Anti-Islam ads on NYC buses. Whose side are you on?

[irosie91]

generally----persons who have passed thru ----something like some sort of liberal arts secondary schooling----do begin to understand that POLLS are not useful FACTS----they are subject to a myriad of factors that render them utterly
misleading, Yet there are people ---even among the
learned population of this message board-----that DEPEND
on whatever "poll" supports their idiotic POV as if the poll stats were handed down on Mount Sinai. To know the opinion of any population-------talk to a statistically significant number of them in candid manner-----under
condition of confidentiality----privately and best of all----at
night

Polls aren't "facts" - they're indicators of trends in public opinion and only as good as the methodology employed. However, if someone makes a claim, they should be able to substantiate it with something besides opinion and conspiracy theory. You know...kind of like we ask people to attempt to claim the Holocaust was a hoax to substantiate their claims with actual facts.

Holocaust deniers have lots of FACTS and polls which they pick and choose with the same facility and confidence that characterizes your choice of facts and polls

They don't have "facts" - they have conspiracy theory and cherry picked bits of data that becomes evident once they start displaying their sources. Kind of like those who claim Muslims in America are calling for sharia and hadith to be the law.

You are showing yourself to be a complete ignorant fool to keep saying that. You might as well be saying "those who claim that gay liberation groups are calling for legalization of same-sex marriage". Well, Gee, Who woulda ever thought ?

When you tell me how many examples you want, I'll give you some, even though the question is so ludicrous, it doesn't even deserve the dignity of a response.

So are you saying that Holocaust denier are on the right path? Many would disagree with you.

try again------holocaust deniers are very much like you-----
in the faces of the victims they SPIT and say "PROVE IT"

now you spit in the faces of the south Sudanese kids lying dead in the dust

 

[Coyote]

Polls aren't "facts" - they're indicators of trends in public opinion and only as good as the methodology employed. However, if someone makes a claim, they should be able to substantiate it with something besides opinion and conspiracy theory. You know...kind of like we ask people to attempt to claim the Holocaust was a hoax to substantiate their claims with actual facts.

Holocaust deniers have lots of FACTS and polls which they pick and choose with the same facility and confidence that characterizes your choice of facts and polls

They don't have "facts" - they have conspiracy theory and cherry picked bits of data that becomes evident once they start displaying their sources. Kind of like those who claim Muslims in America are calling for sharia and hadith to be the law.

You are showing yourself to be a complete ignorant fool to keep saying that. You might as well be saying "those who claim that gay liberation groups are calling for legalization of same-sex marriage". Well, Gee, Who woulda ever thought ?

When you tell me how many examples you want, I'll give you some, even though the question is so ludicrous, it doesn't even deserve the dignity of a response.

So are you saying that Holocaust denier are on the right path? Many would disagree with you.

try again------holocaust deniers are very much like you-----
in the faces of the victims they SPIT and say "PROVE IT"

now you spit in the faces of the south Sudanese kids lying dead in the dust

So now asking a member to support his claim is "spitting in the faces of south Sudanese kids"?

You get odder by the post Rosie.

 

[protectionist]

Awesome! Really nice job. And the best part of it, is that it is right square in the Islamists' faces. In your face, Coyote!

 

[protectionist]

Holocaust deniers have lots of FACTS and polls which they pick and choose with the same facility and confidence that characterizes your choice of facts and polls

They don't have "facts" - they have conspiracy theory and cherry picked bits of data that becomes evident once they start displaying their sources. Kind of like those who claim Muslims in America are calling for sharia and hadith to be the law.

You are showing yourself to be a complete ignorant fool to keep saying that. You might as well be saying "those who claim that gay liberation groups are calling for legalization of same-sex marriage". Well, Gee, Who woulda ever thought ?

When you tell me how many examples you want, I'll give you some, even though the question is so ludicrous, it doesn't even deserve the dignity of a response.

So are you saying that Holocaust denier are on the right path? Many would disagree with you.

try again------holocaust deniers are very much like you-----
in the faces of the victims they SPIT and say "PROVE IT"

now you spit in the faces of the south Sudanese kids lying dead in the dust

So now asking a member to support his claim is "spitting in the faces of south Sudanese kids"?

You get odder by the post Rosie.

Now go back and read the rest of post # 397, (realizing there may be more of it, yet)

 

[protectionist]

Please show me that Muslims in the US call for sharia and hadith as "law".

Center for Security Policy Press launched a collection of monographs called the Civilization Jihad Reader Series with the publication of an update to an earlier and highly influential study concerning the insinuation of Islam’s supremacist shariah legal code into the U.S. judiciary. Entitled Shariah in American Courts: The Expanding Incursion of Islamic Law in the U.S. Legal System, this inaugural booklet documents 146 cases in 32 states in which a party to litigation attempted to have the matter resolved by applying shariah, rather than the statutes of the state in question.

The Center first raised an alarm about the penetration of American jurisprudence by one of the most anti-constitutional of such foreign legal codes with its 2011 report, Shariah Law and American State Courts: An Assessment of State Appellate Court Cases. That study examined a sample of fifty cases and found that in twenty-seven of them, in twenty-three different states, the courts in question allowed the use of shariah, generally to the detriment of women and/or children whose rights under our Constitution were infringed.

SHARIAH IN AMERICAN COURTS The Expanding Incursion of Islamic Law in the U.S. Legal System CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY PRESS

This study identifies a total of 146 cases involving Shariah from 32 different states and federal courts: 9 cases were found in New Jersey; 9 in Texas; 9 in New York; 8 cases were found in California; 8 in Ohio; 7 in Connecticut; 7 in Virginia; 6 in Florida; 5 in Michigan; 4 in Massachusetts; 4 in Washington; 4 in Iowa; 3 in Maryland; 3 in Nebraska; 3 in North Carolina; 2 in Georgia; 2 in Louisiana; 2 in Delaware; 2 in Illinois; 2 in Maine; 2 in New Hampshire; 2 in South Carolina; and 1 each in Arizona, Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Minnesota, Missouri, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and Tennessee. 33 cases were found from federal courts.

The 146 cases can be classified into fifteen categories (cases sometimes fell within more than one category): 7 cases deal with criminal law; 20 cases deal with civil law; 9 cases deal with commercial law; 14 cases deal with family law generally; 23 cases deal with child custody; 67 cases deal with divorce of some sort or related matters; 25 cases dealt with comity; 15 cases dealt with forum non conveniens; 4 cases dealt with choice of law; 1 case involved forum selection; 3 cases involved arbitration and 8 cases involved domestic violence/abuse. In addition, the cases were also assessed as to whether or not the ultimate decision of the court was in accordance with Shariah at both the trial court and appellate court levels: At the trial court level: 22 decisions found that the application of Shariah was at odds with the state’s public policy; 15 found Shariah to be applicable in the case at bar; 9 were indeterminate; and in 4 cases Shariah was not applicable to the decision at this level, but was applicable at the appellate level. At the appellate court level: 23 decisions found that the application of Shariah was at odds with the state’s public policy; 12 found Shariah to be applicable in the case at bar; 8 were indeterminate; and in 7 cases Shariah was not applicable to the decision, but had been applicable at the trial court level.

Across the 146 cases there were 21 foreign countries from which Shariah— based legal conventions or decisions were brought to bear upon the case. Some cases made reference to more than one country while others involved Shariah without reference to a specific foreign country. Among the cases that referenced Shariah in a foreign country: 10 were from Pakistan; 8 were from Iran; 7 were from Egypt; 6 were from Jordan; 5 from Lebanon; 4 from Turkey; 3 from Saudi Arabia; 2 each were from India, Indonesia, Iraq and Nigeria; and 1 each was from Afghanistan, Algeria, Gaza [sic], Israel, Kenya; Morocco, the Philippines, Singapore, Sudan, Syria, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

In summary, of the 146 cases found, the court upheld the use of Shariah in 27 cases. This means that, statistically, one out of five American judges fail to reject foreign law that violates U.S. and state public policy. This alarming success ratio of Shariah submitting American law in our state courts provides ample evidence of the increasing effort to insinuate Shariah into American civilization. This effort, and the intent of those organizations taking part in it, are described in greater detail in Appendix A and B, while Appendix C provides the reader hope for a mechanism to counter it. Finally, It should also be noted that the cases in this survey dealing with prisoner cases and asylum cases are illustrative only; there are literally too many such cases to include in this study. Indeed a whole separate volume could be produced dealing just with each of these issues.

Center for Security Policy Shariah in American Courts The Expanding Incursion of Islamic Law in the U.S. Legal System

http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Shariah_in_American_Courts1.pdf

Shariah in American Courts The Expanding Incursion of Islamic Law in the U.S. Legal System Civilization Jihad Reader Series Volume 1 Center for Security Policy 9780692345559 Amazon.com Books

Almost all of those cases were using sharia in civil disputes or cases involving dealings with other countries. None of this shows that American Muslims are calling for Sharia and Hadith to be the law of the land.

For example - here's a look at the actual cases:

The True Story of Sharia in American Courts The Nation

As an attorney, consultant or expert witness, I have handled more than 100 cases involving components of Sharia. In a case I tried in 2002, Odatalla v. Odatalla, a New Jersey couple had signed an Islamic marriage contract consistent with their cultural traditions. When the wife filed for divorce, she asked the court to enforce the mahr, or dowry provision, in her contract, which called for the husband’s payment of $10,000 upon the dissolution of their marriage. Superior Court Judge John Selser found the marriage contract valid under New Jersey law, concluding, “Clearly, this court can enforce a contract which is not in contravention of established law or public policy.”​

In a 2003 case involving Exxon Mobil and a Saudi oil company, the parties had agreed as part of a commercial transaction that Saudi law would govern any potential disputes. After the Saudi company sued its former business partner, Exxon Mobil, the Delaware Superior Court heard testimony on Saudi law, which applies traditional Sharia, and the judge instructed the jury to base its decision accordingly. The jury returned a $400 million–plus verdict in favor of Exxon Mobil and against the Saudi firm.


Finally, in a more recent case I was involved in, a state judge declined to recognize a Syrian court order that would have transferred the custody of a child to her father because of the mother’s remarriage. The judge reasoned that remarriage alone is not sufficient to transfer custody. Far from deferring to judgments from foreign countries, US courts regularly refuse to recognize such orders due to the constitutional and due-process implications.​

A few more sources:

Column The sharia myth sweeps America - USATODAY.com

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-foreign-law-that-incorporates-religious-law/

What you are looking at is the use of sharia in very limited ways, just like any international laws might be used because sharia is the law in certain countries. None of this shows evidence that American Muslims are pushing for this and that is what I am asking you for - evidence that American Muslims, as a group, are pushing for sharia and hadith to be the law of the land. You are flinging a lot of mud in an attempt to obscure the fact that you can not answer this.

I thought so. I answer your question sincerely, and you come back with biased bullshit invalidation cards, that I've seen 1000 times. I see no point in talking to you. And the 146 cases involved (AS I SAID ALREADY) contained cases of domestic violence, criminal cases, like the infamous New Jersey rape/wife beating case. There are thousands more cases that didn't go to court and are just Muslims imposing Sharia law on American like the Muslim cab drivers who wouldn't pick up people with alcoholic beverages, the ones who wouldn't pick up blind people with a dog, the Muslim-owned company Rising Star, who fired an employee (Lina Morales) for bringing a BLT sandwich to work, the Muslims who got airports and universities to install foot-washing basins at great expense, etc. etc etc etc.

The majority of the cases did not involve domestic violence OR criminal cases. There was only one that involved domestic violence, where the judge ruled wrongly and was overturned as was appropriate.

Drivers refusing to pick up people with alcoholic bevereges or service dogs are not "imposing sharia law" they are acting on their own religious beliefs and no different than Christians refusing to provide services to gays or dispense birth control. Whether it flies or not depends on the law.

None of this shows that Muslims in America are trying to make Sharia and Hadith The Law - you just have personal cases of religious belief.

Of course they're imposing Sharia law, you dumbshit. Or maybe you just nuts. Is there a doctor in the house ?

 

[protectionist]

List of Islamic Terror Attacks in America

 

[protectionist]

Holocaust deniers have lots of FACTS and polls which they pick and choose with the same facility and confidence that characterizes your choice of facts and polls

They don't have "facts" - they have conspiracy theory and cherry picked bits of data that becomes evident once they start displaying their sources. Kind of like those who claim Muslims in America are calling for sharia and hadith to be the law.

You are showing yourself to be a complete ignorant fool to keep saying that. You might as well be saying "those who claim that gay liberation groups are calling for legalization of same-sex marriage". Well, Gee, Who woulda ever thought ?

When you tell me how many examples you want, I'll give you some, even though the question is so ludicrous, it doesn't even deserve the dignity of a response.

So are you saying that Holocaust denier are on the right path? Many would disagree with you.

try again------holocaust deniers are very much like you-----
in the faces of the victims they SPIT and say "PROVE IT"

now you spit in the faces of the south Sudanese kids lying dead in the dust

So now asking a member to support his claim is "spitting in the faces of south Sudanese kids"?

You get odder by the post Rosie.

You're not asking anybody to support anything. You know exactly what's going on, and nobody is scammed by your silly spin.

 

[Coyote]

They don't have "facts" - they have conspiracy theory and cherry picked bits of data that becomes evident once they start displaying their sources. Kind of like those who claim Muslims in America are calling for sharia and hadith to be the law.

You are showing yourself to be a complete ignorant fool to keep saying that. You might as well be saying "those who claim that gay liberation groups are calling for legalization of same-sex marriage". Well, Gee, Who woulda ever thought ?

When you tell me how many examples you want, I'll give you some, even though the question is so ludicrous, it doesn't even deserve the dignity of a response.

So are you saying that Holocaust denier are on the right path? Many would disagree with you.

try again------holocaust deniers are very much like you-----
in the faces of the victims they SPIT and say "PROVE IT"

now you spit in the faces of the south Sudanese kids lying dead in the dust

So now asking a member to support his claim is "spitting in the faces of south Sudanese kids"?

You get odder by the post Rosie.

You're not asking anybody to support anything. You know exactly what's going on, and nobody is scammed by your silly spin.

I've been asking you, multiple times to support your claim that American Muslims want sharia and hadith to be the law.

 

[Coyote]

List of Islamic Terror Attacks in America

Which has what to do with this discussion?

Ans. Nothing.

 

[Coyote]

But it won't matter what I write here because you're a dirty, raghead jihadist, and everybody here knows it. I don't know what the hell Chris is dong by having you be a mod here. If it were up to me, you wouldn't even be allowed to post. You'd be in jail or dead on the battlefield of war against all of you sickening savages.

So much for your vaunted support of free speech

 

[Coyote]

Please show me that Muslims in the US call for sharia and hadith as "law".

Center for Security Policy Press launched a collection of monographs called the Civilization Jihad Reader Series with the publication of an update to an earlier and highly influential study concerning the insinuation of Islam’s supremacist shariah legal code into the U.S. judiciary. Entitled Shariah in American Courts: The Expanding Incursion of Islamic Law in the U.S. Legal System, this inaugural booklet documents 146 cases in 32 states in which a party to litigation attempted to have the matter resolved by applying shariah, rather than the statutes of the state in question.

The Center first raised an alarm about the penetration of American jurisprudence by one of the most anti-constitutional of such foreign legal codes with its 2011 report, Shariah Law and American State Courts: An Assessment of State Appellate Court Cases. That study examined a sample of fifty cases and found that in twenty-seven of them, in twenty-three different states, the courts in question allowed the use of shariah, generally to the detriment of women and/or children whose rights under our Constitution were infringed.

SHARIAH IN AMERICAN COURTS The Expanding Incursion of Islamic Law in the U.S. Legal System CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY PRESS

This study identifies a total of 146 cases involving Shariah from 32 different states and federal courts: 9 cases were found in New Jersey; 9 in Texas; 9 in New York; 8 cases were found in California; 8 in Ohio; 7 in Connecticut; 7 in Virginia; 6 in Florida; 5 in Michigan; 4 in Massachusetts; 4 in Washington; 4 in Iowa; 3 in Maryland; 3 in Nebraska; 3 in North Carolina; 2 in Georgia; 2 in Louisiana; 2 in Delaware; 2 in Illinois; 2 in Maine; 2 in New Hampshire; 2 in South Carolina; and 1 each in Arizona, Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Minnesota, Missouri, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and Tennessee. 33 cases were found from federal courts.

The 146 cases can be classified into fifteen categories (cases sometimes fell within more than one category): 7 cases deal with criminal law; 20 cases deal with civil law; 9 cases deal with commercial law; 14 cases deal with family law generally; 23 cases deal with child custody; 67 cases deal with divorce of some sort or related matters; 25 cases dealt with comity; 15 cases dealt with forum non conveniens; 4 cases dealt with choice of law; 1 case involved forum selection; 3 cases involved arbitration and 8 cases involved domestic violence/abuse. In addition, the cases were also assessed as to whether or not the ultimate decision of the court was in accordance with Shariah at both the trial court and appellate court levels: At the trial court level: 22 decisions found that the application of Shariah was at odds with the state’s public policy; 15 found Shariah to be applicable in the case at bar; 9 were indeterminate; and in 4 cases Shariah was not applicable to the decision at this level, but was applicable at the appellate level. At the appellate court level: 23 decisions found that the application of Shariah was at odds with the state’s public policy; 12 found Shariah to be applicable in the case at bar; 8 were indeterminate; and in 7 cases Shariah was not applicable to the decision, but had been applicable at the trial court level.

Across the 146 cases there were 21 foreign countries from which Shariah— based legal conventions or decisions were brought to bear upon the case. Some cases made reference to more than one country while others involved Shariah without reference to a specific foreign country. Among the cases that referenced Shariah in a foreign country: 10 were from Pakistan; 8 were from Iran; 7 were from Egypt; 6 were from Jordan; 5 from Lebanon; 4 from Turkey; 3 from Saudi Arabia; 2 each were from India, Indonesia, Iraq and Nigeria; and 1 each was from Afghanistan, Algeria, Gaza [sic], Israel, Kenya; Morocco, the Philippines, Singapore, Sudan, Syria, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

In summary, of the 146 cases found, the court upheld the use of Shariah in 27 cases. This means that, statistically, one out of five American judges fail to reject foreign law that violates U.S. and state public policy. This alarming success ratio of Shariah submitting American law in our state courts provides ample evidence of the increasing effort to insinuate Shariah into American civilization. This effort, and the intent of those organizations taking part in it, are described in greater detail in Appendix A and B, while Appendix C provides the reader hope for a mechanism to counter it. Finally, It should also be noted that the cases in this survey dealing with prisoner cases and asylum cases are illustrative only; there are literally too many such cases to include in this study. Indeed a whole separate volume could be produced dealing just with each of these issues.

Center for Security Policy Shariah in American Courts The Expanding Incursion of Islamic Law in the U.S. Legal System

http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Shariah_in_American_Courts1.pdf

Shariah in American Courts The Expanding Incursion of Islamic Law in the U.S. Legal System Civilization Jihad Reader Series Volume 1 Center for Security Policy 9780692345559 Amazon.com Books

Almost all of those cases were using sharia in civil disputes or cases involving dealings with other countries. None of this shows that American Muslims are calling for Sharia and Hadith to be the law of the land.

For example - here's a look at the actual cases:

The True Story of Sharia in American Courts The Nation

As an attorney, consultant or expert witness, I have handled more than 100 cases involving components of Sharia. In a case I tried in 2002, Odatalla v. Odatalla, a New Jersey couple had signed an Islamic marriage contract consistent with their cultural traditions. When the wife filed for divorce, she asked the court to enforce the mahr, or dowry provision, in her contract, which called for the husband’s payment of $10,000 upon the dissolution of their marriage. Superior Court Judge John Selser found the marriage contract valid under New Jersey law, concluding, “Clearly, this court can enforce a contract which is not in contravention of established law or public policy.”​

In a 2003 case involving Exxon Mobil and a Saudi oil company, the parties had agreed as part of a commercial transaction that Saudi law would govern any potential disputes. After the Saudi company sued its former business partner, Exxon Mobil, the Delaware Superior Court heard testimony on Saudi law, which applies traditional Sharia, and the judge instructed the jury to base its decision accordingly. The jury returned a $400 million–plus verdict in favor of Exxon Mobil and against the Saudi firm.


Finally, in a more recent case I was involved in, a state judge declined to recognize a Syrian court order that would have transferred the custody of a child to her father because of the mother’s remarriage. The judge reasoned that remarriage alone is not sufficient to transfer custody. Far from deferring to judgments from foreign countries, US courts regularly refuse to recognize such orders due to the constitutional and due-process implications.​

A few more sources:

Column The sharia myth sweeps America - USATODAY.com

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-foreign-law-that-incorporates-religious-law/

What you are looking at is the use of sharia in very limited ways, just like any international laws might be used because sharia is the law in certain countries. None of this shows evidence that American Muslims are pushing for this and that is what I am asking you for - evidence that American Muslims, as a group, are pushing for sharia and hadith to be the law of the land. You are flinging a lot of mud in an attempt to obscure the fact that you can not answer this.

I thought so. I answer your question sincerely, and you come back with biased bullshit invalidation cards, that I've seen 1000 times. I see no point in talking to you. And the 146 cases involved (AS I SAID ALREADY) contained cases of domestic violence, criminal cases, like the infamous New Jersey rape/wife beating case. There are thousands more cases that didn't go to court and are just Muslims imposing Sharia law on American like the Muslim cab drivers who wouldn't pick up people with alcoholic beverages, the ones who wouldn't pick up blind people with a dog, the Muslim-owned company Rising Star, who fired an employee (Lina Morales) for bringing a BLT sandwich to work, the Muslims who got airports and universities to install foot-washing basins at great expense, etc. etc etc etc.

The majority of the cases did not involve domestic violence OR criminal cases. There was only one that involved domestic violence, where the judge ruled wrongly and was overturned as was appropriate.

Drivers refusing to pick up people with alcoholic bevereges or service dogs are not "imposing sharia law" they are acting on their own religious beliefs and no different than Christians refusing to provide services to gays or dispense birth control. Whether it flies or not depends on the law.

None of this shows that Muslims in America are trying to make Sharia and Hadith The Law - you just have personal cases of religious belief.

Of course they're imposing Sharia law, you dumbshit. Or maybe you just nuts. Is there a doctor in the house ?

Nah. Just asking for a straight answer using reputable sources. All you've provided is lawsuits for religious accommodation (and I can provide you as many from Christians and Jews asking for the same). Then the use of Sharia in certain court cases which I've already shown you to be specific to civil matters and cases involving international entities or contracts other than the one domestic violence one that was reversed. Individuals using sharia in civil matters is not the same as people pushing to have sharia and hadith be the law of the land as you are claiming.

 

[irosie91]

You are showing yourself to be a complete ignorant fool to keep saying that. You might as well be saying "those who claim that gay liberation groups are calling for legalization of same-sex marriage". Well, Gee, Who woulda ever thought ?

When you tell me how many examples you want, I'll give you some, even though the question is so ludicrous, it doesn't even deserve the dignity of a response.

So are you saying that Holocaust denier are on the right path? Many would disagree with you.

try again------holocaust deniers are very much like you-----
in the faces of the victims they SPIT and say "PROVE IT"

now you spit in the faces of the south Sudanese kids lying dead in the dust

So now asking a member to support his claim is "spitting in the faces of south Sudanese kids"?

You get odder by the post Rosie.

You're not asking anybody to support anything. You know exactly what's going on, and nobody is scammed by your silly spin.

I've been asking you, multiple times to support your claim that American Muslims want sharia and hadith to be the law.

I will answer that one-----muslims told me. Now find a VALID STUDY WHICH PROVES THAT MUSLIMS REJECT THE STENCH
AND FILTH OF SHARIAH. WHOLE COUNTRIES
IN THE 20th CENTURY HAVE VOTED THAT STINK AND
SHIT-----IN. EVEN TURKEY IS FALLING INTO THE COSMIC CESSPIT

 

[irosie91]

FELLOW POSTERS ---there is only one way to know islam----
get to know muslims who were educated in muslim countries and are now American citizens and are still----MOSQUE ATTENDEES----pretend you LIKE islam

 

[Osomir]

Polls aren't "facts" - they're indicators of trends in public opinion and only as good as the methodology employed. However, if someone makes a claim, they should be able to substantiate it with something besides opinion and conspiracy theory. You know...kind of like we ask people to attempt to claim the Holocaust was a hoax to substantiate their claims with actual facts.

Holocaust deniers have lots of FACTS and polls which they pick and choose with the same facility and confidence that characterizes your choice of facts and polls

They don't have "facts" - they have conspiracy theory and cherry picked bits of data that becomes evident once they start displaying their sources. Kind of like those who claim Muslims in America are calling for sharia and hadith to be the law.

You are showing yourself to be a complete ignorant fool to keep saying that. You might as well be saying "those who claim that gay liberation groups are calling for legalization of same-sex marriage". Well, Gee, Who woulda ever thought ?

When you tell me how many examples you want, I'll give you some, even though the question is so ludicrous, it doesn't even deserve the dignity of a response.

So are you saying that Holocaust denier are on the right path? Many would disagree with you.

try again------holocaust deniers are very much like you-----
in the faces of the victims they SPIT and say "PROVE IT"

now you spit in the faces of the south Sudanese kids lying dead in the dust

You dont know anything about south sudan.

 

[Osomir]

They don't have "facts" - they have conspiracy theory and cherry picked bits of data that becomes evident once they start displaying their sources. Kind of like those who claim Muslims in America are calling for sharia and hadith to be the law.

You are showing yourself to be a complete ignorant fool to keep saying that. You might as well be saying "those who claim that gay liberation groups are calling for legalization of same-sex marriage". Well, Gee, Who woulda ever thought ?

When you tell me how many examples you want, I'll give you some, even though the question is so ludicrous, it doesn't even deserve the dignity of a response.

Tell us all again about how the dinka are the largest ethnic group in Sudan and about how the janjaweed are waging jihad against non muslims in darfur.

I've already educated you enough in this thread. I'm not being paid to be your tutor. If you read the books I suggested for you, et al (instead of pretending to have read them), you wouldn't need to be asking me for information >>

The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America ---- by Andrew McCarthy

American Jihad: The Terrorists Living Among Us ----- by Steven Emerson

Because They Hate ---- by Brigitte Gabriel

They Must Be Stopped ------ by Brigitte Gabriel

Hating America ------ by John Gibson

Stop the Islamization of America ----- by Pamela Geller

Secrets of the Kingdom: The Inside Story of the Secret Saudi-U.S. Connection ------ by Gerald Posner

Stealth Jihad ----- by Robert Spencer

The Brotherhood: America's Next Great Enemy ------ by Erik Stakelbeck

Outrage ----- by Dick Morris & Eileen McGann

Infiltration ------ by Paul Sperry

The 9/11 Commission Report

The Truth About Muhammad ------ by Robert Spencer

In Mortal Danger ------- by Tom Tancredo

State of Emergency ----- by Pat Buchanan

Muslim Mafia ----- by P.David Gaubatz & Paul Sperry

Your books arent accurate.

This reminds me of someone throwing mud to see if anything sticks. I doubt any of those books have much to say on Sudanese ethnic groups

They dont. he is an example of the dunning krueger effect in full swing. He isnt very well versed in any of the subjects on his quiz. He just knows a sentence or two that he coppied down from his small collection of hate books.

 

[Osomir]

Please show me that Muslims in the US call for sharia and hadith as "law".

Center for Security Policy Press launched a collection of monographs called the Civilization Jihad Reader Series with the publication of an update to an earlier and highly influential study concerning the insinuation of Islam’s supremacist shariah legal code into the U.S. judiciary. Entitled Shariah in American Courts: The Expanding Incursion of Islamic Law in the U.S. Legal System, this inaugural booklet documents 146 cases in 32 states in which a party to litigation attempted to have the matter resolved by applying shariah, rather than the statutes of the state in question.

The Center first raised an alarm about the penetration of American jurisprudence by one of the most anti-constitutional of such foreign legal codes with its 2011 report, Shariah Law and American State Courts: An Assessment of State Appellate Court Cases. That study examined a sample of fifty cases and found that in twenty-seven of them, in twenty-three different states, the courts in question allowed the use of shariah, generally to the detriment of women and/or children whose rights under our Constitution were infringed.

SHARIAH IN AMERICAN COURTS The Expanding Incursion of Islamic Law in the U.S. Legal System CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY PRESS

This study identifies a total of 146 cases involving Shariah from 32 different states and federal courts: 9 cases were found in New Jersey; 9 in Texas; 9 in New York; 8 cases were found in California; 8 in Ohio; 7 in Connecticut; 7 in Virginia; 6 in Florida; 5 in Michigan; 4 in Massachusetts; 4 in Washington; 4 in Iowa; 3 in Maryland; 3 in Nebraska; 3 in North Carolina; 2 in Georgia; 2 in Louisiana; 2 in Delaware; 2 in Illinois; 2 in Maine; 2 in New Hampshire; 2 in South Carolina; and 1 each in Arizona, Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Minnesota, Missouri, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and Tennessee. 33 cases were found from federal courts.

The 146 cases can be classified into fifteen categories (cases sometimes fell within more than one category): 7 cases deal with criminal law; 20 cases deal with civil law; 9 cases deal with commercial law; 14 cases deal with family law generally; 23 cases deal with child custody; 67 cases deal with divorce of some sort or related matters; 25 cases dealt with comity; 15 cases dealt with forum non conveniens; 4 cases dealt with choice of law; 1 case involved forum selection; 3 cases involved arbitration and 8 cases involved domestic violence/abuse. In addition, the cases were also assessed as to whether or not the ultimate decision of the court was in accordance with Shariah at both the trial court and appellate court levels: At the trial court level: 22 decisions found that the application of Shariah was at odds with the state’s public policy; 15 found Shariah to be applicable in the case at bar; 9 were indeterminate; and in 4 cases Shariah was not applicable to the decision at this level, but was applicable at the appellate level. At the appellate court level: 23 decisions found that the application of Shariah was at odds with the state’s public policy; 12 found Shariah to be applicable in the case at bar; 8 were indeterminate; and in 7 cases Shariah was not applicable to the decision, but had been applicable at the trial court level.

Across the 146 cases there were 21 foreign countries from which Shariah— based legal conventions or decisions were brought to bear upon the case. Some cases made reference to more than one country while others involved Shariah without reference to a specific foreign country. Among the cases that referenced Shariah in a foreign country: 10 were from Pakistan; 8 were from Iran; 7 were from Egypt; 6 were from Jordan; 5 from Lebanon; 4 from Turkey; 3 from Saudi Arabia; 2 each were from India, Indonesia, Iraq and Nigeria; and 1 each was from Afghanistan, Algeria, Gaza [sic], Israel, Kenya; Morocco, the Philippines, Singapore, Sudan, Syria, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

In summary, of the 146 cases found, the court upheld the use of Shariah in 27 cases. This means that, statistically, one out of five American judges fail to reject foreign law that violates U.S. and state public policy. This alarming success ratio of Shariah submitting American law in our state courts provides ample evidence of the increasing effort to insinuate Shariah into American civilization. This effort, and the intent of those organizations taking part in it, are described in greater detail in Appendix A and B, while Appendix C provides the reader hope for a mechanism to counter it. Finally, It should also be noted that the cases in this survey dealing with prisoner cases and asylum cases are illustrative only; there are literally too many such cases to include in this study. Indeed a whole separate volume could be produced dealing just with each of these issues.

Center for Security Policy Shariah in American Courts The Expanding Incursion of Islamic Law in the U.S. Legal System

http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Shariah_in_American_Courts1.pdf

Shariah in American Courts The Expanding Incursion of Islamic Law in the U.S. Legal System Civilization Jihad Reader Series Volume 1 Center for Security Policy 9780692345559 Amazon.com Books

Almost all of those cases were using sharia in civil disputes or cases involving dealings with other countries. None of this shows that American Muslims are calling for Sharia and Hadith to be the law of the land.

For example - here's a look at the actual cases:

The True Story of Sharia in American Courts The Nation

As an attorney, consultant or expert witness, I have handled more than 100 cases involving components of Sharia. In a case I tried in 2002, Odatalla v. Odatalla, a New Jersey couple had signed an Islamic marriage contract consistent with their cultural traditions. When the wife filed for divorce, she asked the court to enforce the mahr, or dowry provision, in her contract, which called for the husband’s payment of $10,000 upon the dissolution of their marriage. Superior Court Judge John Selser found the marriage contract valid under New Jersey law, concluding, “Clearly, this court can enforce a contract which is not in contravention of established law or public policy.”​

In a 2003 case involving Exxon Mobil and a Saudi oil company, the parties had agreed as part of a commercial transaction that Saudi law would govern any potential disputes. After the Saudi company sued its former business partner, Exxon Mobil, the Delaware Superior Court heard testimony on Saudi law, which applies traditional Sharia, and the judge instructed the jury to base its decision accordingly. The jury returned a $400 million–plus verdict in favor of Exxon Mobil and against the Saudi firm.


Finally, in a more recent case I was involved in, a state judge declined to recognize a Syrian court order that would have transferred the custody of a child to her father because of the mother’s remarriage. The judge reasoned that remarriage alone is not sufficient to transfer custody. Far from deferring to judgments from foreign countries, US courts regularly refuse to recognize such orders due to the constitutional and due-process implications.​

A few more sources:

Column The sharia myth sweeps America - USATODAY.com

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-foreign-law-that-incorporates-religious-law/

What you are looking at is the use of sharia in very limited ways, just like any international laws might be used because sharia is the law in certain countries. None of this shows evidence that American Muslims are pushing for this and that is what I am asking you for - evidence that American Muslims, as a group, are pushing for sharia and hadith to be the law of the land. You are flinging a lot of mud in an attempt to obscure the fact that you can not answer this.

I thought so. I answer your question sincerely, and you come back with biased bullshit invalidation cards, that I've seen 1000 times. I see no point in talking to you. And the 146 cases involved (AS I SAID ALREADY) contained cases of domestic violence, criminal cases, like the infamous New Jersey rape/wife beating case. There are thousands more cases that didn't go to court and are just Muslims imposing Sharia law on American like the Muslim cab drivers who wouldn't pick up people with alcoholic beverages, the ones who wouldn't pick up blind people with a dog, the Muslim-owned company Rising Star, who fired an employee (Lina Morales) for bringing a BLT sandwich to work, the Muslims who got airports and universities to install foot-washing basins at great expense, etc. etc etc etc.

The majority of the cases did not involve domestic violence OR criminal cases. There was only one that involved domestic violence, where the judge ruled wrongly and was overturned as was appropriate.

Drivers refusing to pick up people with alcoholic bevereges or service dogs are not "imposing sharia law" they are acting on their own religious beliefs and no different than Christians refusing to provide services to gays or dispense birth control. Whether it flies or not depends on the law.

None of this shows that Muslims in America are trying to make Sharia and Hadith The Law - you just have personal cases of religious belief.

Hey dumbass! What the fuck do you think you're doing, responding to a post that I haven't even finished posting yet ? It's only about 50% done. TAKE NOTE; DON'T EVER RESPOND TO A POST OF MINE UNTIL 24 HOURS HAS PASSED. ALLOW FOR EDITING.

I will not read your Post # 398 which purports to be a response to my 397, which irt cannot be, since my # 397 is still being written. Dumbshit.

Post # 397 will not be finished until sometime tomorrow (Sunday, May 10)

Lol thats not how forums work.

 

[irosie91]

Holocaust deniers have lots of FACTS and polls which they pick and choose with the same facility and confidence that characterizes your choice of facts and polls

They don't have "facts" - they have conspiracy theory and cherry picked bits of data that becomes evident once they start displaying their sources. Kind of like those who claim Muslims in America are calling for sharia and hadith to be the law.

You are showing yourself to be a complete ignorant fool to keep saying that. You might as well be saying "those who claim that gay liberation groups are calling for legalization of same-sex marriage". Well, Gee, Who woulda ever thought ?

When you tell me how many examples you want, I'll give you some, even though the question is so ludicrous, it doesn't even deserve the dignity of a response.

So are you saying that Holocaust denier are on the right path? Many would disagree with you.

try again------holocaust deniers are very much like you-----
in the faces of the victims they SPIT and say "PROVE IT"

now you spit in the faces of the south Sudanese kids lying dead in the dust

You dont know anything about south sudan.

oh----I forgot----you read INTRO TO SOCIOLOGY 101 and are a strong advocate of the BEAUTY of------the Islamic approach to the matter of ORPHANS OF WAR

 

[face your]

If terrorist-supporting Islamist groups like C.A.I.R. are allowed to issue their Da'wahs on public transportation, I would think those who oppose their agenda should be able to as well.

Of course. You support Geller and her genocidal ambitions.

If a government wants to learn how to manage growing Islamic problems, take some advice from Ottoman army officer Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. Atatürk abolished Islam by putting a complete ban on Islamic materials, demolishing mosques, and removing any traces of Islam in his country to get rid of the evil. Those who tried to revolt were put in their place, or basically killed….


It is time for the UK to stop wasting their military abroad, but bring them to patrol their own streets and begin to remove Muslims. And it is vital time to plan and arrange deportation programs – and even arrange new deportation programs for practicing Muslims born in England to be deported to their parent’s country of origin.​

The only genocidal variable in this equation are the Islamic Imperialist swine. Islam is the largest most violent hate group on the planet and the Koran and Hadiths are no different than Mein Kampf and fail the clear and probable danger test on every point and can justly be banned without violating the 1st amendment. Muslims have no place whatsoever in the West they are anathema to liberal democracy and a free society.

As to the OP if the Muslim pigs are allowed to lie about Israel and the Jews then people should be allowed to tell the truth about Muslims which is what these ads do.

 

[Osomir]

They don't have "facts" - they have conspiracy theory and cherry picked bits of data that becomes evident once they start displaying their sources. Kind of like those who claim Muslims in America are calling for sharia and hadith to be the law.

You are showing yourself to be a complete ignorant fool to keep saying that. You might as well be saying "those who claim that gay liberation groups are calling for legalization of same-sex marriage". Well, Gee, Who woulda ever thought ?

When you tell me how many examples you want, I'll give you some, even though the question is so ludicrous, it doesn't even deserve the dignity of a response.

So are you saying that Holocaust denier are on the right path? Many would disagree with you.

try again------holocaust deniers are very much like you-----
in the faces of the victims they SPIT and say "PROVE IT"

now you spit in the faces of the south Sudanese kids lying dead in the dust

You dont know anything about south sudan.

oh----I forgot----you read INTRO TO SOCIOLOGY 101 and are a strong advocate of the BEAUTY of------the Islamic approach to the matter of ORPHANS OF WAR

Unlike you, i actually assist those orphans of war and track their plight daily.

 

[irosie91]

You are showing yourself to be a complete ignorant fool to keep saying that. You might as well be saying "those who claim that gay liberation groups are calling for legalization of same-sex marriage". Well, Gee, Who woulda ever thought ?

When you tell me how many examples you want, I'll give you some, even though the question is so ludicrous, it doesn't even deserve the dignity of a response.

So are you saying that Holocaust denier are on the right path? Many would disagree with you.

try again------holocaust deniers are very much like you-----
in the faces of the victims they SPIT and say "PROVE IT"

now you spit in the faces of the south Sudanese kids lying dead in the dust

You dont know anything about south sudan.

oh----I forgot----you read INTRO TO SOCIOLOGY 101 and are a strong advocate of the BEAUTY of------the Islamic approach to the matter of ORPHANS OF WAR

Unlike you, i actually assist those orphans of war and track their plight daily.

no you don't-----those who were claimed by muslims under the DHIMMI ORPHAN law are not available to you unless
they were freed by ransom