Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: steve harris who wrote (295612)	12/4/2010 10:02:05 AM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 306849

Why hasn't Obama addressed Wikileaks? Why is he soft on terrorism but attacks Fox news?

To: steve harris who wrote (295612)	12/4/2010 11:00:15 AM
From: joseffy	Respond to of 306849

Sharia Creeps Forward In The Land Down Under .............................................................. December 4, 2010 by John L. Work work949.wordpress.com While America sleeps, yet another continent begins to cave in, bit by bit, inch by inch, to Islam’s divine mission to subjugate all nations of the World under Sharia. And it befalls us under the rubric of Human Rights – of course. George Orwell would have loved to watch this – Tyranny presented as Human Rights. With thanks to GatesofVienna, here’s another failed-state in the making. From The Australian comes an article by Melbourne barrister Peter Faris, strongly suggesting that Muslim law should now be taken into account in the Courts of Victoria. Faris tells us that Victoria’s Charter of Human Rights contains a provision which “permits the use of international laws and judgments in applying the charter.” He then takes us through the mini-maze of a global-leftist’s logical argument – beginning with the temporary injunction blocking Okalahoma’s Save Our State amendment, to Islam being more than just a religion, to Cairo’s Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, landing happily on the premise that Australian Muslims deserve to have their law validated in Victoria’s Court of Law: theaustralian.com.au “In the US state of Oklahoma, voters recently approved a proposal that forbids state courts from considering or using international laws, as well as Sharia, or Islamic law. A US federal judge has suspended the certification of that change to the law because it might breach the constitutional rights of individual Muslims. In Victoria, the Charter of Human Rights actually permits the use of international laws and judgments in applying the charter. Section 14 of that charter provides for freedom of religion. The issue then arises, does this mean that Muslims are entitled to have Shariah law applied to them in the Victorian courts? Obviously, Islam is a religion. Less obvious, but more important is that, unlike Christianity, Islam is a complete religion governing every aspect of the believer’s life, including law. Shariah law is actually an integral part of the Islamic religious belief and, under the charter, must be protected and applied. Section 32(2) of the charter throws more light on the issue…” Yes. We must protect Sharia’s mandates to lop off limbs, flog petty criminals, stone adulterers to death, and dictate everything in our lives down to the most minute detail. “…That subsection states: “International law and the judgments of domestic, foreign and international courts and tribunals relevant to a human right may be considered in interpreting a statutory provision.” It is important to understand that there are “courts and tribunals” applying Shariah law to the 1.6 billion Muslims in the Muslim world…” And it is equally important to understand that our Constitution and Bill of Rights were written to protect mankind from everything that Sharia represents – abject tyranny and repression. “…In addition to that, the Islamic world has its own Human Rights Covenants — the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, 1990, which is intended to “serve as a general guidance for member states in the field of human rights”. In the Cairo Declaration, it is made clear that all human rights derive from the Koran…” That’s fine- in Cairo. But keep the Koran out of United States jurisprudence and out of my life. “…For example: “There shall be no crime or punishment except as provided for in the Shariah” (Article 19(d)); “All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this declaration are subject to the Islamic Shariah” (Article 24); and “The Islamic Shariah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration” (Article 25)…” And the criminal punishments called for in the Sharia are conjured from Hell, itself. They have no place in Western culture. “…These human rights must be fully respected. Australian Muslims deserve no less…” This is utterly laughable- except that Faris is serious. There are no human rights in Islam as we in the West have come to understand them. “…Decisions on Islamic human rights must be relevant in deciding whether Shariah law is applicable in Victoria. Quite obviously, those Islamic decisions powerfully state that Shariah law must be applied. The Victorian courts must consider these decisions under the charter, thus it makes it very likely that, at some stage in the future, Shariah law will be applied…” And may Mr. Faris rue the day he suggested this – unless he converts to Islam, himself. Or has he already done so? “…Further, there is precedent in Victoria through courts that are for the exclusive use of a minority group, in this instance Aborigines (known in Victoria as Kooris). As a matter of principle, there is no difference between special courts that are racially defined (Koori courts) to those which are religiously defined (Shariah courts). In fact, the Muslims have a much stronger case because their devoutly held beliefs actually include a legal system (Shariah). It is this sort of process that the Oklahoma citizens voted against. In Victoria it is too late.” And we can all thank God that the voters in Oklahoma took their stand. Then we can only hope that the Save Our State Amendment survives the legal battles to come.