Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled against Sharia
simple.lan...@gmail.com
Muslim cabbies whose religious beliefs go against driving passengers
who carry alcohol have lost another round in Minnesota courts.
The Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday against the cabbies'
latest attempt to block penalties from being imposed when they refuse
to transport passengers because they're carrying alcoholic beverages.
An ordinance adopted by the Metropolitan Airports Commission last year
revokes a cabbie's license for 30 days for refusing to pick up a
passenger for any reason at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International
Airport. A second refusal brings a two-year revocation.
A large share of the cabbies who serve the airport are Somali Muslims,
and many of them believe that Islamic law prohibits them from giving
rides to people carrying alcohol. Since the commission began keeping
track in 2002, there have been over 5,200 recorded instances of
cabbies refusing service to passengers at the airport, including a
"significant percentage" of passengers carrying alcohol, the appeals
court noted.
The issue had simmered for several years before the commission decided
the penalties were needed to ensure that customers would get reliable
taxi service at the airport, and that compromises proposed by the
drivers were impractical.
The drivers, who say the airport rules infringe on their religious
freedom, appealed a lower court's refusal to grant a temporary
injunction blocking those penalties from taking effect.
The appeals court affirmed the lower court's decision. The legal
standard for granting a temporary injunction requires that the parties
seeking it must show they would suffer irreparable harm if it's not
granted. The appeals court agreed with the lower court that cab
drivers who face suspension don't suffer irreparable harm because they
can appeal their suspensions to the airports commission and keep
working while their administrative appeals are pending.
The nine-page opinion by Judge Jill Flaskamp Halbrooks was designated
as unpublished, which means it doesn't set a precedent for future
cases.
Don Homuth
simple.lan...@gmail.com wrote:
>source: http://www.startribune.com/local/28053724.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aU7EaDiaMDCiUT
>
>Muslim cabbies whose religious beliefs go against driving passengers
>who carry alcohol have lost another round in Minnesota courts.
Good! As it ought to be.
No One ought to let their religious preferences interfere with their
carrying out any public service, when they are licensed and required
to do so.
It ought to cover More than carrying alcohol.
If they don't care to do that, let them find another line of work.
Rich Ahrens
> On Tue, 9 Sep 2008 13:28:11 -0700 (PDT),
> simple.lan...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> source: http://www.startribune.com/local/28053724.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aU7EaDiaMDCiUT
>>
>> Muslim cabbies whose religious beliefs go against driving passengers
>> who carry alcohol have lost another round in Minnesota courts.
>
> Good! As it ought to be.
>
> No One ought to let their religious preferences interfere with their
> carrying out any public service, when they are licensed and required
> to do so.
Including pharmacists, of course.
osmium
"Rich Ahrens" writes:
>> No One ought to let their religious preferences interfere with their
>> carrying out any public service, when they are licensed and required
>> to do so.
>
> Including pharmacists, of course.
That's an interesting point. I know essentially zero about religion, but I
would think that one of the basic tenets of any religion worth its salt
would be that the laws of God overrule the laws of man. I sense a problem
here.
Don Homuth
Don Homuth
wrote:
If it doesn't work for All religions, then it works for none at all.
If the Muslims can be forced to do things that are counter to their
religion, then Equal Protection demands the same of everyone.
No exceptions.
Scott Smith
Exactly as it should be.
- Scott Smith: scott...@iphouse.com
MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/choppersmith
ßDoüg±Ç
news:9m2ec4t7ing2rp538...@4ax.com...
Well good luck with that. Just look at ANY islamic theocracy on the
face of this earth to discover how muslims subscribe to your fantastically
liberal concepts.
Don Homuth
>"Don Homuth" <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net@> wrote in message
>news:9m2ec4t7ing2rp538...@4ax.com...
>> If the Muslims can be forced to do things that are counter to their
>> religion, then Equal Protection demands the same of everyone.
>>
>> No exceptions.
>
>Well good luck with that. Just look at ANY islamic theocracy on the
>face of this earth to discover how muslims subscribe to your fantastically
>liberal concepts.
We do not run Our constitutional republic on the basis of other
nation's approaches to whatever form of gubmint They may choose.
If indeed ours is superior to theirs, it must hew to its own
principles and demonstrate it.
So if we in fact believe in Equal Protection under the law, then we
don't discriminate on the basis of religion with decisions like these.
If Muslims can be told they must perform public duties that they hold
in opposition to their superstition, then All other religions must be
held subject to the same standard.
We don't Win this discussion by becoming more like Them in the
process.
ßDoüg±Ç
I think you're assuming the muslims will subscribe to your theory
of equality in everything, which is a wishful fantasy. Islam doesn't
play by our civilized rules. You can't apply concepts of tolerance
to an ideology that is completely INTOLERANT.
Don Homuth
>"Don Homuth" <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net@> wrote in message
>news:3l6ec49bdvsilrdav...@4ax.com...
>> We do not run Our constitutional republic on the basis of other
>> nation's approaches to whatever form of gubmint They may choose.
>>
>> If indeed ours is superior to theirs, it must hew to its own
>> principles and demonstrate it.
>>
>> So if we in fact believe in Equal Protection under the law, then we
>> don't discriminate on the basis of religion with decisions like these.
>> If Muslims can be told they must perform public duties that they hold
>> in opposition to their superstition, then All other religions must be
>> held subject to the same standard.
>>
>> We don't Win this discussion by becoming more like Them in the
>> process.
>
>I think you're assuming the muslims will subscribe to your theory
>of equality in everything, which is a wishful fantasy.
Has nothing to do with whether or not They subscribe to anything at
all. They may believe as they wish. We Must act according to our own
principles, else we arguably have none, and are no better than they.
>Islam doesn't play by our civilized rules.
That does not mean we must abandon our civilized rules.
> You can't apply concepts of tolerance
>to an ideology that is completely INTOLERANT.
Sure you can! You need merely live by what We believe, and not become
like them.
If we have the Superior Ideology, then it ought to be demonstrable,
especially to those who do not share it. Otherwise They get to claim
that We (a) don't believe our own rhetoric about what our principles
really are, and (b) are more like Them that we like to assert.
Either way, that's a losing stance.
johnny@.
> On Tue, 9 Sep 2008 18:51:55 -0700, "ßDoüg±Ç" <noün...@now.com> wrote:
>
>> "Don Homuth" <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net@> wrote in message
>> news:3l6ec49bdvsilrdav...@4ax.com...
>
>>> We do not run Our constitutional republic on the basis of other
>>> nation's approaches to whatever form of gubmint They may choose.
>>>
>>> If indeed ours is superior to theirs, it must hew to its own
>>> principles and demonstrate it.
>>>
>>> So if we in fact believe in Equal Protection under the law, then we
>>> don't discriminate on the basis of religion with decisions like these.
>>> If Muslims can be told they must perform public duties that they hold
>>> in opposition to their superstition, then All other religions must be
>>> held subject to the same standard.
>>>
>>> We don't Win this discussion by becoming more like Them in the
>>> process.
>> I think you're assuming the muslims will subscribe to your theory
>> of equality in everything, which is a wishful fantasy.
>
> Has nothing to do with whether or not They subscribe to anything at
> all. They may believe as they wish. We Must act according to our own
> principles, else we arguably have none, and are no better than they.
>
>> Islam doesn't play by our civilized rules.
>
> That does not mean we must abandon our civilized rules.
Yes is does.
>
>> You can't apply concepts of tolerance
>> to an ideology that is completely INTOLERANT.
>
> Sure you can! You need merely live by what We believe, and not become
> like them.
>
> If we have the Superior Ideology, then it ought to be demonstrable,
> especially to those who do not share it. Otherwise They get to claim
> that We (a) don't believe our own rhetoric about what our principles
> really are, and (b) are more like Them that we like to assert.
Who cares what they claim?
>
> Either way, that's a losing stance.
Then you might as well just give up.
--
"Instead of worrying about whether immigrants can learn English, they'll
learn English; you need to make sure your child can speak Spanish."
Barack Hussein Obama
Don Homuth
>Don Homuth wrote:
>> On Tue, 9 Sep 2008 18:51:55 -0700, "ßDoüg±Ç" <noün...@now.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Islam doesn't play by our civilized rules.
>>
>> That does not mean we must abandon our civilized rules.
>
>Yes is does.
No, child -- it most assuredly does not.
>> Either way, that's a losing stance.
>
>Then you might as well just give up.
Give up what? The principles we run our constitutional republic on?
What should we adopt instead that might satisfy You?
No thanks!
We don't Win by becoming more like Them.
Scott Smith
>Don Homuth wrote:
>> On Tue, 9 Sep 2008 18:51:55 -0700, "ßDoüg±Ç" <noün...@now.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "Don Homuth" <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net@> wrote in message
>>> news:3l6ec49bdvsilrdav...@4ax.com...
>>
>>>> We do not run Our constitutional republic on the basis of other
>>>> nation's approaches to whatever form of gubmint They may choose.
>>>>
>>>> If indeed ours is superior to theirs, it must hew to its own
>>>> principles and demonstrate it.
>>>>
>>>> So if we in fact believe in Equal Protection under the law, then we
>>>> don't discriminate on the basis of religion with decisions like these.
>>>> If Muslims can be told they must perform public duties that they hold
>>>> in opposition to their superstition, then All other religions must be
>>>> held subject to the same standard.
>>>>
>>>> We don't Win this discussion by becoming more like Them in the
>>>> process.
>>> I think you're assuming the muslims will subscribe to your theory
>>> of equality in everything, which is a wishful fantasy.
>>
>> Has nothing to do with whether or not They subscribe to anything at
>> all. They may believe as they wish. We Must act according to our own
>> principles, else we arguably have none, and are no better than they.
>>
>>> Islam doesn't play by our civilized rules.
>>
>> That does not mean we must abandon our civilized rules.
>
>Yes is does.
So, we stoop to the level of the uncivilized?
That sounds thoroughly un-American to me.
.
repo
>
> - Show quoted text -
Muslims don't care about their host countries and will wiggle
their Sharia laws into our system until our system is no more.
We are sleepwalking into it.
Little by little, Arab Law (Sharia Law)
is creeping into American life without us knowing it. Why are public
schools teaching Islam? Why footbath concessions, ect.?
PUBLIC SCHOOLS THAT TEACH ISLAM (Indoctrinate the young)
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/21e334a78627dd7b
ISLAMS TWO WINGS, TERROR & LEGAL, EACH SUPPORT THE OTHER
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/2c6b4b9e4b4c20c5
USA; KUFFARS PROTEST SPECIAL TREATMENT OF MUSLIMS
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/3ceb2be58e64a4b0
RECOGNITION OF MUSLIM HOLIDAY STIR FURY IN PENNSLVANIA
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/0a6e5664997a2293
APPEASING CANADA’S ISLAMISTS> Since 9/11, Muslims have leveraged
political correctness and imaginary “Islamophobia” to position
themselves as a
victim group worth courting – or else.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/ae37849287c1bc3a
THE-M...@webtv.net
>If it doesn't work for All religions, then it
> works for none at all.
>If the Muslims can be forced to do things
>that are counter to their religion, then
>Equal Protection demands the same of
>everyone. No exceptions.
What has driving a cab got to do with religions ? The object is to
provide a service and to make money, not to apease
muslim religion. Seems like this ought to fit under the sepration of
church and state some where. The cabs are owned by who ever but they are
regulated by the state. The company sets the rules for the employee's
like what uniforms to wear, pay rates, salary, etc. If the muslim does
like to pick up fares because of some religious belief then he doesn't
need to work there.
Suppose you were catching a cab... and right in he middle of your ride
the muslim pulled over to take out the time to do one of his daily
prayer times.or to wash his feet, think he should be able to do that
while you wait in his cab ?
Work is for work, church is for church and church things.
Don Homuth
wrote:
>Muslims don't care about their host countries and will wiggle
>their Sharia laws into our system until our system is no more.
>We are sleepwalking into it.
So for you that means that we must give up Our principles on what a
constitutional republic is and does?
No -- a thousand times No.
>Little by little, Arab Law (Sharia Law)
>is creeping into American life without us knowing it.
Then the solution is that we should know it.
>Why are public schools teaching Islam?
They aren't. They are teaching About Islam, which is sorta like
teaching About Xtianity and Judaism and Buddhism and any of the other
assorted superstitions with a wide following around the world.
Would you prefer that schools merely Ignore a superstition followed by
a group of folks who really Are important? Why would you support
ignorance on such a matter?
>Why footbath concessions, ect.?
Why not? Why acknowledge or even celebrate religious holidays of
other superstitions, or provide kosher meals for observant
conservative Jews, or have prayers at high school football games (with
each side praying to the same divinity for Victory On The Field, and
one of them certain to be turned down in the appeal)?
We have an Odd relationship with organized superstition in this
nation. But at the key, the recent court opinion wrt the Muslim cab
drivers is correct -- they ought Not to be able to refuse accomodation
to the public based on their religious beliefs. I have no problem
with that, and seemingly neither do you.
But given precisely the Same principle about the relationship between
the state and religion, then None of the other organized superstitions
ought to be able to do the same thing only in different venues -- and
yes, that Does include medical personnel and pharmacists.
Because it's the Principle that matters more than the religion does.
If you believe in Equal Protection Under The Law -- which is a bedrock
Constitutional principle -- then that's how it properly ought to be,
is it not? Is that something you wish to give up simply because you
feel threatened?
Still not a good enough reason.
It's the Constitution, child. Applying it equally to all is the way
it's supposed to work. Anything else is an abandonment of our
principles.
Our principles matter.
ßDoüg±Ç
> On Tue, 9 Sep 2008 19:26:00 -0700 (PDT), repo <Kcaj...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Muslims don't care about their host countries and will wiggle
>>their Sharia laws into our system until our system is no more.
>>We are sleepwalking into it.
>
> So for you that means that we must give up Our principles on what a
> constitutional republic is and does?
>
> No -- a thousand times No.
>
>>Little by little, Arab Law (Sharia Law)
>>is creeping into American life without us knowing it.
>
> Then the solution is that we should know it.
>
>>Why are public schools teaching Islam?
>
> They aren't. They are teaching About Islam, which is sorta like
> teaching About Xtianity and Judaism and Buddhism and any of the other
> assorted superstitions with a wide following around the world.
>
"Xtianity" eh? R U a muslim?
> Would you prefer that schools merely Ignore a superstition followed by
> a group of folks who really Are important? Why would you support
> ignorance on such a matter?
>
>>Why footbath concessions, ect.?
>
> Why not? Why acknowledge or even celebrate religious holidays of
> other superstitions, or provide kosher meals for observant
> conservative Jews, or have prayers at high school football games (with
> each side praying to the same divinity for Victory On The Field, and
> one of them certain to be turned down in the appeal)?
>
Why not?
i. Saudi Barbaria
ii. Pigistan
iii. Iran
iv. Malaysia
v. Indonesia
vi. Phillipines (ethnic cleansing of non-muslims)
vii. Lebanon (ditto)
viii. Bethleham (ditto)
Sorry, I don't want to the USA to end up like any of
the above countries.
You can take your islamic road show of genocidal
hatred and intolerance back to where it came from.
> We have an Odd relationship with organized superstition in this
> nation. But at the key, the recent court opinion wrt the Muslim cab
> drivers is correct -- they ought Not to be able to refuse accomodation
> to the public based on their religious beliefs. I have no problem
> with that, and seemingly neither do you.
>
They won't stop trying...ever.
> But given precisely the Same principle about the relationship between
> the state and religion, then None of the other organized superstitions
> ought to be able to do the same thing only in different venues -- and
> yes, that Does include medical personnel and pharmacists.
>
Islam isn't an innocuous religion like Buddhism, Christianity
or Judaism. The same rules don't apply.
> Because it's the Principle that matters more than the religion does.
>
> If you believe in Equal Protection Under The Law -- which is a bedrock
> Constitutional principle -- then that's how it properly ought to be,
> is it not? Is that something you wish to give up simply because you
> feel threatened?
>
"Equal protection under the law"? For islam? You must think us
infidels mighty stupid.
> Still not a good enough reason.
>
> It's the Constitution, child. Applying it equally to all is the way
> it's supposed to work. Anything else is an abandonment of our
> principles.
>
Sorry, but the muslime fucks have repeatedly stated their desire
to abolish the Constitution and bill of rights and install sharia
law.
> Our principles matter.
NOt to muslime pig scum it doesn't.
Don Homuth
>"Don Homuth" <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net@> wrote in message
>news:7vjfc4pl6u8jkmhkr...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 9 Sep 2008 19:26:00 -0700 (PDT), repo <Kcaj...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Why are public schools teaching Islam?
>>
>> They aren't. They are teaching About Islam, which is sorta like
>> teaching About Xtianity and Judaism and Buddhism and any of the other
>> assorted superstitions with a wide following around the world.
>>
>
>"Xtianity" eh?
Educate yourself on the symbolism of the Early Church, when you
connect a functioning neuron.
> R U a muslim?
Nope -- and it's a silly question, given your basis for it.
>> Would you prefer that schools merely Ignore a superstition followed by
>> a group of folks who really Are important? Why would you support
>> ignorance on such a matter?
>>
>>>Why footbath concessions, ect.?
>>
>> Why not? Why acknowledge or even celebrate religious holidays of
>> other superstitions, or provide kosher meals for observant
>> conservative Jews, or have prayers at high school football games (with
>> each side praying to the same divinity for Victory On The Field, and
>> one of them certain to be turned down in the appeal)?
>>
>
>Why not?
>
>i. Saudi Barbaria
>ii. Pigistan
>iii. Iran
>iv. Malaysia
>v. Indonesia
>vi. Phillipines (ethnic cleansing of non-muslims)
>vii. Lebanon (ditto)
>viii. Bethleham (ditto)
>
>Sorry, I don't want to the USA to end up like any of
>the above countries.
Then live up to the principles by which We founded a Constitutional
Republic, and don't hew to the sorts of secular practices that They
follow.
>You can take your islamic road show of genocidal
>hatred and intolerance back to where it came from.
and you can take your Adamant Ignorance and display it to someone who
actually cares about it.
>> We have an Odd relationship with organized superstition in this
>> nation. But at the key, the recent court opinion wrt the Muslim cab
>> drivers is correct -- they ought Not to be able to refuse accomodation
>> to the public based on their religious beliefs. I have no problem
>> with that, and seemingly neither do you.
>>
>They won't stop trying...ever.
So what if they don't stop trying? All we need to do is hew to Our
constitutional principles, no matter how long they try.
>> But given precisely the Same principle about the relationship between
>> the state and religion, then None of the other organized superstitions
>> ought to be able to do the same thing only in different venues -- and
>> yes, that Does include medical personnel and pharmacists.
>>
>Islam isn't an innocuous religion like Buddhism, Christianity
>or Judaism. The same rules don't apply.
Islam is an organized superstition, as all the others have been. All
of the others have, at various times, undertaken terrism, wars of
religious conquest, religious oppression and everything else possible
under the sun.
>> Because it's the Principle that matters more than the religion does.
>>
>> If you believe in Equal Protection Under The Law -- which is a bedrock
>> Constitutional principle -- then that's how it properly ought to be,
>> is it not? Is that something you wish to give up simply because you
>> feel threatened?
>>
>"Equal protection under the law"? For islam?
For all organized superstitions -- no exceptions.
>You must think us infidels mighty stupid.
I have in fact reached Precisely that conclusion in your case. I will
await others trying to join you in that case to reach the same
conclusion on their part.
But for the nonce, one at a time will do just fine.
>> Still not a good enough reason.
>>
>> It's the Constitution, child. Applying it equally to all is the way
>> it's supposed to work. Anything else is an abandonment of our
>> principles.
>>
>
>Sorry, but the muslime fucks have repeatedly stated their desire
>to abolish the Constitution and bill of rights and install sharia
>law.
As have various other groups within This nation through the years.
The best means of opposing them has always been to remain close to Our
principles and let their attempts founder.
It has Never been to abandon ours and become more like them.
>> Our principles matter.
>
>NOt to muslime pig scum it doesn't.
It doesn't have to. It has to matter to Us -- not to them.
repo
> On Tue, 9 Sep 2008 19:26:00 -0700 (PDT), repo <Kcajy...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Muslims don't care about their host countries and will wiggle
> >their Sharia laws into our system until our system is no more.
> >We are sleepwalking into it.
>
> So for you that means that we must give up Our principles on what a
> constitutional republic is and does?
There will be no "Our principles", there will be no "constitution"
under sharia law.
The idea for the US Constitution is to protect individual rights;
if sharia law however little, creeps into our system, "the
Constitution"
and what it represents is being taken away.
So "Our principles" and America as it is and as the founding
fathers intended it to be, will be no more.
>
> No -- a thousand times No.
Then get ready to be hacked to death, and if you have children;
their children will be hacking away at each other. They hack
one another you see.
>
> >Little by little, Arab Law (Sharia Law)
> >is creeping into American life without us knowing it.
>
> Then the solution is that we should know it.
>
> >Why are public schools teaching Islam?
>
> They aren't. They are teaching About Islam,
Apparently you didn't even click on the links provided
in my previous post. A crucifix
would never ever be part of a public classroom for any reason.
In many public schools under the guise of "cultural
diversity" or something like that, Islam is taught
Prayers, dress, Arabic mandated in some Public schools, ect.
> which is sorta like
> teaching About Xtianity and Judaism and Buddhism and any of the other
> assorted superstitions with a wide following around the world.
No, it is not like teaching Christianity and Judaism and Buddhism,
ect.
The only thing allowed about Christianity in public classrooms is
santa claus and christmas trees..Maybe. Never a crucifix, never
Christ, Mary and Joseph. Teachers would be fired if they ever said,
"In the name of the Father, of the Son, and the Holy Spirit, Amen.
>
> Would you prefer that schools merely Ignore a superstition followed by
> a group of folks who really Are important? Why would you support
> ignorance on such a matter?
>
> >Why footbath concessions, ect.?
>
> Why not? Why acknowledge or even celebrate religious holidays of
> other superstitions, or provide kosher meals for observant
> conservative Jews,
I have not seen "Observant conservative Jews" shove
their footbaths, prayer time outs at places of employment, ect.
> or have prayers at high school football games (with
> each side praying to the same divinity for Victory On The Field, and
> one of them certain to be turned down in the appeal)?
>
> We have an Odd relationship with organized superstition in this
> nation. But at the key, the recent court opinion wrt the Muslim cab
> drivers is correct -- they ought Not to be able to refuse accomodation
> to the public based on their religious beliefs. I have no problem
> with that, and seemingly neither do you.
Why are Muslims pushing for these seemingly minor concessions?
It's because one small concession leads to the entire enchilada
one day. Give them an inch, they take a mile. They are not like
you,
they are not tolerant of others, there are no human or individual
rights
in Islam.
>
> But given precisely the Same principle about the relationship between
> the state and religion, then None of the other organized superstitions
> ought to be able to do the same thing only in different venues -- and
> yes, that Does include medical personnel and pharmacists.
>
> Because it's the Principle that matters more than the religion does.
They have no loyality to their host countries, not even the U.S.
When their numbers are approx 10%, they terrorize their host
countries, then ask for autonomy. i.e. the Philipines, ect.
>
> If you believe in Equal Protection Under The Law -- which is a bedrock
> Constitutional principle -- then that's how it properly ought to be,
> is it not? Is that something you wish to give up simply because you
> feel threatened?
Open your eyes, ears, and wake up. Not everyone
believes in "Equal Protection Under The Law", and those
Islamists will kill you as look at you.
>
> Still not a good enough reason.
>
> It's the Constitution, child. Applying it equally to all is the way
> it's supposed to work. Anything else is an abandonment of our
> principles.
The Constitution could be on its way to be replaced
by Sharia Arab Law If America doesn't wake up.
Then what will you do? Your grandchildren will either
be hacked or the hackee...nice future, eh.
>
> Our principles matter.
Yes they do, and we want to keep it that way,
No Arab Sharia Law. Educate everyone about Islamists,
what they have done, are doing, and promise to do. I challange
you to read All the following links.
THE BRUTAL TRUTH ABOUT ISLAM (Part I )
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/19f8f3adec34e140
THE BRUTAL TRUTH ABOUT ISLAM (Part 2 )
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/18a22b9c5b5d8362
THE BRUTAL TRUTH ABOUT ISLAM (Part 3 )
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/c4f6ee69c12bf2ef
THE BRUTAL TRUTH ABOUT ISLAM (Part 4 of 4)
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/c23901a6663a5846
ISLAM IS A SUPREMACIST, THE ARABS (accordin to Islam) is
THE MASTER RACE, OTHER MUSLIMS R THEIR HELPERS
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/752dd584af9e94e3?
ISLAM FORBIDS REFORMATION, Posted by simple_language
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/780ea4ad25405834?
WHAT ORDINARY PEOPLE CAN DO TO STOP ISLAM
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/d65e516f729a434c
MUSLIMS 20 YEAR PLAN TO OVER THROW THE U.S. GOVERNMENT
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/4decd85ce5843143
SHORT MUST SEE VIDEOS> ISLAM
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/4629ca1db7c7390a
HOW MUSLIMS ARE CONQUERING THE WORLD
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/9512abf4f9b76fd2
THE PROPHET OF DOOM
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/c71f7f19d6354324
ISLAM, THE WORST CRIME EVER AGAINST HUMANITY
http://kleviusnews.blogspot.com/
ISLAM IS A CRIME SYNDICATE CONTROLLED
BY ARAB IMPERIALISTS
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa/msg/7c1c149c61ee8037
ISLAM IDEOLOGY ENDEAVORS TO SUPPLANT OUR LAW,
CULTURE & RELIGIOUS BELIEFS. The Koran dictates three options for
non-believers: conversion, subjugation or death
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/browse_thread/thread/85320be1b912994a#
RESISTANCE TO JIHAD & ISLAMIC SUPREMACISM IS NOT RACISM
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.islam/msg/0e2faaacc6ac86ed
FIRST COMES SATURDAY, THEN COMES SUNDAY (ISLAMS
PLAN TO EXTERMINATE THE JEWS, CHRISTIANS (NON MUSLIMS)
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.politics.misc/msg/04cf6d741a4ba5fb
MUSLIMS OF AMERICAS (MOA INC.), Responsible for Firebomings,
Assassinations
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/cfe68b7adc8cf1ca
GIVEN THE PROBLEM IS MUSLIM TERROR, WHAT TO DO?
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/7124b2a6147d6bc3
WHAT MAKES ISLAM AN INCUBATOR OF FANATICISM & TERRORISM
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/fd57a0cd423f97b3
ARAB LAW=SHARIA LAW/CREEPING SHARIA=HONOR KILLINGS=
KILLING MINORITIES=NO HUMAN RIGHTS FOR NON-MUSLIMS
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/2fcc92f26ffb030a
WORDS ALL NON-MUSLIMS SHOULD KNOW
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/66d24d2d627fb37e
AYAAN HIRSI ALI: DEFEND THE INDIVIDUAL AND SO THE WEST
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/3171d15507782d5f
----------
WEBSITES, ORGANIZATIONS WITH INFO ON ISLAM
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/f5f7195fef10ff6e
Don Homuth
wrote:
>On Sep 10, 6:54 am, Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net@> wrote:
>> On Tue, 9 Sep 2008 19:26:00 -0700 (PDT), repo <Kcajy...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Muslims don't care about their host countries and will wiggle
>> >their Sharia laws into our system until our system is no more.
>> >We are sleepwalking into it.
>>
>> So for you that means that we must give up Our principles on what a
>> constitutional republic is and does?
>
>There will be no "Our principles", there will be no "constitution"
>under sharia law.
Then the best protection we have is our constitution, seems to me.
>The idea for the US Constitution is to protect individual rights;
>if sharia law however little, creeps into our system, "the
>Constitution" and what it represents is being taken away.
No religious law ought to creep into the constitution. Eternal
Vigilance and all.
>So "Our principles" and America as it is and as the founding
>fathers intended it to be, will be no more.
The FFs intended this to be a nation run on constitutional principles.
I believe Ol' Ben himself said something like you have a republic, If
you can keep it.
We don't keep it by throwing it away when/if we feel threatened by
some outside ideology. We keep it by holding the stronger to it.
When I joined the Army, I took an oath to protect and defend the
Constitution against *all* enemies, foreign and domestic.
They are foreign enemies and You are a domestic enemy of the
Constitution.
>> >Why are public schools teaching Islam?
>>
>> They aren't. They are teaching About Islam,
>
>Apparently you didn't even click on the links provided
>in my previous post. A crucifix
>would never ever be part of a public classroom for any reason.
Good! Seems quite far -- though the display of one during a lecture
wouldn't be prohibited, any more than a copy of the Holy Tome, the
Q'ran or the Baghavad Gita would.
>In many public schools under the guise of "cultural
>diversity" or something like that, Islam is taught
>Prayers, dress, Arabic mandated in some Public schools, ect.
Oh nonsense! There are not Many public schools doing any such thing.
Some are. They should. As part of a comparative religions class,
such demonstrations work for a lot of different religions and
cultures.
You wish merely to focus on one. That dog don't hunt. It's all or
none, just as I said.
>I have not seen "Observant conservative Jews" shove
>their footbaths, prayer time outs at places of employment, ect.
Then you have not been paying proper attention to those of the
Conservative sect in Judaism, or even more to the extremely
conservative sects like the Lubavitchers.
Judaism is not monolithic, any more than any of the other organized
superstitions are.
>> We have an Odd relationship with organized superstition in this
>> nation. But at the key, the recent court opinion wrt the Muslim cab
>> drivers is correct -- they ought Not to be able to refuse accomodation
>> to the public based on their religious beliefs. I have no problem
>> with that, and seemingly neither do you.
>
>Why are Muslims pushing for these seemingly minor concessions?
They wish to observe Their faith as They see it.
>It's because one small concession leads to the entire enchilada
>one day. Give them an inch, they take a mile. They are not like
>you, they are not tolerant of others, there are no human or individual
>rights in Islam.
Now who told you that? It is clearly Not true that there are none.
Your adamant ignorance is showing again.
We know how to set limits on things. We do it all the time. We can
set a reasonable and constitutional limit on that too. Indeed, the
local courts just did with the cab drivers. It's a decision that I
fully support.
And it's a decision that ought to be applied to All religions equally.
Which is what I said in the first place.
>They have no loyality to their host countries, not even the U.S.
Few of the True Believers within any organized superstition do. They
are more interested in the hereafter than in the here.
>When their numbers are approx 10%, they terrorize their host
>countries, then ask for autonomy. i.e. the Philipines, ect.
In which case, they are reasonably opposed and autonomy refused, seems
to me.
>> If you believe in Equal Protection Under The Law -- which is a bedrock
>> Constitutional principle -- then that's how it properly ought to be,
>> is it not? Is that something you wish to give up simply because you
>> feel threatened?
>
>Open your eyes, ears, and wake up. Not everyone
>believes in "Equal Protection Under The Law", and those
>Islamists will kill you as look at you.
They'd best be pretty good at that. But yer right -- if someone wants
to kill either of us, chances are they probably can. Their religion
won't matter.
Because it's the Actions that make them culpable, and not their
beliefs.
>> Still not a good enough reason.
>>
>> It's the Constitution, child. Applying it equally to all is the way
>> it's supposed to work. Anything else is an abandonment of our
>> principles.
>
>The Constitution could be on its way to be replaced
>by Sharia Arab Law If America doesn't wake up.
Oh, calm down here. If Murkens support and defend the Constitution
against all enemies, furn and domestic, it'll work out just fine. If
Murkens choose to abandon the constitution, it probably won't.
Oppress one religion successfully, and the next question will be which
one is Next on the list.
>Then what will you do? Your grandchildren will either
>be hacked or the hackee...nice future, eh.
My descendants will be responsible to protect and defend the
constitution for themselves as well. It's an obligation passed down
through the generations. They either will or they won't.
I'm betting they will, and will Not choose to follow Your lead on the
matter.
>> Our principles matter.
>
>Yes they do, and we want to keep it that way,
Then keep it that way.
>No Arab Sharia Law.
There is none, and if we stick to the constituion, there won't be.
>Educate everyone about Islamists,
>what they have done, are doing, and promise to do.
And educate everyone what happens when a society that Claims to have
equal protection decides arbitrarily just to chuck it because it
becomes slightly More difficult to live by the principle than not.
> I challange
>you to read All the following links.
Good. I refuse the challenge. Heard it all before, and None of it
persuades me to give up the Constituion and all its principles.
You have now placed yourself as a domestic enemy of it, so you must be
carefully watched and monitored into the future so you can't do any
Real danger to it.
Eternal Vigilance is the Price of Liberty -- for everyone.
Including Muslims.
If they or anyone else does violence, then we ought to prosecute them
for the violence they do.
Their religious beliefs are their own, just as yours are.
repo
> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 08:27:28 -0700 (PDT), repo <Kcajy...@yahoo.com>
I'm on the side of All who love the USofA, the US Constitution,
including the President.
However, you on the other hand have closed your
eyes and mind to any possibility of threats within
the borders of the U.S, which means You are
could very well be considered an enemy of the USofA
and the US Constitution as we know it today.
> so you must be
> carefully watched and monitored into the future so you can't do any
> Real danger to it.
You may verywell be Islamist, and should be carefully
watched and monitored into the future so you can't do
any more danger to My country and its U.S. Constitution.
>
> Eternal Vigilance is the Price of Liberty -- for everyone.
>
> Including Muslims.
Not when concessions to Muslims equals less rights
for Americans, i.e. the creeping in of Sharia Arab Law
little by little.
>
> If they or anyone else does violence, then we ought to prosecute them
> for the violence they do.
Islam has two arms at least, one is terror and the other
is legal, they both work to help one another.
repo
> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 08:27:28 -0700 (PDT), repo <Kcajy...@yahoo.com>
What about the "Conservative sect in Judaism"?
Do they have compounds throughout the USofA like
MOA who are responsible for Firebomings, Assassinations
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/cfe68b7adc8cf1ca
> or even more to the extremely
S. Smith
<dhomuthoneatcomcast.net@> wrote:
Very well written, Don. At least there are a few around here,
like you, who have some insight into the issue and who also
possess some common sense and decency regarding religion
and politics.
These violently anti-Muslim nuts are acting in very un-American
ways...and they don't even realize it. They think they are patriots,
however they are anything but.
Don Homuth
wrote:
>On Sep 10, 8:42 am, Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net@> wrote:
>> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 08:27:28 -0700 (PDT), repo <Kcajy...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > I challange
>> >you to read All the following links.
>>
>> Good. I refuse the challenge. Heard it all before, and None of it
>> persuades me to give up the Constituion and all its principles.
>>
>> You have now placed yourself as a domestic enemy of it,
>
>I'm on the side of All who love the USofA, the US Constitution,
>including the President.
Nah - you're just another parrot who mouths phrases but doesn't
comprehend the meaning of them. The world is full of such adamantly
ignorant folks, and you're hardly unique in that.
It's very simple really: If you actually do Love the Constitution,
then live by it. You can't demand that others live by it -- only You
can do that on your own.
If you want religious tolerance, then be tolerant of other religions.
It's just exactly that simple. You do that without preconditions --
you simply do it, whether or not someone else does.
That's how the Constitution works.
Otherwise, it's just something for you to rant on if it's convenient.
The Constitution isn't something you put away simply because You feel
threatened. It's your greatest protection Against the sorts of things
you inchoately fear, in fact.
Live with it, and you bring the majesty and strength of this nation
along with you. Toss it out whenever you like, and you do its enemies
work for them.
You're just another fearful clown.
repo
> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 09:08:47 -0700 (PDT), repo <Kcajy...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On Sep 10, 8:42 am, Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net@> wrote:
> >> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 08:27:28 -0700 (PDT), repo <Kcajy...@yahoo.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> > I challange
> >> >you to read All the following links.
>
> >> Good. I refuse the challenge. Heard it all before, and None of it
> >> persuades me to give up the Constituion and all its principles.
>
> >> You have now placed yourself as a domestic enemy of it,
You have placed yourself as a domestic enemy of it.
>
> >I'm on the side of All who love the USofA, the US Constitution,
> >including the President.
>
> Nah - you're just another parrot who mouths phrases but doesn't
> comprehend the meaning of them. The world is full of such adamantly
> ignorant folks, and you're hardly unique in that.
>
> It's very simple really: If you actually do Love the Constitution,
> then live by it. You can't demand that others live by it -- only You
> can do that on your own.
>
> If you want religious tolerance, then be tolerant of other religions.
>
> It's just exactly that simple. You do that without preconditions --
> you simply do it, whether or not someone else does.
>
> That's how the Constitution works.
>
> Otherwise, it's just something for you to rant on if it's convenient.
>
> The Constitution isn't something you put away simply because You feel
> threatened. It's your greatest protection Against the sorts of things
> you inchoately fear, in fact.
>
> Live with it, and you bring the majesty and strength of this nation
> along with you. Toss it out whenever you like, and you do its enemies
> work for them.
>
> You're just another fearful clown.
And you sound exactly like I did at one time;
It could only take the stroke of a pen, the wrong person in office,
and
the Constitution could be gone. I'll do my small part in educating
the public about Islamists, and what they have done to other
countries, doing to Europe, the Philippines, ect.
Thanks for your advice though. If you're not Islamist or not
on the Islam payroll, hopefully you will see what's going on around
the country.
MUSLIMS OF AMERICAS Responsible for Firebomings, Assassinations
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.immigration/msg/cfe68b7adc8cf1ca
Don Homuth
wrote:
>On Sep 10, 12:19 pm, Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net@> wrote:
>> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 09:08:47 -0700 (PDT), repo <Kcajy...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Sep 10, 8:42 am, Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net@> wrote:
>> >> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 08:27:28 -0700 (PDT), repo <Kcajy...@yahoo.com>
>> >> wrote:
>>
>> >> > I challange
>> >> >you to read All the following links.
>>
>> >> Good. I refuse the challenge. Heard it all before, and None of it
>> >> persuades me to give up the Constituion and all its principles.
>>
>> >> You have now placed yourself as a domestic enemy of it,
>
>You have placed yourself as a domestic enemy of it.
And you are adamantly ignorant of what the term means -- again.
The Constitution either applies to everyone or it does not.
If it does, the Republic is whole and secure.
If it does not, the Republic is in deeper danger from those such as
you who would negate it than it is from those without who might wish
to oppose it.
The recent decision of the MN Court of Appeals was precisely correct.
And that decision should apply strictly to all other organized
superstitions in turn, when the same sort of matter arises.
That's what the Constitution says Must happen.
I support that. You do not.
See how that works?
ßDoüg±Ç
You're either a muslime pig collaborator or naive beyond repair.
ßDoüg±Ç
news:u6tfc4db90ciprvag...@4ax.com...
Nah, you're both liberal fools who should both be deported from
the US to an islamonazi theocracy to discover for yourselves what
islam is all about. Either that or you're both lying muslime pigs
yourselves.
Fucktard.
Don Homuth
>You're either a muslime pig collaborator or naive beyond repair.
Which is the sort of drivel that the Adamantly Ignorant on the
amUsenet are forever trying to flog.
But as I said -- the Constitution either applies or it does not. I
think it does. You think it does not.
You're merely Wrong, and can't even comprehend why.
I'll just leave it at that.
ßDoüg±Ç
That's what the islamonazis say -- and they make certain
you agree w/them.
> I'll just leave it at that.
Why don't you just leave the country? GO make friends
w/your islamonazi pals in:
pigistan
saudi barbaria
iran
somalia
egypt
syria
Don Homuth
>Why don't you just leave the country?
Ah yes -- the final retort of the Adamantly Ignorant and Right
Wingnuts out there -- a version of Love It Or Leave It.
What is it about this nation that you love?
For me, it's the Constitution. For you, it seems not to be.
Which is why You are one of those domestic enemies the several oaths
of office mention so prominently.
But the reason why I don't leave it? I'm a Murken Citizen, and have
Every right to be here, just as you do. What I believe doesn't and
can't interfere with that, much as you might prefer it did.
It's been that way since essentially forever, and isn't about to
change because of Your inchoate fears.
>GO make friends w/your islamonazi pals in:
>
>pigistan
>saudi barbaria
>iran
>somalia
>egypt
>syria
Heh!
Now you be Nice to those folks who provide you with the Awl needed to
run this great country of ours.
Ingrate!
Scott Smith
It would probably be a better trip for YOU to take...you might
learn that not all Muslims are bad people. In fact, the majority
of them are quite decent people. Unlike you, apparently.
Don Homuth
>You're either a muslime pig collaborator or naive beyond repair.
This source might not be useful to those without a properly
functioning Comprehension Neuron. But it might be useful to those who
want to see this anti-Muslim mindless prejudice as something that
affects Real People. People who are Not terrists, Not trying to bring
down the Constitution. Just people trying to live a life, get by as
best they can, and hew to their faith as they see fit:
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2008/09/reemergence_of_antimuslim_sent.html
...Mughal and Baloch spent years crafting what they considered a
typical American life. Baloch, a Pakistan native, moved to the United
States at age 4. Her family settled in North Carolina.
Mughal, also Pakistani, came to the states in 1993 as a student and
met Baloch at North Carolina State University. The couple got married
and moved to Oregon in 1999 when Mughal got a job as an engineer at
Intel. They bought a house in the burbs with a station wagon in the
garage and a trampoline out back. He's now a student at Lewis & Clark
Law School. She spends too much at Costco and hauls her two girls to
gymnastics.
Sitting in her tastefully decorated dining room, Baloch explains that
it wasn't until two years ago after a pilgrimage to Mecca in Saudi
Arabia that she started wearing the hijab. She did it as an
affirmation of her faith.
Sept. 11, 2001, destroyed that middle-class buffer for Muslim
Americans, says Read of Duke University, and life suddenly became
tougher. Hate crimes against Muslims spiked and in many minds, Muslim
became synonymous with terrorists. Several people thought to be Muslim
or Arab were assaulted in Oregon. In 2005, Portland lawyer Brandon
Mayfield, a Muslim convert, was arrested and held for two weeks when
his fingerprints were mistakenly linked to the terrorist bombings that
killed 191 people in Spain.
Non-Muslim friends and neighbors rallied around Mughal and Baloch
after 9/11. But Mughal got stopped and searched nearly every time he
flew. When his elderly father visited from Pakistan, he was pulled
from the airport line for intensive screening. On the day Mughal was
to take his oath of U.S. citizenship, he was told he would have to
wait for a more rigorous security check.
That check took almost four years....
There's more - and it's worth a read.
These are nice folks. You are not threatened by them. Their kids
will grow up American same as yours will, but given your take on
religious xenophobia, chances are theirs will be better Americans than
yours will.
(But yours will, as all generations eventually do, have a chance to
mature past their parents' principles. Which is A Good Thing too.)
The Constitution applies to them the same as it applies to you.
You just want to withdraw it from them because they hew to a different
superstition than you are comfortable with.
Too bad. Deal.
ßDoüg±Ç
news:o6sgc49gknv693078...@4ax.com...
Yeah, that's why they systematically, deliberately persecute,
oppress and murder people of other faiths in EVERY islamic
country on this earth fucktard.
That's why every islamic country on earth has laws against
blasphemy and heresy.
Fuck allah, fuck dumhammad and fuck you.
ßDoüg±Ç
> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 15:00:01 -0700, "ßDoüg±Ç" <noün...@now.com> wrote:
>
>
>>You're either a muslime pig collaborator or naive beyond repair.
>
GFY in Pigistan. Pigistan where persecution of infidels is systematic,
deliberate and daily. Pigistan, where heresy and blasphemy laws
still exist. Pigistan, where the sentence for blaspheming the prophet
is death or life imprisonment.