at approximately 4:00 p.m., plaintiff attempted to leave the apartment. However, defendant pulled her back into the bedroom and assaulted her by repeatedly slapping her face, causing her lip to swell and bleeding to occur. He then left the room, and plaintiff escaped without shoes or proper clothing through the unbroken window.”
The husband obviously beat his wife and raped her. This was not disputed in court.
The Judge’s decision in this case of so called “justice” is as disturbing as the husband’s behavior towards his wife. Here is what the Judge wrote for his decision on a restraining order following a finding of domestic violence:
“This court does not feel that, under the circumstances, that this defendant had a criminal desire to or intent to sexually assault or to sexually contact the plaintiff when he did. The court believes that he was operating under his belief that it is, as the husband, his desire to have sex when and whether he wanted to, was something that was consistent with his practices and it was something that was not prohibited.”
You read it right. Go ahead and re-read it if you want to, it won’t change. The Judge in this case basically said, because he is a Muslim he was acting under “something that was consistent with his practices and it was something that was not prohibited.”
Yeah, and Sharia doesn’t happen here in America, or ABC’s “legal experts” can’t remember? It is not compatible with our Constitution remember?
I am glad to report that an Appellate Court saw it differently. Here is part of what the Appellate Court wrote when overturning the first Judge’s decision:
“Defendant’s conduct in engaging in nonconsensual sexual intercourse was unquestionably knowing, regardless of his view that his religion permitted him to act as he did.”
“As the judge recognized, the case thus presents a conflict between the criminal law and religious precepts. In resolving this conflict, the judge determined to except defendant from the operation of the State’s statutes as the result of his religious beliefs. In doing so, the judge was mistaken.”
The Judge was “mistaken”? Mistaken? How about if we mistakenly throw this guy off the bench?
Yes, in this case an Appellate Court came through, but how many more times must we see cases like this here in America before people start to open their eyes to the truth of “creeping Sharia”?
How many cases such as this will occur before the Appellate Court lets the decision stand? The words written above the main entrance to the Supreme Court Building, express the ultimate responsibility of the Supreme Court of the United States - "EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW".
Equal. It does not say equal unless you are a different religion or culture. It says equal. Period.
The more people, yes, we the people, allow this to happen the more Sharia has a foothold within our society and our Judicial system. We the people have the right, no, the obligation, to make sure that those we put in office, be it as Judges or Representatives follow the Constitution. If and when they don’t, vote them out or impeach them. This is our country and it’s time we took it back!
-
2010-08-03 14:03:46 |75.189.230.xxx| PatriotUSA - The cancer is spreading
One only has to look at the decision by NYC to allow the mosque at Ground Zero to be built to
know and realize sharia law is very much alive
inside the USA. What an insult to those who were murdered in cold blood by islam and jihad.
The examples you have noted in your aticle are but a few of what is being allowed to creep into our country. I call sharia law another form of stealth jihad. Ask most muslims if they
favor sharia law instead of trying to engage them in s discussion about islam, terrorism etc. I have yet to meet any muslims who do not
want to see sharia established and become the law of OUR land. Again, great article and will be posting at my site.P.S. I didn't get it by email yet!
-
2010-08-06 23:14:36 |41.178.148.xxx| seifturki
Abdul Basheer: It’s your right to be an idiot !
The full cooperation between Satan and Allah in misleading the poor creatures!
What is the main work of the devil (Iblis)? The answer is in Al-A’raf (7-16,17) To lure humans into sin, or to mislead humans. What about Allah? Believe it or not Allah does the same thing to mislead humans! Look at the following Quranic verses: Al-Nahl (16-93), Al-Ra’d (13-27), Ibrahim (14-4) all of them confirm that Allah guides those He wishes and misleads those He wishes. In Al-Nisa’ (4-88 and 143), AL -Shura (42-46), Al-Kahf (18-17) confirm that you will not be able to guide those that Allah misled. Look at Al Baqara (2-10) it says that the unbelievers have sickness in their hearts and Allah increased their sickness. Can you believe that? Instead of guiding them Allah increased their sickness!! Allah even gets angry at those humans who try to guide that God mislead! Look at Al-Nisa’ (4-88): “Are you trying to guide those that God misled? In Al-Araf (7-16,17) Satan misleads humans as above while in Al-Araf (7:18) Allah will fill up hell with those that are misled by Satan. Isn’t obvious here that there is a joint venture between Satan and Allah as Iblis will mislead and Allah will fill up hell with them? Look up these verses yourself in the Arabic Quran to confirm it to your feeble mind. If you cannot read Arabic look at Pickthall translation because others use deception in interpretation because it would be very embarrassing to tell the truth about this strange relation between Satan and Allah!!!!
-
2010-08-07 01:23:17 |41.178.148.xxx| seifturki - A (good) Moslem has to be a terrorist!!
If we define good Christians, and good Jews as those who adhere to the teachings of the Gospel and the Bible respectively, then good Moslems are those who follow the teachings of the Quran. Now if the teachings of the Quran call for violence against non-Moslems, then “good” Moslems have no choice but to become terrorists. The following are only few of the Quranic verses that call for violence against non-Moslems: Al Baqara 2(244), Al-Nisa’4(76,77,84,89), Al-Anfal 8(12,39), Al-Tawba 9
5,14,29), 9(88,112,123), 47(4). All call to fight non-Moslems until all religion is that of Allah, or fight in Allah’s cause (Jihad), or to kill them wherever you find them until they pay Gezya submissively, which is a specially designed humiliating tax used only against non-Moslems. These verses are also augmented by many similar instructions in the Hadiths like: In Bukhari V4B53N386: “We are ordered to fight you until you submit to Islam or pay Gezya with submission”, or in Muslim, C9B1N31: “I have been commanded to fight people until they say no God but Allah, and Mohammad is his only messenger”. It is no wonder that many Islamic militant organizations were specifically established to implement the verses that call for violence against the non-Moslems like: Muslim militants, Muslim terrorists, Islamic terrorists, Islamic radicals, Al-Jihad, Islamic militants, Islamic fanatics, Al-Qaeda, and Taliban. No other religion has so many organizations that call for violence against the other as Islam, which explains the frequent Moslem attacks on non-Moslems everywhere in the world.
The 1982 Mecca Islamic summit Conference confirmed the above when they declared that Jihad is a duty of all Moslems where ever they are.
Most Moslem apologists do not quote the above verses, but rather use few verses that were “inspired” much earlier like Al-Baqara (2:256), Al-Kahf (18:29) and Al-Kafirun (109:6), which call for tolerance of other religions. These are the few verses that the Moslem apologists keep pumping into the ears of the Western audience, while ignoring the other verses that call for violence giving the impression that the Quranic verses do not encourage anything except peaceful coexistence with non-Moslems! The fact remains though, that these verses that call for peaceful coexistence were “inspired” much earlier when the Moslems were weak and few, but as they became stronger these verses of tolerance were later abrogated by the above verses that call for violence, as many Islamic prominent scholars and historians can confirm, like Al- Suyuti and Al-Qurtubi. This should explain the declarations of many of al-Qaeda leaders like Abu Misab al-Zarqawi in Iraq who confirmed that “we are only obeying the Quranic verses that demand the practice of violence against non-Moslems, and that verses for violence have abrogated all verses that call for tolerance”. This attitude explains all those unprovoked attacks against non-Moslems all over the world or even against Moslems that oppose violence. It should further explain the burning of churches in many countries in the world, like Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia, Nigeria and others. Most non speaking Arabic Moslems are not told the truth about violence; actually they are deceived in many instances when it comes to translation of the Quran, especially when the Quran contradicts simple science, history and general logic. They are taught that Islam is the religion of peace and mercy and nothing is unveiled about the so many verses that call for violence against the other. In science for instance, look up Al-Azhar website or the Supreme Council on Islamic Affairs (the highest Moslem authority on earth) website the Quranic Arabic verse 23:14, then look at the English translation right under it, to find out that the “many creators” stated in the original Arabic verse is translated to the “one unique creator”, as it would be very embarrassing to tell the truth! A Moslem cannot with all honesty deny the existence of these verses that call for violence, as anyone can verify their existence in the Quran. If asked what could a Moslem say in defending “the peaceful Nature” of the Quran with the presence of violent Quranic verses? Could he say that he will only follow those abrogated verses that call for tolerance? Will he say: “Trust me I have no intention to implement those verses that call for violence”, as some Moslems might claim! Should the world peace and security depend on the mood of a Moslem? What happens if he later changes his mind? Do people accept the presence of racist clauses in the “democratic” constitution. because the government promised not to implement them? Would such a step bring peace and security to those concerned, or should the government delete these verses from the constitution?
Does this mean that all Moslems are terrorists? Of course not as most of them abhor and condemn publicly all perpetrated violence against non-Moslems, but with their entire adherence to the daily prayers notwithstanding, they are not considered good Moslems, because they are not practicing all the obvious instructions of the Quran. Strangely they do not support the removal of these verses that call for violence, because they would not dare to venture into changing the “words of God”. The Quran says that all verses in the Quran will remain intact until the end of times. What could be done?
All Moslems, including myself (an ex-Moslem), that oppose violence even if it was emphasized repeatedly in the Quran have the immediate and urgent duty to demand from all Islamic authorities, especially in Saudi Arabia, Al-Azhar in Egypt and from all future international Islamic conferences to espouse firmly a resolution that abrogate in effect all Quranic verses that call for violence and consider them as historical needed contingencies of the past and no longer valid for the present. It takes a lot of courage to do that since the Islamic authority will become a target for most Moslems who are programmed to resist any change. Many Moslems have the means to discredit, fight and even demand death for anyone that call for such a change, which means again that the problem is not with Moslems but with Islam itself. No one can accuse me of being a racist, because I am an ex-Moslem, but we all have to admit that Islamic violence will remain active until the verses in the Quran that call for violence are totally abrogated.
Thank you for laying out so clearly how Shariah law is weaseling it's way into our courts, and why it's unfortunately necessary for our laws to reflect the protection of our Constitution against Judges that think Shariah is an appropriate rule of "law" to follow and accept as an argument to get out of punishment in America.