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.

Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: denizen48 who wrote (87201)	4/13/2012 8:34:10 PM
From: joseffy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Translation: Lefty cautious is getting slaughtered here.

To: denizen48 who wrote (87201)	4/14/2012 10:31:28 AM
From: longnshort	1 Recommendation Respond to of 89467

More hypocrisy! Obama uses tax shelters for his kids to avoid paying his fair share Not only did Obama only pay 20.5% of his income to taxes last year, when his federal income tax rate should be 35% (and he doesn’t get income from capital gains), but now he’s also setting up tax shelters for his kids to avoid paying even more taxes! If you could bottle the hypocrisy the comes from Obama, his wife, and the Marxist Democrat party and turn it into oil, you’d never have to buy oil again from terrorist countries. There is of course nothing illegal with what Obama did, but if he’s so “serious” about having everybody paying their “fair share” in taxes, why isn’t he setting an example? President Obama and his wife, Michele, gave a total of $48,000 in tax-free gifts to their daughters, according to tax records made public on Friday. The president and his wife separately gave each daughter a $12,000 gift under a section of the federal tax code that exempts such donations from federal taxes.

To: denizen48 who wrote (87201)	4/14/2012 3:41:18 PM
From: longnshort	1 Recommendation Respond to of 89467

American Muslim Group Warns American Muslims Against Working in Law Enforcement Posted on April 14, 2012 by creeping Sharia is alive and well in the U.S. and the AMJA is helping Muslims determine what is permissible under Islam in dar al kufr. via Translating Jihad. Mainstream American Muslim Group Warns Muslims Against Working in Law Enforcement, Becoming “Pleased with a Legal System That Does Not Come from Allah” The Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America ( AMJA) cautioned American Muslims in a 22-page Arabic-language paper in 2008 against working in law enforcement in countries which do not rule by Allah’s dictates. One of their main concerns was that such work might cause Muslims to gain love and respect for secular laws: …there are many evils which result from working in law enforcement, the greatest of which is compelling people to obey rulings which do not come from Allah. It could also cause reverence and love for these rulings to enter the heart of the police officer, and perhaps spread to the hearts of his family members and other Muslims who see him at the mosque or even Muslims in general. They could lose conviction of governance by Allah, and become pleased with a legal system that does not come from Allah. (italics added) AMJA provided some allowances for Muslims to work in certain law enforcement professions, fearing that a lack of Muslim representation in this sector could bring negative effects for the Muslim community. They also reasoned that Muslims working as police officers might be able to use their positions to help the Muslim community, such as helping out with traffic near their mosques and protecting their mosques. Still, there was concern that some of these might be required to enforce laws contrary to the shari’a, such as “arrest[ing] a Muslim man whose wife said he ‘raped’ her.” The AMJA paper specifically forbade Muslims from working for the FBI or in national security positions, due to their alleged arbitrary targeting of certain Muslims for “their political beliefs, charity work, or some of their convictions under the shari’a”–an apparent reference to counterterrorism investigations against Muslim suspects. The paper also made clear that Muslims are to seek justice not in secular courts, but in Islamic courts which are compliant with their shari’a: ”It is not permissible to pursue justice in the man-made (i.e. non-Islamic) judiciary, except where there is an absence of a shari’a-compliant substitute capable of restoring one’s rights and working out one’s grievances” (see my translation of another AMJA paper on working in the judiciary here). Throughout the paper it is made clear that the duty of Muslims is not to uphold and respect the laws of the land in which they reside, but rather to do everything in their power to make the laws of Allah–the shari’a–supreme: [Muslims are] to seek through legal means which exist in the countries in which they reside to make it possible for themselves to seek legal recourse in their shar’ia, and (not only) for personal affairs. The duty to make Islam supreme comes above all, even preserving one’s life: We must remember that preserving the religion comes before preserving one’s self, mind, wealth, honor, or offspring. [...] But if saving [the individual's] life destroys Islam, then saving Islam comes first, even if it means the individual is destroyed. This is the case with jihad against the infidels, and the killing of apostates, and so forth. It is worth stressing once again that AMJA–whose stated purpose is to “clarify the rulings of the sharia which are relevant for those who live in America”–is a mainstream American Muslim organization. Their membership list contains a large number of highly-influential American imams and Muslim leaders, including Muhammad al-Majid of the Adam Center in Virginia; Hussein Hamed Hassan, director of the financial consultancy firm which advises Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase, and other large American banking institutions; Zulfiqar Ali Shah, former president of Islamic Circle of North America and current executive director of the Fiqh Council of North America; and the author of this paper, Dr. Hatem al-Haj, MD, PhD, a fellow at the American Academy of Pediatrics, and founder and president of “Building Blocks of Islam.”

To: denizen48 who wrote (87201)	4/17/2012 11:39:30 AM
From: longnshort	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Why Is Jordan Keeping Out Palestinian Refugees? by Khaled Abu Toameh April 17, 2012 at 4:45 am http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3019/jordan-palestinian-refugees Jordan's treatment of Palestinian refugees is not uncommon for an Arab country. In the past, Palestinians have also been denied entry into Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt and Libya. Palestinians are being held in tents, with poor sanitary conditions. More than 1,000 Palestinians who fled from the violence in Syria and were hoping to find temporary shelter in Jordan, have been stranded along the border between Syria and Jordan for the past few weeks. The Jordanian authorities have been refusing to allow them into the kingdom. The Jordanian authorities have set up a makeshift refugee camp along the border with Syria, where the Palestinians are being held in tents, with poor sanitary conditions. Jordan's treatment of Palestinian refugees is not uncommon for an Arab country. Lebanon and Egypt have also refused to grant asylum to the fleeing Palestinians. This is also not the first time that an Arab country keeps Palestinians waiting on the border. In the past, Palestinians have also been denied entry into Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt and Libya. Arab support for the Palestinians has been largely rhetorical over the past two decades, forcing the Palestinians to become almost entirely dependent on American and EU taxpayers' money. Meanwhile, an additional 100,000 Syrians, who have fled their country in the past year, have been permitted to enter Jordan. The Jordanians are worried that if they allow a few hundred Palestinians to settle in the kingdom, that would create a precedent and pave the way for 500,000 Palestinians living in Syria to run away to Jordan. As Jordan's King Abdullah already has a problem with the 80% Palestinian majority in his kingdom, he does not want the Palestinians in the kingdom. They pose a demographic threat to the Jordanians. The decision to ban the Palestinian refugees from entering Jordan coincided with reports that the Jordanian authorities have begun revoking the Jordanian citizenship of Palestinians which they had previously been given. Because the Palestinians pose a demographic threat to the Jordanians, hundreds of thousands of them living in Jordan will lose their status as Jordanian citizens. The Jordanian government, according to sources in Amman, has even decided to revoke the Jordanian citizenship of Palestinian Authority leaders, including Mahmoud Abbas. King Abdullah this week dispatched a high level delegation to Ramallah to discuss the new measures against the Palestinians with the Palestinian leadership. Headed by Jordan's interior minister, the delegation informed the Palestinians that the kingdom would not be able to help the Palestinians who fled from Syria. King Abdullah is so worried about the talk, mainly in Israel, about the need to establish a Palestinian state in Jordan that he has just instructed his government to come up with a new electoral law that would keep Palestinians away from parliament and most government institutions altogether.