John Hall’s Shame
By Jack Puglis Thursday, September 30, 2010
Democrat Congressman John Hall’s (NY-19) campaign manager, somebody named Patrick McGarrity, must fail to understand the meaning of his own words.
McGarrity authored an email that described the mission of the Facebook ANTI-C.R.A.P.T.A.S.T.I.C. (Collectivist Redistributionist Anti-American Progressive Totalitarian Antagonistic Slanderous Treasonous Insidious Cretin) page as hate filled. [STRIKE ONE]
Here’s the correct mission statement: “To undermine C.R.A.P.T.A.S.T.I.C.s and their dangerous agenda.” What McGarrity posted instead was in fact a description of C.R.A.P.T.A.S.T.I.C. behavior – radical leftist behavior. Could McGarrity deliberately and dishonestly have plugged the wrong words into his email? Message to McGarrity: the C.R.A.P.T.A.S.T.I.C. definition describes you and your candidate, John Hall’s political position. [STRIKE 2]
John Hall’s shame: by this attack, he is defending totalitarianism, socialism, tyranny and communism. There can be no other conclusion from his negative comments about the ANTI- C.R.A.P.T.A.S.T.I.C. (A-C) page, since it is clearly dedicated to moderate, common sense, constitutional conservatism. All of the A-C page’s posts, links and notes support this position. [STRIKE 3. You’re out, McGarrity.]
McGarrity, who lives in an ethical desert, refers to the A-C group as “dangerous and extreme.” As with all radical leftists, he makes such vicious claims but fails to identify just what is dangerous or extreme. It is easy to write bitter words; it is hard to back them up. McGarrity’s words are the true hate-filled rhetoric.
You may view the A-C page on Facebook and decide for yourself if you see any item that is “dangerous or extreme.” Hint: you will find nothing of the sort, but you will note a great deal of material showing how our radical liberal government is causing damage to the nation.
Extreme is an interesting pejorative. Apparently, based upon McGarrity’s words, his candidate, John Hall, subscribes to Barack Obama’s far-left radical progressive socialist agenda. Far left radicals are extreme, by definition. This is Marxism on display in a candidate’s heart for all to see.
By contrast, the A-C page, like the tea parties, dwells on the moderate right. McGarrity seems to fail to understand what the far right is. The moderate conservatives of the A-C page and the tea parties strongly reject the radical right just as they abhor the radical left.
The Republican Party has lost its way in recent years and has drifted to the left of center. The Democrat Party has not so drifted, but rather has driven itself to the extreme left. From the vantage points of both parties, moderate conservatives look very far away, politically.
They are applying the term extreme right with malice of intent, but both groups have moved so far off course that patriotic constitutional ideals also look very strange to them. Their mutual leftward shift, coupled with the high levels of corruption in both parties, marks them as unfit to govern.
Strong feelings expressed on the A-C Facebook page therefore do not constitute extremism or radicalism; violations of the United States constitution by the president and the congress—and possibly by John Hall in the future—do.
The far right in the United States bears several striking analogies to the far-left radical Marxists of the Obama administration and the present Democrat congress. The extremists on the left and the right both want to exceed the constitution’s authority: the far left through tyranny, the far right through the dissolution of government. Both would destroy the health and well-being of our nation. Both ideologies are unacceptable to the A-C page.
The A-C page, in lockstep with the tea parties, argues for adherence to the constitution, the same document that Barack Obama describes as an obstacle to his progress. The A-C page holds precious the ideals of fiscal responsibility, limited government, reduced restrictions of freedoms and respect for the natural rights of individuals as guaranteed by our constitution.
In order for John Hall to participate in the radical leftist conversion of the nation to Marxism, he must assist Obama in the destruction of our constitution, our government and our way of life. It appears that McGarrity is exposing the reality of John Hall’s ideals. His DANGEROUS and EXTREME ideals.
McGarrity is telling you, then, that John Hall subscribes to far-left radical progressive values via tyrannical changes to the system. Is this who you want in congress?
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Think not? Better think again!
If Obuma has his way, America too will fall!
CRESCENT MOON OVER DEUTSCHLAND
MUSLIM CONQUEST CONTINUES
By
Paul L. Williams, Ph.D.
Chancellor Angela Merkel said that Germans have failed to grasp how Muslim immigration has transformed their country and will have to come to terms with more mosques than churches throughout the countryside, according to the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung daily.
“Our country is going to carry on changing, and integration is also a task for the society taking up the task of dealing with immigrants,” Ms. Merkel told the daily newspaper.“For years we’ve been deceiving ourselves about this. Mosques, for example, are going to be a more prominent part of our cities than they were before.”
Germany, with a population of 4-5million Muslims, has been divided in recent weeks by a debate over remarks by the Bundesbank’s Thilo Sarrazin, who argued Turkish and Arab immigrants were failing to integrate and were swamping Germany with a higher birth rate.
The Chancellor’s remarks represent the first official acknowledgment that Germany, like other European countries, is destined to become a stronghold of Islam. has admitted that the country will some become a stronghold.
In France 30% of children age 20 years and below are Muslims. The ratio in Paris and Marseilles has soared to 45%. In southern France there are more Mosques than churches.
The situation within the United Kingdom is not much different. In last 30 years, the Muslim population there has climbed from 82,000 to 2.5 millions. Presently, there are over 1000 mosques throughout Great Britain –- many of which were converted from churches.
In Belgium, 50% newborns are Muslims and reportedly its Islamic population hovers around 25%. A similar statistic holds true for The Netherlands.
It’s the same story in Russia where one in five inhabitants are Muslim.
Muammar Gaddafi recently stated that “There are signs that Allah will grant victory to Islam in Europe without sword, without gun, without conquest. We don’t need terrorists; we don’t need homicide bombers. The 50 plus million Muslims (in Europe) will turn it into the Muslim Continent within a few decades.”
The statistics support him.
CRESCENT MOON OVER DEUTSCHLAND
MUSLIM CONQUEST CONTINUES
By
Paul L. Williams, Ph.D.
Chancellor Angela Merkel said that Germans have failed to grasp how Muslim immigration has transformed their country and will have to come to terms with more mosques than churches throughout the countryside, according to the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung daily.
“Our country is going to carry on changing, and integration is also a task for the society taking up the task of dealing with immigrants,” Ms. Merkel told the daily newspaper.“For years we’ve been deceiving ourselves about this. Mosques, for example, are going to be a more prominent part of our cities than they were before.”
Germany, with a population of 4-5million Muslims, has been divided in recent weeks by a debate over remarks by the Bundesbank’s Thilo Sarrazin, who argued Turkish and Arab immigrants were failing to integrate and were swamping Germany with a higher birth rate.
The Chancellor’s remarks represent the first official acknowledgment that Germany, like other European countries, is destined to become a stronghold of Islam. has admitted that the country will some become a stronghold.
In France 30% of children age 20 years and below are Muslims. The ratio in Paris and Marseilles has soared to 45%. In southern France there are more Mosques than churches.
The situation within the United Kingdom is not much different. In last 30 years, the Muslim population there has climbed from 82,000 to 2.5 millions. Presently, there are over 1000 mosques throughout Great Britain –- many of which were converted from churches.
In Belgium, 50% newborns are Muslims and reportedly its Islamic population hovers around 25%. A similar statistic holds true for The Netherlands.
It’s the same story in Russia where one in five inhabitants are Muslim.
Muammar Gaddafi recently stated that “There are signs that Allah will grant victory to Islam in Europe without sword, without gun, without conquest. We don’t need terrorists; we don’t need homicide bombers. The 50 plus million Muslims (in Europe) will turn it into the Muslim Continent within a few decades.”
The statistics support him.
Sunday, September 26, 2010
Shiari' ah law the same as American law????? Give me a break!
If you can believe that, then go live in a Muslim country and find out for yourself.
Is American Law Really the Same as Muslim Shari'ah, As Ground Zero Mosque Imam Rauf Boasts?
Crime & Punishment in Islamic Law
By Kelly O'Connell Sunday, September 26, 2010
This article examines classic Islamic law, the “Shari’ah,” regarding crime and punishment. Recently, the “Ground Zero Imam” Egyptian Feisal Abdul Rauf claimed Muslim and American law were essentially the same. He said, “What’s right with America and what’s right with Islam are, in fact, very much in sync…I call America a Sharia compliant state.” But what would being a “Shari’ah compliant state” really mean? To understand this, we need to study the details of Shari’ah law.
One way to better understand Muslim Shari’ah law, is by taking a particular sub-category, such as crime and punishment, to see how Islam treats these topics. While analyzing this issue, the reader will undoubtedly begin to realize Shari’ah and American law are not so similar, and that perhaps Rauf is wildly bluffing (or something else). He claims American law is similar to Muslim because they are both “from God,” while ignoring the fact mankind has created many Gods over millenniums, each mostly opposed to the rest.
Of course, Islamic views of crime and punishment have shifted occasionally over the centuries, and the Shari’ah varies between regimes and Muslim schools. This essay gives a general picture of the Shari’ah on these topics.
I General Introduction to Islamic “Shari’ah” Law
The foundation of Islamic Shari’ah law is the Qur’an; combined with the Sunna, or the Prophet’s model behavior; the consensus of the four schools (Ijma), and analogical reasoning (Qiyas), according to Shari’ah: The Islamic Law by Abdur Rahman I. Doi. These sources are considered divine.
The Qur’an is believed to have “co-existed with God Himself in a heavenly book, known as the ‘Mother Book’” written in Arabic from all eternity,”[a] writes David Forte in Studies in Islamic Law; Classical & Contemporary Application.
The Shari’ah seamlessly combines public, private and religious law, featuring elements of ancient codes, such as revenge. For instance, at a public execution for a crime against a person, the victim will normally be present in the crowd, viewing the impending death. The punishment is owned by the victim or their kin, and only they can stop the killing from taking place, normally by acceptance of blood-money (diya).
II General Description of Shari’ah Criminal Law
To Western eyes, the Shari’ah presents a disorganized and incomplete description of Criminal Law. According to Joseph Schacht, in Introduction to Islamic Law,
There exists no general concept of penal law in Islam. The concepts of guilt and criminal responsibility are little developed, that of mitigating circumstances does not exist; any theory of attempt, complicity, of concurrence is lacking. On the other hand, the theory of punishments, with its distinction of private vengeance, hadd punishments, ta’zir, and coercive and preventative measures, shows a considerable variety of ideas.
As Forte points out, one cannot actually say there is a modern Muslim penal code, writing, “Islamic law does not possess a concept of penal law comparable to that of modern systems. Instead, it categorizes its offenses by the types of punishment they engender.”
Therefore, in terms of punishments, there are five basic categories. Behavior with a specifically prescribed punishment is under hadd. Discretionary punishment for various acts are under ta’zir, where the judge sets whatever penalty he chooses. Personal revenge, where retaliation or blood-money (diya) is applicable, is under jinayat. Offense against the state receive administrative penalties, or siyasa. And crimes where the appropriate, or chosen response, is personal religious penance, are under kaffara.
III Criminal Procedure
Shari’ah legal procedure is a somewhat counter-intuitive process. Rules for choosing the proper court and applying correct procedures, essential for American Due Process, are virtually non-existent in Islamic law. Rudolph Peters writes in Crime and Punishment in Islamic Law,
There are very few general principles in Islamic criminal law. The classical books of fiqh do not contain chapters dealing with general notions or rules. Those that exist are either mentioned in each chapter devoted to a specific crime or they must be found by deduction.
The most important local players in the Muslim legal system are the judge (qadi), the police (shurta), and the Islamic “inspector of the market” (muhtasib), says Schacht. The latter is an official who made sure weights and measures were accurate, but also became a keeper of public morality and justice, including overseeing the police force. The muhtasib controls the system, but the qadi is independent in his decisions. Yet, the state at the highest levels may legally intervene at any time and make political decisions involving the accused which completely derail justice.
Police may beat suspects, not to extract a confession, but merely remind the accused his duty to be truthful, according to There was no office of public prosecution under classic Shari’ah doctrine, although the muhtasib occasionally came to fill this roll as defender of public morals. Most cases were launched by private prosecutions from victims. Only verbal testimony (shahada) is considered evidence, with exceptions made for proof made by smell of alcohol for drunkenness or pregnancy indicating illicit sexual activity. Written documents are merely allowed as memory aids.
IV Muslim Criminal Law Theory
A quintessentially religious law, Shari’ah has set penalties, known as hadd—called “exemplary punishments” (Qur’an 5:38). These are performed in public to remind residents the wages of evil. Retribution is an important part of Muslim punishments, using the standard of Lex Talionis, ie “eye for an eye,” to measure punishment. For example, the murderer should be executed in the same manner his or her victim was dispatched. The Discretionary Punishments (ta’zir) are especially meant to return offenders to the gilded path of Allah.
V Specific Religious Crimes & Punishment Under Islamic Law
The state is generally responsible for criminal punishment, with a few exceptions, writes Peters. The prosecuting next of kin are allowed to personally deliver the death sentence in the case of murder. Also, a slave should be punished by their master, with the exception of amputations, which state executioners enforce. All criminal sentences are to be carried out immediately upon pronouncement, unless a compelling reason exists not do so.
Were an offender to commit several different crimes which cannot be punished at once, a weight-list is used to decide which comes first. Writes Peters,
If a person, having committed several crimes, is sentenced to a number of different penalties, each of them must be carried out. If this is physically impossible, the authorities must first execute those sentences that are founded on the claims of men and then those resulting from the claims of God…If a person has been sentenced to the removal of his eye by way of retaliation, to eighty lashes for slander, to a hundred lashes for unlawful intercourse and to the amputation of the right hand, the head of state or his agent must first carry out the gouging out of the eye because that is the claim of a man, then imprison him until the wound has healed, then carry out the punishment for calumny, etc…
A. Hudud Religious Punishments
Forte describes the religious Hadd crimes, writing “Islamic law denotes five “Quranic offenses” which are regarded as offenses directly against Allah and which compel specific punishment.” These crimes are Unlawful Intercourse (Zina), False Accusation of Unlawful Intercourse (Kadhf); Drinking of Wine (Shurb); Theft (Sariq), and Highway Robbery (Qat’ Al-Tariq).
1. Unlawful Intercourse—Zina: This occurs when a person has sexual relations with anyone not their spouse, nor a concubine (Shari’ah accepts sexual slavery). Technically, adultery is not a crime as no woman has exclusive rights to her husband, and the husband has no exclusive bond with his wife, despite this being an offense against Allah. The crime of Zina can also occur if a man takes and sleeps with a fifth wife while the four previous yet live, weds a close relative or girl before she undergoes puberty, or commits necrophilia, writes Forte.
Proof of Zina must be provided by four adult Muslim males or a confession. The crime should have occurred within the last 30 days. On a discrepancy of testimony, of even a technical irregularity, the four can then receive the punishment for Zina themselves. Peters explains that if a man has sex with a slave not his, he owes her master a fine. A woman who reports a rape but cannot prove it occurred via four witnesses can then be prosecuted for Zina with her unproved accusation acting as a confession.
Zina Penalty:
The punishment here can be stoning, lashing, or both, depending upon the school. A stoning should only be applied to one convicted of unlawful intercourse, who is mentally competent, is a free person, and has already experienced lawful sexual relations in a marriage. For all others, it is either one 100 lashes for a free person, or 50 for a slave. All homosexual relations fulfill the Zina requirements, although the penalty is simply death instead of whipping, according to Peters.
2. False Accusation of Unlawful Intercourse—Kadhf: This occurs when a competent adult slanders another competent adult, who is a free Muslim, with false charges of Zina. Claiming someone is illegitimate also qualifies. Proof for this occurs via normal Islamic means, using oaths of witnesses, or by confession. Under a special rule, a husband may charge his wife with infidelity without risk if he uses the li’an procedure, which Forte describes as “...if he swears four times by Allah that he is speaking the truth and, at a fifth oath, calls down a curse upon himself if he is lying.” The woman, as a defense, may repeat the exact procedure. If either one refuses the li’an, they are considered guilty, ipso facto, and receive the lashes.
Kadhf Penalty: The punishment for kadhf is 80 lashes for a freeman, or 40 for a slave.
3. Drinking of Wine—Shurb: Alcohol was not originally illegal but became so after Muhammad was appalled at the drunkenness of Arab society. The law also applies to any other intoxicant or drug. Proof can be provided by a confession, which can then be withdrawn at any time without penalty. Or witnesses can attest seeing the accused drinking, smelled alcohol on his breath, or observed him soused.
Shurb Penalty: The penalty for intoxicant imbibing is 20-40 lashes.
4. Theft—Sariq: This must be a crime of theft involving removal by stealth of an item owned by another of at least a certain value, kept in a locked area or under guard (hirz), says Peters. For example, removal of a gold coin stored in an animal stable would not qualify. This crime should be prosecuted by the government.
Sariq Penalty: Amputation of the right hand, as based upon Qur’an 5:38; although the Shiites allow just four fingers of the hand amputated, according to Peters. A second, third and fourth conviction can remove all such appendages.
5. Highway Robbery—Qat’ Al-Tariq: The Arabs considered this the most serious kind of crime as it threatens the calm and order of all society, according to Forte. Two types of evil are covered here. The first is robbing travelers from distant places; whereas the second is armed assault into a private home. Even non-Muslims are protected under this law. There must be at least a holdup which occurs outside the city for the penalty to apply to banditry, states Peters. The perpetrator must be of superior force to the victim, and so women do not qualify.
Qat’ Al-Tariq Penalty: The first conviction for this offense merits the amputation of the right hand and left foot of the wrong-doer, although some schools allow a simple deportation if no harm occurs. The second results in amputation of the left hand and right foot.
Says the Qur’an at 5:33,
The just retribution for those who fight GOD and His messenger, and commit horrendous crimes, is to be killed, or crucified, or to have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or to be banished from the land. This is to humiliate them in this life, then they suffer a far worse retribution in the Hereafter.
VI. Other Shari’ah Crimes, Punishment, & Blood Money
A. Ta’zir Penalties
Discretionary penalties, or Ta’zir, are punishments delivered at the qadi’s subjective decision. The purpose is to punish acts against man and God, and sometimes includes reparation and repentance, writes Forte. These punishment vary in severity:
Private admonition to the guilty party, sometimes by letter;
Public reprimand in court;
Public proclamation of the offender’s guilt;
Suspended sentence;
Banishment;
Flogging;
Imprisonment;
Death.
Forte says many crimes are covered by Ta’zir that for some reason have eluded Hadd penalties, such as apostasy (ridda —although some schools consider this hadd), wine selling, homosexual activity, bodily harm or murder, bestiality, perjury, slander and usury.
B. Fines & Blood Money
Fines are paid to the state, whereas blood-money (diya) goes to a victim or kin, based upon his blood-status. Bloodprice is the victim’s worth, only calculable against that of the accused, which controls the punishment. A person cannot receive retaliation for killing a person of a lower bloodprice. For example, a Muslim cannot be executed for murdering a slave or member of the protected classes, being Christians or Jews, deemed dhimmis, i.e. the People of the Book (Bible).
C. Public Scorn, Imprisonment & Banishment
A common punishment is public exposure to scorn (tashir). Achieved by shaving the culprit’s head, or covering his face with soot (especially for false witnesses) and parading him sitting backwards on an donkey, through the community, with a town-crier announcing his sins. Banishment (nafy, taghrib) is associated with two crimes—simple banditry and illegal sex. If a woman is banished for being sexually immoral, a male relative must travel with her to make sure she stays chaste. Imprisonment (habs) is not normally used for penal law, but as a means to encourage debtors to pay.
D. Retaliation
Retaliation for injuries (qisas ma dun al-nafs) comes as Lex Talionis, eye-for-eye punishment in the form of amputations, blinding, and infliction of wounds the victim received. A recent Saudi case involved a man sentenced to judicial paralysis for severing the spinal cord of another. This should not be done till the victim has healed, in case he dies.
E. Theft & Amputation
Muhammad probably borrowed amputation (qat) for theft from the pagan Quaraysh tribe, who inflicted this punishment on rival tribesmen caught stealing, says Forte. While Muslim jurists claim amputation is to prevent recidivism, it more likely originated as judicial revenge. The hand is removed at the wrist, the stump cauterized in boiling oil, at the criminal’s expense, and the hand can be hung around the thief’s neck for three days. Cross-amputation (al-qat min-khilaf) is a punishment for brigands, ie highway robbers.
F. Flogging (Jald)
Flogging by leather whip is a very common punishment under the Shari’ah. The executioner administers this penalty, but should not raise the whip arm above the shoulder. The more serious a crime, the harder the executioner should flog the criminal. For example, one convicted of illegal sex should be beaten more severely than one guilty of drinking alcohol. Men are whipped standing, women seated. Men are stripped to the waist, while women are allowed to keep on clothes. As advised in Qur’an 24:2, the punishment should be public. The blows are to be spread over the body, except for dangerous places, like the head or genitals, as the purpose for whipping is not death.
G. Executions: Beheading, Stoning & Other Means
There are many ways to execute a criminal under Shari’ah. Typically, the mode of execution is beheading by sword, as done at famed Chop-Chop Square in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. But the crime defines the manner. For example, homosexuals are executed in typically dramatic fashion, by stoning, beheading, thrown from a high wall or building, hanging, immolated by fire, or buried alive (despite male homosexuality reportedly being rampant in the Middle East, according to Raphael Patai’s Arab Mind).
Execution may be used as retaliation, done by the kin of the victim, according to Qur’an 16:126 & 2:194, which calls for the murderer to be executed in the same manner as he killed his victims. Only if this would result in extended torture will the sword be substituted. The Government will inspect the proposed execution weapon and decide if the person can handle it properly. If not, then a substitute executioner will be arranged.
Death by Stoning (Rajm), or lapidation, is delivered by a crowd with the ultimate intent of killing the victim, writes Peters. The stones used should neither be too large, which would kill the criminal too quickly, nor too small, which would delay the job. The proper size is a stone which fills the hand. Women are to be dug into the earth up to their waists before the event. If the conviction is based upon accusations, the accusers are the first to throw. If the conviction is based upon a confession, the state representative is first to toss.
For Highway Robbery (Qat’ Al-Tariq), if a killing resulted during an attempted robbery, the punishment is beheading by sword. If a murder occurred during an actual theft, the punishment is execution by crucifixion (salb), the body left dying three days. Unlike a normal murder, the family of the victim cannot choose blood-money (diya) instead of execution.
Apostates may renounce Islam by word or deed, including rejecting axiomatic articles of faith, like denying Muhammad’s mission, fasting, or disrespecting the Qur’an. The apostate (ridda) is given three days to reflect, then put to death. Some schools only execute men, whereas the women are kept alive but flogged during the hours of prayer, according to Peters. Frank Vogel, in Islamic Law & Legal System: Studies of Saudi Arabia states that apostates are beheaded in Saudi Arabia before huge crowds on Friday afternoons, in the public square, directly after prayer time has ceased.
Dhimmis, as Christians and Jews, have no inherent rights or status under the Shari’ah, being harbis, or enemy aliens, naturally at war with Islam. It is only by way of the jizyah, or yearly treaty of war tax, that these can qualify for temporary protection. Should a dhimmi lapse in protection, they can be killed on the spot and their property taken without recompense, according to Schacht. Further, any persons not Muslim or dhimmi are considered pagans and are to be instantly killed under classical shari’ah doctrine.
Conclusion
Even the simplest person can deduce that classical Islamic Shari’ah law cannot possibly fit into the modern world anywhere on the globe. But it is especially impossible to apply this system in America, the land that created modern religious freedom, and let millions escape oppression. Most alarming, the Islamic law does not change to fit into other cultures, but is always offered as a “perfect gift,” delivered at the edge of a sword.
Is it not the most obvious fact imaginable that American law is a thousand times fairer and safer than Shar’iah? Therefore, what kind of a mentality would want to force so much injustice, punishment and destruction upon the American people—in the name of God &¬† the “Religion of Peace”? That Rauf claims this antiquated, unsophisticated and brutal legal system agrees with American law and society says much more about his intentions for his Ground Zero mosque than it does any other topic he will ever discuss.
[a]This idea cannot help but evoke John’s description of the pre-incarnate Christic Logos (Word), “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God…No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him…” (John 1:1; 18). Undoubtedly, such imagery influenced Muhammad’s fertile imagination when rendering the Qur’an.
Is American Law Really the Same as Muslim Shari'ah, As Ground Zero Mosque Imam Rauf Boasts?
Crime & Punishment in Islamic Law
By Kelly O'Connell Sunday, September 26, 2010
This article examines classic Islamic law, the “Shari’ah,” regarding crime and punishment. Recently, the “Ground Zero Imam” Egyptian Feisal Abdul Rauf claimed Muslim and American law were essentially the same. He said, “What’s right with America and what’s right with Islam are, in fact, very much in sync…I call America a Sharia compliant state.” But what would being a “Shari’ah compliant state” really mean? To understand this, we need to study the details of Shari’ah law.
One way to better understand Muslim Shari’ah law, is by taking a particular sub-category, such as crime and punishment, to see how Islam treats these topics. While analyzing this issue, the reader will undoubtedly begin to realize Shari’ah and American law are not so similar, and that perhaps Rauf is wildly bluffing (or something else). He claims American law is similar to Muslim because they are both “from God,” while ignoring the fact mankind has created many Gods over millenniums, each mostly opposed to the rest.
Of course, Islamic views of crime and punishment have shifted occasionally over the centuries, and the Shari’ah varies between regimes and Muslim schools. This essay gives a general picture of the Shari’ah on these topics.
I General Introduction to Islamic “Shari’ah” Law
The foundation of Islamic Shari’ah law is the Qur’an; combined with the Sunna, or the Prophet’s model behavior; the consensus of the four schools (Ijma), and analogical reasoning (Qiyas), according to Shari’ah: The Islamic Law by Abdur Rahman I. Doi. These sources are considered divine.
The Qur’an is believed to have “co-existed with God Himself in a heavenly book, known as the ‘Mother Book’” written in Arabic from all eternity,”[a] writes David Forte in Studies in Islamic Law; Classical & Contemporary Application.
The Shari’ah seamlessly combines public, private and religious law, featuring elements of ancient codes, such as revenge. For instance, at a public execution for a crime against a person, the victim will normally be present in the crowd, viewing the impending death. The punishment is owned by the victim or their kin, and only they can stop the killing from taking place, normally by acceptance of blood-money (diya).
II General Description of Shari’ah Criminal Law
To Western eyes, the Shari’ah presents a disorganized and incomplete description of Criminal Law. According to Joseph Schacht, in Introduction to Islamic Law,
There exists no general concept of penal law in Islam. The concepts of guilt and criminal responsibility are little developed, that of mitigating circumstances does not exist; any theory of attempt, complicity, of concurrence is lacking. On the other hand, the theory of punishments, with its distinction of private vengeance, hadd punishments, ta’zir, and coercive and preventative measures, shows a considerable variety of ideas.
As Forte points out, one cannot actually say there is a modern Muslim penal code, writing, “Islamic law does not possess a concept of penal law comparable to that of modern systems. Instead, it categorizes its offenses by the types of punishment they engender.”
Therefore, in terms of punishments, there are five basic categories. Behavior with a specifically prescribed punishment is under hadd. Discretionary punishment for various acts are under ta’zir, where the judge sets whatever penalty he chooses. Personal revenge, where retaliation or blood-money (diya) is applicable, is under jinayat. Offense against the state receive administrative penalties, or siyasa. And crimes where the appropriate, or chosen response, is personal religious penance, are under kaffara.
III Criminal Procedure
Shari’ah legal procedure is a somewhat counter-intuitive process. Rules for choosing the proper court and applying correct procedures, essential for American Due Process, are virtually non-existent in Islamic law. Rudolph Peters writes in Crime and Punishment in Islamic Law,
There are very few general principles in Islamic criminal law. The classical books of fiqh do not contain chapters dealing with general notions or rules. Those that exist are either mentioned in each chapter devoted to a specific crime or they must be found by deduction.
The most important local players in the Muslim legal system are the judge (qadi), the police (shurta), and the Islamic “inspector of the market” (muhtasib), says Schacht. The latter is an official who made sure weights and measures were accurate, but also became a keeper of public morality and justice, including overseeing the police force. The muhtasib controls the system, but the qadi is independent in his decisions. Yet, the state at the highest levels may legally intervene at any time and make political decisions involving the accused which completely derail justice.
Police may beat suspects, not to extract a confession, but merely remind the accused his duty to be truthful, according to There was no office of public prosecution under classic Shari’ah doctrine, although the muhtasib occasionally came to fill this roll as defender of public morals. Most cases were launched by private prosecutions from victims. Only verbal testimony (shahada) is considered evidence, with exceptions made for proof made by smell of alcohol for drunkenness or pregnancy indicating illicit sexual activity. Written documents are merely allowed as memory aids.
IV Muslim Criminal Law Theory
A quintessentially religious law, Shari’ah has set penalties, known as hadd—called “exemplary punishments” (Qur’an 5:38). These are performed in public to remind residents the wages of evil. Retribution is an important part of Muslim punishments, using the standard of Lex Talionis, ie “eye for an eye,” to measure punishment. For example, the murderer should be executed in the same manner his or her victim was dispatched. The Discretionary Punishments (ta’zir) are especially meant to return offenders to the gilded path of Allah.
V Specific Religious Crimes & Punishment Under Islamic Law
The state is generally responsible for criminal punishment, with a few exceptions, writes Peters. The prosecuting next of kin are allowed to personally deliver the death sentence in the case of murder. Also, a slave should be punished by their master, with the exception of amputations, which state executioners enforce. All criminal sentences are to be carried out immediately upon pronouncement, unless a compelling reason exists not do so.
Were an offender to commit several different crimes which cannot be punished at once, a weight-list is used to decide which comes first. Writes Peters,
If a person, having committed several crimes, is sentenced to a number of different penalties, each of them must be carried out. If this is physically impossible, the authorities must first execute those sentences that are founded on the claims of men and then those resulting from the claims of God…If a person has been sentenced to the removal of his eye by way of retaliation, to eighty lashes for slander, to a hundred lashes for unlawful intercourse and to the amputation of the right hand, the head of state or his agent must first carry out the gouging out of the eye because that is the claim of a man, then imprison him until the wound has healed, then carry out the punishment for calumny, etc…
A. Hudud Religious Punishments
Forte describes the religious Hadd crimes, writing “Islamic law denotes five “Quranic offenses” which are regarded as offenses directly against Allah and which compel specific punishment.” These crimes are Unlawful Intercourse (Zina), False Accusation of Unlawful Intercourse (Kadhf); Drinking of Wine (Shurb); Theft (Sariq), and Highway Robbery (Qat’ Al-Tariq).
1. Unlawful Intercourse—Zina: This occurs when a person has sexual relations with anyone not their spouse, nor a concubine (Shari’ah accepts sexual slavery). Technically, adultery is not a crime as no woman has exclusive rights to her husband, and the husband has no exclusive bond with his wife, despite this being an offense against Allah. The crime of Zina can also occur if a man takes and sleeps with a fifth wife while the four previous yet live, weds a close relative or girl before she undergoes puberty, or commits necrophilia, writes Forte.
Proof of Zina must be provided by four adult Muslim males or a confession. The crime should have occurred within the last 30 days. On a discrepancy of testimony, of even a technical irregularity, the four can then receive the punishment for Zina themselves. Peters explains that if a man has sex with a slave not his, he owes her master a fine. A woman who reports a rape but cannot prove it occurred via four witnesses can then be prosecuted for Zina with her unproved accusation acting as a confession.
Zina Penalty:
The punishment here can be stoning, lashing, or both, depending upon the school. A stoning should only be applied to one convicted of unlawful intercourse, who is mentally competent, is a free person, and has already experienced lawful sexual relations in a marriage. For all others, it is either one 100 lashes for a free person, or 50 for a slave. All homosexual relations fulfill the Zina requirements, although the penalty is simply death instead of whipping, according to Peters.
2. False Accusation of Unlawful Intercourse—Kadhf: This occurs when a competent adult slanders another competent adult, who is a free Muslim, with false charges of Zina. Claiming someone is illegitimate also qualifies. Proof for this occurs via normal Islamic means, using oaths of witnesses, or by confession. Under a special rule, a husband may charge his wife with infidelity without risk if he uses the li’an procedure, which Forte describes as “...if he swears four times by Allah that he is speaking the truth and, at a fifth oath, calls down a curse upon himself if he is lying.” The woman, as a defense, may repeat the exact procedure. If either one refuses the li’an, they are considered guilty, ipso facto, and receive the lashes.
Kadhf Penalty: The punishment for kadhf is 80 lashes for a freeman, or 40 for a slave.
3. Drinking of Wine—Shurb: Alcohol was not originally illegal but became so after Muhammad was appalled at the drunkenness of Arab society. The law also applies to any other intoxicant or drug. Proof can be provided by a confession, which can then be withdrawn at any time without penalty. Or witnesses can attest seeing the accused drinking, smelled alcohol on his breath, or observed him soused.
Shurb Penalty: The penalty for intoxicant imbibing is 20-40 lashes.
4. Theft—Sariq: This must be a crime of theft involving removal by stealth of an item owned by another of at least a certain value, kept in a locked area or under guard (hirz), says Peters. For example, removal of a gold coin stored in an animal stable would not qualify. This crime should be prosecuted by the government.
Sariq Penalty: Amputation of the right hand, as based upon Qur’an 5:38; although the Shiites allow just four fingers of the hand amputated, according to Peters. A second, third and fourth conviction can remove all such appendages.
5. Highway Robbery—Qat’ Al-Tariq: The Arabs considered this the most serious kind of crime as it threatens the calm and order of all society, according to Forte. Two types of evil are covered here. The first is robbing travelers from distant places; whereas the second is armed assault into a private home. Even non-Muslims are protected under this law. There must be at least a holdup which occurs outside the city for the penalty to apply to banditry, states Peters. The perpetrator must be of superior force to the victim, and so women do not qualify.
Qat’ Al-Tariq Penalty: The first conviction for this offense merits the amputation of the right hand and left foot of the wrong-doer, although some schools allow a simple deportation if no harm occurs. The second results in amputation of the left hand and right foot.
Says the Qur’an at 5:33,
The just retribution for those who fight GOD and His messenger, and commit horrendous crimes, is to be killed, or crucified, or to have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or to be banished from the land. This is to humiliate them in this life, then they suffer a far worse retribution in the Hereafter.
VI. Other Shari’ah Crimes, Punishment, & Blood Money
A. Ta’zir Penalties
Discretionary penalties, or Ta’zir, are punishments delivered at the qadi’s subjective decision. The purpose is to punish acts against man and God, and sometimes includes reparation and repentance, writes Forte. These punishment vary in severity:
Private admonition to the guilty party, sometimes by letter;
Public reprimand in court;
Public proclamation of the offender’s guilt;
Suspended sentence;
Banishment;
Flogging;
Imprisonment;
Death.
Forte says many crimes are covered by Ta’zir that for some reason have eluded Hadd penalties, such as apostasy (ridda —although some schools consider this hadd), wine selling, homosexual activity, bodily harm or murder, bestiality, perjury, slander and usury.
B. Fines & Blood Money
Fines are paid to the state, whereas blood-money (diya) goes to a victim or kin, based upon his blood-status. Bloodprice is the victim’s worth, only calculable against that of the accused, which controls the punishment. A person cannot receive retaliation for killing a person of a lower bloodprice. For example, a Muslim cannot be executed for murdering a slave or member of the protected classes, being Christians or Jews, deemed dhimmis, i.e. the People of the Book (Bible).
C. Public Scorn, Imprisonment & Banishment
A common punishment is public exposure to scorn (tashir). Achieved by shaving the culprit’s head, or covering his face with soot (especially for false witnesses) and parading him sitting backwards on an donkey, through the community, with a town-crier announcing his sins. Banishment (nafy, taghrib) is associated with two crimes—simple banditry and illegal sex. If a woman is banished for being sexually immoral, a male relative must travel with her to make sure she stays chaste. Imprisonment (habs) is not normally used for penal law, but as a means to encourage debtors to pay.
D. Retaliation
Retaliation for injuries (qisas ma dun al-nafs) comes as Lex Talionis, eye-for-eye punishment in the form of amputations, blinding, and infliction of wounds the victim received. A recent Saudi case involved a man sentenced to judicial paralysis for severing the spinal cord of another. This should not be done till the victim has healed, in case he dies.
E. Theft & Amputation
Muhammad probably borrowed amputation (qat) for theft from the pagan Quaraysh tribe, who inflicted this punishment on rival tribesmen caught stealing, says Forte. While Muslim jurists claim amputation is to prevent recidivism, it more likely originated as judicial revenge. The hand is removed at the wrist, the stump cauterized in boiling oil, at the criminal’s expense, and the hand can be hung around the thief’s neck for three days. Cross-amputation (al-qat min-khilaf) is a punishment for brigands, ie highway robbers.
F. Flogging (Jald)
Flogging by leather whip is a very common punishment under the Shari’ah. The executioner administers this penalty, but should not raise the whip arm above the shoulder. The more serious a crime, the harder the executioner should flog the criminal. For example, one convicted of illegal sex should be beaten more severely than one guilty of drinking alcohol. Men are whipped standing, women seated. Men are stripped to the waist, while women are allowed to keep on clothes. As advised in Qur’an 24:2, the punishment should be public. The blows are to be spread over the body, except for dangerous places, like the head or genitals, as the purpose for whipping is not death.
G. Executions: Beheading, Stoning & Other Means
There are many ways to execute a criminal under Shari’ah. Typically, the mode of execution is beheading by sword, as done at famed Chop-Chop Square in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. But the crime defines the manner. For example, homosexuals are executed in typically dramatic fashion, by stoning, beheading, thrown from a high wall or building, hanging, immolated by fire, or buried alive (despite male homosexuality reportedly being rampant in the Middle East, according to Raphael Patai’s Arab Mind).
Execution may be used as retaliation, done by the kin of the victim, according to Qur’an 16:126 & 2:194, which calls for the murderer to be executed in the same manner as he killed his victims. Only if this would result in extended torture will the sword be substituted. The Government will inspect the proposed execution weapon and decide if the person can handle it properly. If not, then a substitute executioner will be arranged.
Death by Stoning (Rajm), or lapidation, is delivered by a crowd with the ultimate intent of killing the victim, writes Peters. The stones used should neither be too large, which would kill the criminal too quickly, nor too small, which would delay the job. The proper size is a stone which fills the hand. Women are to be dug into the earth up to their waists before the event. If the conviction is based upon accusations, the accusers are the first to throw. If the conviction is based upon a confession, the state representative is first to toss.
For Highway Robbery (Qat’ Al-Tariq), if a killing resulted during an attempted robbery, the punishment is beheading by sword. If a murder occurred during an actual theft, the punishment is execution by crucifixion (salb), the body left dying three days. Unlike a normal murder, the family of the victim cannot choose blood-money (diya) instead of execution.
Apostates may renounce Islam by word or deed, including rejecting axiomatic articles of faith, like denying Muhammad’s mission, fasting, or disrespecting the Qur’an. The apostate (ridda) is given three days to reflect, then put to death. Some schools only execute men, whereas the women are kept alive but flogged during the hours of prayer, according to Peters. Frank Vogel, in Islamic Law & Legal System: Studies of Saudi Arabia states that apostates are beheaded in Saudi Arabia before huge crowds on Friday afternoons, in the public square, directly after prayer time has ceased.
Dhimmis, as Christians and Jews, have no inherent rights or status under the Shari’ah, being harbis, or enemy aliens, naturally at war with Islam. It is only by way of the jizyah, or yearly treaty of war tax, that these can qualify for temporary protection. Should a dhimmi lapse in protection, they can be killed on the spot and their property taken without recompense, according to Schacht. Further, any persons not Muslim or dhimmi are considered pagans and are to be instantly killed under classical shari’ah doctrine.
Conclusion
Even the simplest person can deduce that classical Islamic Shari’ah law cannot possibly fit into the modern world anywhere on the globe. But it is especially impossible to apply this system in America, the land that created modern religious freedom, and let millions escape oppression. Most alarming, the Islamic law does not change to fit into other cultures, but is always offered as a “perfect gift,” delivered at the edge of a sword.
Is it not the most obvious fact imaginable that American law is a thousand times fairer and safer than Shar’iah? Therefore, what kind of a mentality would want to force so much injustice, punishment and destruction upon the American people—in the name of God &¬† the “Religion of Peace”? That Rauf claims this antiquated, unsophisticated and brutal legal system agrees with American law and society says much more about his intentions for his Ground Zero mosque than it does any other topic he will ever discuss.
[a]This idea cannot help but evoke John’s description of the pre-incarnate Christic Logos (Word), “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God…No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him…” (John 1:1; 18). Undoubtedly, such imagery influenced Muhammad’s fertile imagination when rendering the Qur’an.
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Vote out the Demo-craps, then retake America
First get rid of the liberal Democrats that encourage the spread of Islam and then get control of the Muslims that perpetrate it and enforce OUR Constitution
Is Sharia Law Creeping Into American Lives?
By Jerry McConnell Saturday, September 25, 2010
The Muslims downplay the above question by scoffingly answering in the negative despite mounting evidence to the contrary. Of course getting devious answers from Muslims is to be expected; that is, until they are ready to threaten a lawsuit due to being offended.
The February 19, 2010 online Bear Creek Ledger (TN) writer Toni stated “You can see the tell tale signs of creeping Sharia Law (Islamic law) through lawsuits and demands made by Muslims in America on an almost daily basis. Whether it’s the Somali Muslim cabdrivers (Mpls.,MN) who refuse to pick up fares who have been consuming alcohol to disabled people with a service canine or it could be something like Muslims demanding foot baths in a public building, it’s the incremental creep of imposing Sharia Law in the US.”
In the same issue of the Bear Creek Ledger this report was published: “Last year Stephen Coughlin (a Pentagon specialist on Islamic law and extremism) was fired because of Muslim officials in the Pentagon who opposed his work. You think there is no threat in the US from Islamists in this country?’‘
Also, this offering from Brian Mosely of the Shelbyville (TN) Times: “Every major Muslim organization is controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood, a former FBI Agent John Guandolo said, which he said was formed to overthrow America and establish Islamic law.
“They’re having great success of implementing Shariah law, I could give you a thousand examples,’’ Guandolo said.
He said small concessions like installing foot baths, and colleges forced to have separate swimming times for Islamic men and women so not to offend Muslims, are other parts of the strategy.
“The solution to this is you,” Guandolo said. “If you are looking to DHS, the FBI and Congress to solve this . you’re going to be woefully disappointed.”
So even a former FBI Agent agrees with the premise that Sharia is working its way into and through our judicial system at all levels; and their arrogant and selfish demands for attention are being heard and dealt with by people in authoritative positions.
The above mentioned Bear Creek Ledger covered this story on August 02, 2008 from Shelbyville, TN that the large Tyson Foods’ poultry processing plant had pandered to the Somali Muslims employed there by dropping Labor Day as a paid holiday and adding the Islam holiday of Eid al-Fitr which occurs near the end of Ramadan. Out of 1,200 employees at the plant, Somalis represent approximately 250 or about 20 percent of the total.
It was reported that Shelbyville’s Tyson plant “does have a prayer room to accommodate the needs of Muslim Team Members/” Also reported was that “the Somali’s have a very active legal advocate system and they use it to advance their extremist culture. Don’t expect the Somali’s to assimilate to American culture. They will use our laws to make money and then sue to advance their own Islamist ways.”
One more of the many events that the Bear Creek Ledger’s author Toni provides is one titled, “More Dhimmitude from Minnesota” about a school in that state that bows to Islam but fights the terror threats of Christianity; (the underlined are my words, not Toni’s.)
On April 12, 2007, Toni relates an example provided by Powerline’s Katherine Kersten about installing foot washing basins in the schools of Mpls. Community & Technical College. Kersten reports that the officials of that school say the college, a public institution, has a strict policy of not promoting religion or favoring one religion over another.
Kersten says, “Where Christianity is concerned, the college goes to great lengths to avoid any hint of what the courts call “entanglement” or support of the church. Yet the college is planning to install facilities for Muslims to use in preparing for daily prayers, an apparent first at a public institution in Minnesota.”
Separation of church and state is clearest at the college during the Christmas season. A memo from . President Phil Davis, dated Nov. 28, 2006, exhorted supervisors to banish any public display of holiday cheer: “As we head into the holiday season . all public offices and areas should refrain from displays that may represent to our students, employees or the public that the college is promoting any particular religion.
“They appear to take a very different attitude toward Islam. Welcome and accommodation are the order of the day for the college’s more than 500 Muslim students. The college has worked with local Muslim leaders to ensure that these students’ prayer needs and concerns are adequately addressed, Davis told me.”
According to Wikipedia, Minneapolis Community and Technical College has about 12,000 students. If, as Kersten says, the Muslim population at the College is “more than 500 students”, that means that the Muslims represent about four to five percent of the total enrollment.
What sort of power does the Islamist-Muslim religion have to cause the school to ignore the religious beliefs and practices of more than 11,000 students or about 95 percent of the students while catering to “more than 500 students,” about 4 to 5 percent?
I’d like to pose that question to Governor Pawlenty, a potential presidential candidate in 2012.
Then again, perhaps I should ask the renowned Washington Post columnist, Eugene Robinson, of the National Association of Black Journalists. He associates frequently on the MSNBC shows of Olbermann, Maddow and Matthews and he is also deeply endowed in their perverted bias to matters un-American and anti-Christian.
Guy Rodgers, Executive Director of Act for America quoted Robinson when he dismissed any concern about a “stealthy insinuation of sharia into America’s legal system, because no such thing is happening.”
Rodgers continued, “In a September 21st, column Robinson belittled Newt Gingrich for painting “Islam as the new Red Menace” unveiling the latest, and predictable, name-calling tactic intended to put us in our place-we’re all supposedly engaging in “McCarthyism.”
“Robinson’s arrogance is exceeded only by his ignorance” said Rodgers then also added these examples of what Gingrich was alluding to:
Sharia has penetrated our financial system, in the form of sharia-compliant financial instruments offered by the likes of Citi Group and AIG. In an example of government accommodating sharia, Minnesota offers sharia-compliant mortgages for Muslims.
Muslim prison employees, law enforcement officials, and even a Disneyland employee, have sued for the right to wear the hijab as part of their uniforms.
Muslim parents in New Jersey are demanding private prayer rooms for their children in the PUBLIC elementary schools.
According to a National Public Radio report in 2007, as many as 100,000 Muslims are living in polygamous marriages here in America.
Harvard provided women-only gym hours to accommodate the demands of Muslims
As I have said before in other columns, the danger of continuing in power the liberal Democrats who are hell-bent to install a Socialist form of government is one that we can remedy in the November elections by firing ALL of them. But the creeping incursion of Islamic-Muslimism is another matter.
In another column I equated that problem to a creeping form of cancer that can wipe out the entire country just by swallowing up everything that we allow them. Compliance with their demands HAS GOT TO STOP.
First get rid of the liberal Democrats that encourage the spread of Islam and then get control of the Muslims that perpetrate it and enforce OUR Constitution.
Is Sharia Law Creeping Into American Lives?
By Jerry McConnell Saturday, September 25, 2010
The Muslims downplay the above question by scoffingly answering in the negative despite mounting evidence to the contrary. Of course getting devious answers from Muslims is to be expected; that is, until they are ready to threaten a lawsuit due to being offended.
The February 19, 2010 online Bear Creek Ledger (TN) writer Toni stated “You can see the tell tale signs of creeping Sharia Law (Islamic law) through lawsuits and demands made by Muslims in America on an almost daily basis. Whether it’s the Somali Muslim cabdrivers (Mpls.,MN) who refuse to pick up fares who have been consuming alcohol to disabled people with a service canine or it could be something like Muslims demanding foot baths in a public building, it’s the incremental creep of imposing Sharia Law in the US.”
In the same issue of the Bear Creek Ledger this report was published: “Last year Stephen Coughlin (a Pentagon specialist on Islamic law and extremism) was fired because of Muslim officials in the Pentagon who opposed his work. You think there is no threat in the US from Islamists in this country?’‘
Also, this offering from Brian Mosely of the Shelbyville (TN) Times: “Every major Muslim organization is controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood, a former FBI Agent John Guandolo said, which he said was formed to overthrow America and establish Islamic law.
“They’re having great success of implementing Shariah law, I could give you a thousand examples,’’ Guandolo said.
He said small concessions like installing foot baths, and colleges forced to have separate swimming times for Islamic men and women so not to offend Muslims, are other parts of the strategy.
“The solution to this is you,” Guandolo said. “If you are looking to DHS, the FBI and Congress to solve this . you’re going to be woefully disappointed.”
So even a former FBI Agent agrees with the premise that Sharia is working its way into and through our judicial system at all levels; and their arrogant and selfish demands for attention are being heard and dealt with by people in authoritative positions.
The above mentioned Bear Creek Ledger covered this story on August 02, 2008 from Shelbyville, TN that the large Tyson Foods’ poultry processing plant had pandered to the Somali Muslims employed there by dropping Labor Day as a paid holiday and adding the Islam holiday of Eid al-Fitr which occurs near the end of Ramadan. Out of 1,200 employees at the plant, Somalis represent approximately 250 or about 20 percent of the total.
It was reported that Shelbyville’s Tyson plant “does have a prayer room to accommodate the needs of Muslim Team Members/” Also reported was that “the Somali’s have a very active legal advocate system and they use it to advance their extremist culture. Don’t expect the Somali’s to assimilate to American culture. They will use our laws to make money and then sue to advance their own Islamist ways.”
One more of the many events that the Bear Creek Ledger’s author Toni provides is one titled, “More Dhimmitude from Minnesota” about a school in that state that bows to Islam but fights the terror threats of Christianity; (the underlined are my words, not Toni’s.)
On April 12, 2007, Toni relates an example provided by Powerline’s Katherine Kersten about installing foot washing basins in the schools of Mpls. Community & Technical College. Kersten reports that the officials of that school say the college, a public institution, has a strict policy of not promoting religion or favoring one religion over another.
Kersten says, “Where Christianity is concerned, the college goes to great lengths to avoid any hint of what the courts call “entanglement” or support of the church. Yet the college is planning to install facilities for Muslims to use in preparing for daily prayers, an apparent first at a public institution in Minnesota.”
Separation of church and state is clearest at the college during the Christmas season. A memo from . President Phil Davis, dated Nov. 28, 2006, exhorted supervisors to banish any public display of holiday cheer: “As we head into the holiday season . all public offices and areas should refrain from displays that may represent to our students, employees or the public that the college is promoting any particular religion.
“They appear to take a very different attitude toward Islam. Welcome and accommodation are the order of the day for the college’s more than 500 Muslim students. The college has worked with local Muslim leaders to ensure that these students’ prayer needs and concerns are adequately addressed, Davis told me.”
According to Wikipedia, Minneapolis Community and Technical College has about 12,000 students. If, as Kersten says, the Muslim population at the College is “more than 500 students”, that means that the Muslims represent about four to five percent of the total enrollment.
What sort of power does the Islamist-Muslim religion have to cause the school to ignore the religious beliefs and practices of more than 11,000 students or about 95 percent of the students while catering to “more than 500 students,” about 4 to 5 percent?
I’d like to pose that question to Governor Pawlenty, a potential presidential candidate in 2012.
Then again, perhaps I should ask the renowned Washington Post columnist, Eugene Robinson, of the National Association of Black Journalists. He associates frequently on the MSNBC shows of Olbermann, Maddow and Matthews and he is also deeply endowed in their perverted bias to matters un-American and anti-Christian.
Guy Rodgers, Executive Director of Act for America quoted Robinson when he dismissed any concern about a “stealthy insinuation of sharia into America’s legal system, because no such thing is happening.”
Rodgers continued, “In a September 21st, column Robinson belittled Newt Gingrich for painting “Islam as the new Red Menace” unveiling the latest, and predictable, name-calling tactic intended to put us in our place-we’re all supposedly engaging in “McCarthyism.”
“Robinson’s arrogance is exceeded only by his ignorance” said Rodgers then also added these examples of what Gingrich was alluding to:
Sharia has penetrated our financial system, in the form of sharia-compliant financial instruments offered by the likes of Citi Group and AIG. In an example of government accommodating sharia, Minnesota offers sharia-compliant mortgages for Muslims.
Muslim prison employees, law enforcement officials, and even a Disneyland employee, have sued for the right to wear the hijab as part of their uniforms.
Muslim parents in New Jersey are demanding private prayer rooms for their children in the PUBLIC elementary schools.
According to a National Public Radio report in 2007, as many as 100,000 Muslims are living in polygamous marriages here in America.
Harvard provided women-only gym hours to accommodate the demands of Muslims
As I have said before in other columns, the danger of continuing in power the liberal Democrats who are hell-bent to install a Socialist form of government is one that we can remedy in the November elections by firing ALL of them. But the creeping incursion of Islamic-Muslimism is another matter.
In another column I equated that problem to a creeping form of cancer that can wipe out the entire country just by swallowing up everything that we allow them. Compliance with their demands HAS GOT TO STOP.
First get rid of the liberal Democrats that encourage the spread of Islam and then get control of the Muslims that perpetrate it and enforce OUR Constitution.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
In case you do not think your telephone calls count......
(At least one party is listening to us!)
Republicans to reclaim marriage and life issues on their agenda!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Great news!
So many of you emailed the Republican House leader's office last week urging the party not to backtrack on its commitment to life, liberty and marriage that you brought the email servers down. We have just been informed that the Republican leadership WILL now include references to marriage and federal funding of abortion in their election agenda.
Thank you for acting so promptly! Before your action this was a dead issue -- you helped turn attitudes around, a great victory.
But now we must keep the momentum, so we're asking you to do two things today:
1. Commit to participate in the PRAY and ACT campaign for forty days of prayer and fasting (if possible) beginning today, September 20 through October 30. CLICK HERE to download a Pray and ACT guide to get you started.
2. Provide your personal financial support to help fuel this Manhattan Declaration movement. This is a very low overhead operation with no staff. But we need funds to keep the website operating. Our resources are very low at the moment and we very much need your help. Visit the Manhattan Declaration website to make a donation.
Help us encourage a growing, vibrant movement of Christians from across denominational and confessional lines, to impact our society with Christian truth.
Thank you and God Bless you,
Timothy George
Republicans to reclaim marriage and life issues on their agenda!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Great news!
So many of you emailed the Republican House leader's office last week urging the party not to backtrack on its commitment to life, liberty and marriage that you brought the email servers down. We have just been informed that the Republican leadership WILL now include references to marriage and federal funding of abortion in their election agenda.
Thank you for acting so promptly! Before your action this was a dead issue -- you helped turn attitudes around, a great victory.
But now we must keep the momentum, so we're asking you to do two things today:
1. Commit to participate in the PRAY and ACT campaign for forty days of prayer and fasting (if possible) beginning today, September 20 through October 30. CLICK HERE to download a Pray and ACT guide to get you started.
2. Provide your personal financial support to help fuel this Manhattan Declaration movement. This is a very low overhead operation with no staff. But we need funds to keep the website operating. Our resources are very low at the moment and we very much need your help. Visit the Manhattan Declaration website to make a donation.
Help us encourage a growing, vibrant movement of Christians from across denominational and confessional lines, to impact our society with Christian truth.
Thank you and God Bless you,
Timothy George
Why would OBuma reference GOD, when he thinks he is the Messiah
September 21, 2010
OBAMA OMITS "CREATOR" FROM SPEECH
On September 15, President Barack Obama addressed the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute's 33rd Annual Awards. In his remarks, he made reference to the Declaration of Independence. He said, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, endowed with certain inalienable rights: life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the president's words: There are several errors here, though only one that really matters. On a small scale, Jefferson chose "unalienable" instead of "inalienable," and following the word "rights" there is no colon: instead it should read, "that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness." What really matters, however, is the omission of any reference to God: after "equal" it should read, "that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights…." Some are blaming the president for this error, but it is his speech writers, and those who vetted his address, who are to blame. The prepared remarks, as released by the White House, omit the word "Creator." Since this got by so many in the White House, it makes us wonder whether only incompetence was at work. While Obama may be given a pass, it is striking nonetheless that this omission got by a former constitutional law professor. There are four references to God in the Declaration. God is the author of the "laws of nature and nature's God"; he is the "Creator" who "endowed" us with "unalienable rights"; he is "the Supreme Judge of the world"; and he provides "the protection of Divine Providence." As a former professor of political science, I made sure my students understood this, but evidently none of those who write or vet the president's speeches learned this in college. They should pay more attention, especially given the suspicion that Obama likes his religion lite.
OBAMA OMITS "CREATOR" FROM SPEECH
On September 15, President Barack Obama addressed the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute's 33rd Annual Awards. In his remarks, he made reference to the Declaration of Independence. He said, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, endowed with certain inalienable rights: life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the president's words: There are several errors here, though only one that really matters. On a small scale, Jefferson chose "unalienable" instead of "inalienable," and following the word "rights" there is no colon: instead it should read, "that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness." What really matters, however, is the omission of any reference to God: after "equal" it should read, "that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights…." Some are blaming the president for this error, but it is his speech writers, and those who vetted his address, who are to blame. The prepared remarks, as released by the White House, omit the word "Creator." Since this got by so many in the White House, it makes us wonder whether only incompetence was at work. While Obama may be given a pass, it is striking nonetheless that this omission got by a former constitutional law professor. There are four references to God in the Declaration. God is the author of the "laws of nature and nature's God"; he is the "Creator" who "endowed" us with "unalienable rights"; he is "the Supreme Judge of the world"; and he provides "the protection of Divine Providence." As a former professor of political science, I made sure my students understood this, but evidently none of those who write or vet the president's speeches learned this in college. They should pay more attention, especially given the suspicion that Obama likes his religion lite.
Saturday, September 11, 2010
I have ceased answering vitriols on the other sites
Those on the other Topix sites that I still post on, but ceased reading, or answering ,are probably still attacking my posts. Too bad, so sad. I am feeling very good, and my spirit is feeling great since "ignore", has been in place at those sites. I will not post their names, as they are insignificant, and only attack the posters that are catholics, and Conservatives, never the substance of the post.
All of you conservatives, both of the catholic religion, and in politics, get out and help change what the liberals are doing to our religion, and country. Even if you give one hour a week on the telephone, or stuff envelopes, you will be doing your part. Just this week I have gotten 4 people to register as Republicans, and that was in just one hour. All of the lives of those that have protected us, and our country, thank you. If nothing else, make sure that those that have ignored our voices, hear them loud and clear in November.
God bless you all
All of you conservatives, both of the catholic religion, and in politics, get out and help change what the liberals are doing to our religion, and country. Even if you give one hour a week on the telephone, or stuff envelopes, you will be doing your part. Just this week I have gotten 4 people to register as Republicans, and that was in just one hour. All of the lives of those that have protected us, and our country, thank you. If nothing else, make sure that those that have ignored our voices, hear them loud and clear in November.
God bless you all
Obuma, has awakened the moral majority voter, and the great senior voters.
Grim outlook for Democrats puts House up for grabs
WASHINGTON – Their control of the House in peril, Democrats are scratching to survive in races all across the country. Disgruntled voters, a sluggish economy and vanishing enthusiasm for President Barack Obama have put 75 seats or more — the vast majority held by Democrats — at risk of changing hands.
The party could become a victim of its own successes during the past two elections, when candidates were swept into power by antipathy for President George W. Bush and ardor for Obama. Now, eight weeks from Election Day, the Democrats are bracing for the virtual certainty of lost House seats and scrambling to hold back a wave that could hand the GOP the 40 it needs to command a majority
Obama, grasping for a way to turn the tide, on Wednesday plans to propose $30 billion in new investment tax breaks for businesses to go along with tens of billions in spending he called for on Labor Day to invigorate the slow recovery. But even if Congress acts on the requests — a long shot in a highly charged political season — there's little time left for Democrats to salvage their election chances.
With Obama's popularity slumping and the party demoralized, dozens of first- and second-term Democrats as well as longer-serving congressmen who haven't faced serious challenges in years are toiling to hold onto their jobs in places that tend to prefer Republicans. And polls show independent voters leaning toward the GOP.
When asked which party they want to control Congress, voters are split or leaning toward Republicans, national surveys say. Perhaps even more ominously for Democrats, voters are overwhelmingly sour about national issues, especially the economy.
More than 60 percent said the nation was in a state of decline and on the wrong track in the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, in which voters likely to turn out in November gave Republicans a gaping 9-point edge when asked which party they wanted to control Congress.
Much can change between now and Election Day, and a GOP House takeover is far from sure.
And most voters have yet to focus on the contests.
Still, Republicans are confidently predicting Democrats' defeat.
"Republicans have the intensity," said Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., head recruiter for House GOP candidates. "The map is growing by the day."
Democrats acknowledge the strong headwinds but counter that, with a solid fundraising advantage over Republicans and years worth of preparation for what they always knew would be a brutal election.
The current breakdown is 255 Democrats, 178 Republicans and two vacancies that appear likely to be won by the GOP.
Democratic incumbents are at risk from California to New York and particularly in the unemployment-stricken Rust Belt, where six in Pennsylvania and five in Ohio face stiff challenges, including in Arizona, Florida, Illinois and Indiana, and two in Alabama, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Wisconsin and Virginia.
Among the most vulnerable Democratic incumbents are freshmen Reps. Betsy Markey of Colorado, Steve Driehaus of Ohio and Tom Perriello of Virginia.
At the same time, a handful of influential, senior Democrats — including Missouri's Ike Skelton, the chair of the Armed Services Committee, and South Carolinian John Spratt, the Budget chairman — are facing formidable re-election battles.
Reps. Allen Boyd of Florida and Earl Pomeroy of North Dakota — and Paul Kanjorski of Pennsylvania and Chet Edwards of Texas — veterans of 20 years or more — also face tough fights.
And Democrats are facing tight races to hang on to most of the 20 seats where the incumbent retired, left or is pursuing another office — typically the most difficult for a party to defend. Those include two each in Arkansas and Tennessee, and long-shots in Louisiana, Kansas and upstate New York, where Rep. Eric Massa resigned in March amid an investigation into whether he sexually harassed male staffers.
WASHINGTON – Their control of the House in peril, Democrats are scratching to survive in races all across the country. Disgruntled voters, a sluggish economy and vanishing enthusiasm for President Barack Obama have put 75 seats or more — the vast majority held by Democrats — at risk of changing hands.
The party could become a victim of its own successes during the past two elections, when candidates were swept into power by antipathy for President George W. Bush and ardor for Obama. Now, eight weeks from Election Day, the Democrats are bracing for the virtual certainty of lost House seats and scrambling to hold back a wave that could hand the GOP the 40 it needs to command a majority
Obama, grasping for a way to turn the tide, on Wednesday plans to propose $30 billion in new investment tax breaks for businesses to go along with tens of billions in spending he called for on Labor Day to invigorate the slow recovery. But even if Congress acts on the requests — a long shot in a highly charged political season — there's little time left for Democrats to salvage their election chances.
With Obama's popularity slumping and the party demoralized, dozens of first- and second-term Democrats as well as longer-serving congressmen who haven't faced serious challenges in years are toiling to hold onto their jobs in places that tend to prefer Republicans. And polls show independent voters leaning toward the GOP.
When asked which party they want to control Congress, voters are split or leaning toward Republicans, national surveys say. Perhaps even more ominously for Democrats, voters are overwhelmingly sour about national issues, especially the economy.
More than 60 percent said the nation was in a state of decline and on the wrong track in the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, in which voters likely to turn out in November gave Republicans a gaping 9-point edge when asked which party they wanted to control Congress.
Much can change between now and Election Day, and a GOP House takeover is far from sure.
And most voters have yet to focus on the contests.
Still, Republicans are confidently predicting Democrats' defeat.
"Republicans have the intensity," said Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., head recruiter for House GOP candidates. "The map is growing by the day."
Democrats acknowledge the strong headwinds but counter that, with a solid fundraising advantage over Republicans and years worth of preparation for what they always knew would be a brutal election.
The current breakdown is 255 Democrats, 178 Republicans and two vacancies that appear likely to be won by the GOP.
Democratic incumbents are at risk from California to New York and particularly in the unemployment-stricken Rust Belt, where six in Pennsylvania and five in Ohio face stiff challenges, including in Arizona, Florida, Illinois and Indiana, and two in Alabama, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Wisconsin and Virginia.
Among the most vulnerable Democratic incumbents are freshmen Reps. Betsy Markey of Colorado, Steve Driehaus of Ohio and Tom Perriello of Virginia.
At the same time, a handful of influential, senior Democrats — including Missouri's Ike Skelton, the chair of the Armed Services Committee, and South Carolinian John Spratt, the Budget chairman — are facing formidable re-election battles.
Reps. Allen Boyd of Florida and Earl Pomeroy of North Dakota — and Paul Kanjorski of Pennsylvania and Chet Edwards of Texas — veterans of 20 years or more — also face tough fights.
And Democrats are facing tight races to hang on to most of the 20 seats where the incumbent retired, left or is pursuing another office — typically the most difficult for a party to defend. Those include two each in Arkansas and Tennessee, and long-shots in Louisiana, Kansas and upstate New York, where Rep. Eric Massa resigned in March amid an investigation into whether he sexually harassed male staffers.
Thursday, September 9, 2010
More Gore/Obama garbage, that should never be recycled
So....following pretty hard evidence (a few short months ago) that Global Warming is based more on fiction than fact.....morons across the country have instituted using computer chips to monitor how efficiently Americans are recycling their garbage – by, get this: hiding MICROCHIPS on recycling pails! Where will the lunacy end? This country is turning into a lame version of the USSR, circa 1976, with the Obama Black House being the Kremlin. How long will it take before Mayor Buttberg has these on the streets of NYC?? Can you even believe this:
Cities Increasingly Turn to 'Trash Police' to Enforce Recycling Laws
By John Brandon
Published September 08, 2010 | FoxNews.com
They don't carry guns and there's no police academy to train them, but if you don't recycle your trash properly, they can walk up your driveway and give you a $100 ticket.
They know what's in your trash, they know what you eat, they know how often you bring your recycles to the curb -- and they may be coming to your town soon. That is, if they're not already there.
In a growing number of cities across the U.S., local governments are placing computer chips in recycling bins to collect data on refuse disposal, and then fining residents who don't participate in recycling efforts and forcing others into educational programs meant to instill respect for the environment.
From Charlotte, N.C., to Cleveland, Ohio, from Boise, Idaho, to Flint, Mich., the green police are spreading out. And that alarms some privacy advocates who are asking: Should local governments have the right to monitor how you divide your paper cups from your plastic forks? Is that really the role of government?
In Dayton, Ohio, chips placed in recycle bins transmit information to garbage trucks to keep track of whether residents are recycling -- a program that incensed Arizona Sen. John McCain, who pointed out that the city was awarded half a million dollars in stimulus money for it.
Harry Lewis, a computer science professor at Harvard University and a noted privacy expert, cried foul about the "spy chips," which are already in use in several cities and are often funded by government stimulus programs. He noted that cattle farmers use the same chips to tell if Betsy the Cow has generated her milk quota for the day.
"It's treating people like cattle!" Lewis cried. Are people "supposed to produce recyclable waste, rather than certain quantities of milk"? What, he asked, happens if you don't generate enough?
But there's a clear upside to the technology, said Michael Kanellos, editor in chief of GreenTech Media.
"By tagging bins, haulers can weigh garbage, and weighing brings accountability. Consumers that diligently recycle will likely become eligible for rebates in some jurisdictions," he wrote recently. "Conversely, those who throw away excessive amounts of trash may face steeper tariffs in the future ... recycling, meanwhile, will go from being something that gives the consumer peace of mind to a way to reduce household bills."
Best and worse case scenarios
Dayton City Manager Thomas Ritchie said the city is using the chips to aid marketing campaigns, not to punish uncooperative citizens. "The data will be used to identify which residents participate in the recycling program, at what rate do they participate and the average weight of each participant’s recycling," he said.
Charlotte, N.C., also uses trash tags, and it gathers similar information. City spokeswoman Charita Curtis said the city uses the data from the tags -- low-power radio frequency IDs (RFIDs) -- to find which areas aren't recycling as often and to start education initiatives there. The data is not shared outside of the city, she stressed, and it's not used to track down specific residents. The RFID program is also voluntary.
“We can do targeted recycling education for areas with low participation, providing information on how to recycle, what can be recycled, the importance of recycling to encourage more recycling participation,” Curtis said. “Some residents may not participate simply because they don't know how to and we'd provide that education in hopes that they start recycling or recycle more.”
But there's no volunteering in Cleveland, where the trash police can fine you $100 for not recycling.
Cleveland will run reports on who fails to recycle consistently, and then it will send out the green cops, waste collection commissioner Ronnie Owens told ABC News.
In late August, Cleveland's city council voted to roll out the tags to 25,000 residents, and it may extend the program to the entire city. It costs $30 per ton to haul away trash, but the city gets paid $26 per ton to recycle it. The program should generate about $170,000 annually in revenue for the city, the Washington Times reported.
But the new equipment and bins cost $2.5 million, so it will take about 15 years to recoup the costs of deploying the technology. Cleveland officials did not immediately respond to requests for more information, but reports indicate that officials will know when you bring your trash to the curb -- and may go through your trash to ensure you're recycling properly.
Right to trash privacy
Privacy experts, meanwhile, are up in arms about how these chips are being used to collect data.
Lewis said Cleveland residents need to ask whether sacrificing their privacy -- having the government snoop through their trash -- is worth the environmental benefit. If not, he said, they should start a referendum to overthrow the ruling. Part of the issue, he said, is that the system is easy to fool: A neighbor, he said, might dump your recycling into his bin to avoid fines.
The trash police could unfairly give the worst citizens a pass, Lewis added. He warned that those generating the most waste by using bottled water instead of tap water (plastic water bottles are a major source of trash) could earn credits for recycling all those wasteful bottles -- a reward for a poor choice, in other words.
Mari Frank, a privacy expert and attorney, questioned the openness of the data. "It clearly looks like the reason for the RFID is to collect money, but the privacy issues are paramount," she said.
"I believe these RFIDs are using technology to violate our Fourth Amendment rights of search and seizure," she said. "The community should have the right to informed consent."
What comes next?
Lewis says the solution lies in improving education and awareness, not punishment. He said economic incentives work for recycling -- getting money back for aluminum cans and newspapers is a proven tactic.
Frank was skeptical about the future potential exploitation of the RFID trash collection data, and questioned whether the next step might be to attach a GPS receiver to bins to see where residents put them and how they are used. Lewis wondered whether a city might use trash collection data for other, more invasive purposes.
"If the government wanted to know our drinking habits by neighborhood or household -- purely for 'public health reasons,' of course -- it could mandate RFIDs on liquor bottles and reprogram the scanners to collect data on where the most vodka is being consumed," he said.
"And it's not just the government either. Suppose a major distiller went to your town and offered to pay to collect data about who was throwing out which kinds of bottles. They might be prepared to chip the bottles without being told they had to -- and your town might be able to use the new revenue source to hold down its tax rate."
Cities Increasingly Turn to 'Trash Police' to Enforce Recycling Laws
By John Brandon
Published September 08, 2010 | FoxNews.com
They don't carry guns and there's no police academy to train them, but if you don't recycle your trash properly, they can walk up your driveway and give you a $100 ticket.
They know what's in your trash, they know what you eat, they know how often you bring your recycles to the curb -- and they may be coming to your town soon. That is, if they're not already there.
In a growing number of cities across the U.S., local governments are placing computer chips in recycling bins to collect data on refuse disposal, and then fining residents who don't participate in recycling efforts and forcing others into educational programs meant to instill respect for the environment.
From Charlotte, N.C., to Cleveland, Ohio, from Boise, Idaho, to Flint, Mich., the green police are spreading out. And that alarms some privacy advocates who are asking: Should local governments have the right to monitor how you divide your paper cups from your plastic forks? Is that really the role of government?
In Dayton, Ohio, chips placed in recycle bins transmit information to garbage trucks to keep track of whether residents are recycling -- a program that incensed Arizona Sen. John McCain, who pointed out that the city was awarded half a million dollars in stimulus money for it.
Harry Lewis, a computer science professor at Harvard University and a noted privacy expert, cried foul about the "spy chips," which are already in use in several cities and are often funded by government stimulus programs. He noted that cattle farmers use the same chips to tell if Betsy the Cow has generated her milk quota for the day.
"It's treating people like cattle!" Lewis cried. Are people "supposed to produce recyclable waste, rather than certain quantities of milk"? What, he asked, happens if you don't generate enough?
But there's a clear upside to the technology, said Michael Kanellos, editor in chief of GreenTech Media.
"By tagging bins, haulers can weigh garbage, and weighing brings accountability. Consumers that diligently recycle will likely become eligible for rebates in some jurisdictions," he wrote recently. "Conversely, those who throw away excessive amounts of trash may face steeper tariffs in the future ... recycling, meanwhile, will go from being something that gives the consumer peace of mind to a way to reduce household bills."
Best and worse case scenarios
Dayton City Manager Thomas Ritchie said the city is using the chips to aid marketing campaigns, not to punish uncooperative citizens. "The data will be used to identify which residents participate in the recycling program, at what rate do they participate and the average weight of each participant’s recycling," he said.
Charlotte, N.C., also uses trash tags, and it gathers similar information. City spokeswoman Charita Curtis said the city uses the data from the tags -- low-power radio frequency IDs (RFIDs) -- to find which areas aren't recycling as often and to start education initiatives there. The data is not shared outside of the city, she stressed, and it's not used to track down specific residents. The RFID program is also voluntary.
“We can do targeted recycling education for areas with low participation, providing information on how to recycle, what can be recycled, the importance of recycling to encourage more recycling participation,” Curtis said. “Some residents may not participate simply because they don't know how to and we'd provide that education in hopes that they start recycling or recycle more.”
But there's no volunteering in Cleveland, where the trash police can fine you $100 for not recycling.
Cleveland will run reports on who fails to recycle consistently, and then it will send out the green cops, waste collection commissioner Ronnie Owens told ABC News.
In late August, Cleveland's city council voted to roll out the tags to 25,000 residents, and it may extend the program to the entire city. It costs $30 per ton to haul away trash, but the city gets paid $26 per ton to recycle it. The program should generate about $170,000 annually in revenue for the city, the Washington Times reported.
But the new equipment and bins cost $2.5 million, so it will take about 15 years to recoup the costs of deploying the technology. Cleveland officials did not immediately respond to requests for more information, but reports indicate that officials will know when you bring your trash to the curb -- and may go through your trash to ensure you're recycling properly.
Right to trash privacy
Privacy experts, meanwhile, are up in arms about how these chips are being used to collect data.
Lewis said Cleveland residents need to ask whether sacrificing their privacy -- having the government snoop through their trash -- is worth the environmental benefit. If not, he said, they should start a referendum to overthrow the ruling. Part of the issue, he said, is that the system is easy to fool: A neighbor, he said, might dump your recycling into his bin to avoid fines.
The trash police could unfairly give the worst citizens a pass, Lewis added. He warned that those generating the most waste by using bottled water instead of tap water (plastic water bottles are a major source of trash) could earn credits for recycling all those wasteful bottles -- a reward for a poor choice, in other words.
Mari Frank, a privacy expert and attorney, questioned the openness of the data. "It clearly looks like the reason for the RFID is to collect money, but the privacy issues are paramount," she said.
"I believe these RFIDs are using technology to violate our Fourth Amendment rights of search and seizure," she said. "The community should have the right to informed consent."
What comes next?
Lewis says the solution lies in improving education and awareness, not punishment. He said economic incentives work for recycling -- getting money back for aluminum cans and newspapers is a proven tactic.
Frank was skeptical about the future potential exploitation of the RFID trash collection data, and questioned whether the next step might be to attach a GPS receiver to bins to see where residents put them and how they are used. Lewis wondered whether a city might use trash collection data for other, more invasive purposes.
"If the government wanted to know our drinking habits by neighborhood or household -- purely for 'public health reasons,' of course -- it could mandate RFIDs on liquor bottles and reprogram the scanners to collect data on where the most vodka is being consumed," he said.
"And it's not just the government either. Suppose a major distiller went to your town and offered to pay to collect data about who was throwing out which kinds of bottles. They might be prepared to chip the bottles without being told they had to -- and your town might be able to use the new revenue source to hold down its tax rate."
Saturday, September 4, 2010
Modernism and its falseness
Slowly but surely the "Spirit of Vatican II" is plodding toward a slow death. Oh, it's not going quietly; it still has a legion of "followers", but the outcome is inevitable. The Pope is doing his part, but so are the enlistees in the Church Militant. Tom Roeser has a good post, mostly concerning one of those Militants, Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV:
Vital Immanence
However, this Agnosticism is only the negative part of the system of the Modernist: the positive side of it consists in what they call vital immanence. This is how they advance from one to the other. Religion, whether natural or supernatural, must, like every other fact, admit of some explanation. But when Natural theology has been destroyed, the road to revelation closed through the rejection of the arguments of credibility, and all external revelation absolutely denied, it is clear that this explanation will be sought in vain outside man himself. It must, therefore, be looked for in man; and since religion is a form of life, the explanation must certainly be found in the life of man. Hence the principle of religious immanence is formulated. Moreover, the first actuation, so to say, of every vital phenomenon, and religion, as has been said, belongs to this category, is due to a certain necessity or impulsion; but it has its origin, speaking more particularly of life, in a movement of the heart, which movement is called a sentiment. Therefore, since God is the object of religion, we must conclude that faith, which is the basis and the foundation of all religion, consists in a sentiment which originates from a need of the divine. This need of the divine, which is experienced only in special and favourable circumstances, cannot, of itself, appertain to the domain of consciousness; it is at first latent within the consciousness, or, to borrow a term from modern philosophy, in the subconsciousness, where also its roots lies hidden and undetected.
Should anyone ask how it is that this need of the divine which man experiences within himself grows up into a religion, the Modernists reply thus: Science and history, they say, are confined within two limits, the one external, namely, the visible world, the other internal, which is consciousness. When one or other of these boundaries has been reached, there can be no further progress, for beyond is the unknowable. In presence of this unknowable, whether it is outside man and beyond the visible world of nature, or lies hidden within in the subconsciousness, the need of the divine, according to the principles of Fideism, excites in a soul with a propensity towards religion a certain special sentiment, without any previous advertence of the mind: and this sentiment possesses, implied within itself both as its own object and as its intrinsic cause, the reality of the divine, and in a way unites man with God. It is this sentiment to which Modernists give the name of faith, and this it is which they consider the beginning of religion.
But we have not yet come to the end of their philosophy, or, to speak more accurately, their folly. For Modernism finds in this sentiment not faith only, but with and in faith, as they understand it, revelation, they say, abides. For what more can one require for revelation? Is not that religious sentiment which is perceptible in the consciousness revelation, or at least the beginning of revelation? Nay, is not God Himself, as He manifests Himself to the soul, indistinctly it is true, in this same religious sense, revelation? And they add: Since God is both the object and the cause of faith, this revelation is at the same time of God and from God; that is, God is both the revealer and the revealed.
Hence, Venerable Brethren, springs that ridiculous proposition of the Modernists, that every religion, according to the different aspect under which it is viewed, must be considered as both natural and supernatural. Hence it is that they make consciousness and revelation synonymous. Hence the law, according to which religious consciousness is given as the universal rule, to be put on an equal footing with revelation, and to which all must submit, even the supreme authority of the Church, whether in its teaching capacity, or in that of legislator in the province of sacred liturgy or discipline.
Therefore the religious sentiment, which through the agency of vital immanence emerges from the lurking places of the subconsciousness, is the germ of all religion, and the explanation of everything that has been or ever will be in any religion. The sentiment, which was at first only rudimentary and almost formless, gradually matured, under the influence of that mysterious principle from which it originated, with the progress of human life, of which, as has been said, it is a form. This, then, is the origin of all religion, even supernatural religion; it is only a development of this religious sentiment. Nor is the Catholic religion an exception; it is quite on a level with the rest; for it was engendered, by the process of vital immanence, in the consciousness of Christ, who was a man of the choicest nature, whose like has never been, nor will be.- Those who hear these audacious, these sacrilegious assertions, are simply shocked! And yet, Venerable Brethren, these are not merely the foolish babblings of infidels. There are many Catholics, yea, and priests too, who say these things openly; and they boast that they are going to reform the Church by these ravings! There is no question now of the old error, by which a sort of right to the supernatural order was claimed for the human nature. We have gone far beyond that: we have reached the point when it is affirmed that our most holy religion, in the man Christ as in us, emanated from nature spontaneously and entirely. Than this there is surely nothing more destructive of the whole supernatural order. Wherefore the Vatican Council most justly decreed: "If anyone says that man cannot be raised by God to a knowledge and perfection which surpasses nature, but that he can and should, by his own efforts and by a constant development, attain finally to the possession of all truth and good, let him be anathema" (De Revel., can. 3).
Vital Immanence
However, this Agnosticism is only the negative part of the system of the Modernist: the positive side of it consists in what they call vital immanence. This is how they advance from one to the other. Religion, whether natural or supernatural, must, like every other fact, admit of some explanation. But when Natural theology has been destroyed, the road to revelation closed through the rejection of the arguments of credibility, and all external revelation absolutely denied, it is clear that this explanation will be sought in vain outside man himself. It must, therefore, be looked for in man; and since religion is a form of life, the explanation must certainly be found in the life of man. Hence the principle of religious immanence is formulated. Moreover, the first actuation, so to say, of every vital phenomenon, and religion, as has been said, belongs to this category, is due to a certain necessity or impulsion; but it has its origin, speaking more particularly of life, in a movement of the heart, which movement is called a sentiment. Therefore, since God is the object of religion, we must conclude that faith, which is the basis and the foundation of all religion, consists in a sentiment which originates from a need of the divine. This need of the divine, which is experienced only in special and favourable circumstances, cannot, of itself, appertain to the domain of consciousness; it is at first latent within the consciousness, or, to borrow a term from modern philosophy, in the subconsciousness, where also its roots lies hidden and undetected.
Should anyone ask how it is that this need of the divine which man experiences within himself grows up into a religion, the Modernists reply thus: Science and history, they say, are confined within two limits, the one external, namely, the visible world, the other internal, which is consciousness. When one or other of these boundaries has been reached, there can be no further progress, for beyond is the unknowable. In presence of this unknowable, whether it is outside man and beyond the visible world of nature, or lies hidden within in the subconsciousness, the need of the divine, according to the principles of Fideism, excites in a soul with a propensity towards religion a certain special sentiment, without any previous advertence of the mind: and this sentiment possesses, implied within itself both as its own object and as its intrinsic cause, the reality of the divine, and in a way unites man with God. It is this sentiment to which Modernists give the name of faith, and this it is which they consider the beginning of religion.
But we have not yet come to the end of their philosophy, or, to speak more accurately, their folly. For Modernism finds in this sentiment not faith only, but with and in faith, as they understand it, revelation, they say, abides. For what more can one require for revelation? Is not that religious sentiment which is perceptible in the consciousness revelation, or at least the beginning of revelation? Nay, is not God Himself, as He manifests Himself to the soul, indistinctly it is true, in this same religious sense, revelation? And they add: Since God is both the object and the cause of faith, this revelation is at the same time of God and from God; that is, God is both the revealer and the revealed.
Hence, Venerable Brethren, springs that ridiculous proposition of the Modernists, that every religion, according to the different aspect under which it is viewed, must be considered as both natural and supernatural. Hence it is that they make consciousness and revelation synonymous. Hence the law, according to which religious consciousness is given as the universal rule, to be put on an equal footing with revelation, and to which all must submit, even the supreme authority of the Church, whether in its teaching capacity, or in that of legislator in the province of sacred liturgy or discipline.
Therefore the religious sentiment, which through the agency of vital immanence emerges from the lurking places of the subconsciousness, is the germ of all religion, and the explanation of everything that has been or ever will be in any religion. The sentiment, which was at first only rudimentary and almost formless, gradually matured, under the influence of that mysterious principle from which it originated, with the progress of human life, of which, as has been said, it is a form. This, then, is the origin of all religion, even supernatural religion; it is only a development of this religious sentiment. Nor is the Catholic religion an exception; it is quite on a level with the rest; for it was engendered, by the process of vital immanence, in the consciousness of Christ, who was a man of the choicest nature, whose like has never been, nor will be.- Those who hear these audacious, these sacrilegious assertions, are simply shocked! And yet, Venerable Brethren, these are not merely the foolish babblings of infidels. There are many Catholics, yea, and priests too, who say these things openly; and they boast that they are going to reform the Church by these ravings! There is no question now of the old error, by which a sort of right to the supernatural order was claimed for the human nature. We have gone far beyond that: we have reached the point when it is affirmed that our most holy religion, in the man Christ as in us, emanated from nature spontaneously and entirely. Than this there is surely nothing more destructive of the whole supernatural order. Wherefore the Vatican Council most justly decreed: "If anyone says that man cannot be raised by God to a knowledge and perfection which surpasses nature, but that he can and should, by his own efforts and by a constant development, attain finally to the possession of all truth and good, let him be anathema" (De Revel., can. 3).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)