Death of America: States rights trumped by Sharia rights

The Kansas legislation preventing Sharia or any other foreign laws being taken into account in the rendering of legal decisions follows similar actions by other states, with more states still in the process.  While the bill does not specifically mention Sharia, muslim organisations have predictably reacted by accusing Kansas of ‘discrimination’ and are threatening legal action.

A federal appeals court blocked similar Oklahoma legislation as being “unconstitutional”.  If the American Constitution gives foreign legislation equal standing with American, then I would be greatly surprised.  The answer is perhaps that Sharia Law has religious connotations, and religious rights must be protected.  If, however, foreign religious “rights” are allowed to ride roughshod over legislation passed by democratically-elected state legislatures, then what is the point of having a constitution, or even an America? 

The American Constitution was created by White Christians to govern the relationship between themselves and their government.  It doesn’t work well for other people and religions, and particularly not for a religion which regards democracy as contrary to the rules which govern every aspect of the lives of its practitioners.  For anyone to have expected otherwise is nonsensical.

The notion that America has had little difficulty “integrating” muslims as compared to Europe doesn’t make sense, unless one mistakes accommodation for integration.  Wherever they have immigrated, we often hear stories of muslim employees and the parents of muslim school-children demanding special meals, prayer breaks, and specialised washroom facilities at great cost and disruption to employers and to the taxpayer. 

America is no exception, and to suggest that “…America has had no trouble integrating Muslims into its society” works only because of massive, well-organised campaigns, financed from abroad,  designed to paint those objecting to the importation of such difficult and aggravating foreigners as Islamophobes, racists, haters, and so on.  Liberal and media establishments have chimed in, with ‘lawfare” increasingly being used to stifle free speech.

I am appalled by police and FBI efforts to create “false plots” by trapping people into “artificially created radical groups.”  I have never accepted that as legitimate police activity, and in this case it creates martyrs out of muslim radicals, providing focal points and giving an aura of credibility to their claims.  People so obviously unsuited to live in White European society should quite simply never have been allowed into our White homelands in the first place.

The suggestion that “…the White House is faced with the need to find a compromise that would prevent a social split and whatever consequences it might entail” is wrong and misleading, in my opinion.  The more America yields to the ever-increasing demands of its muslim invaders, the more demands they will make.

Muslims cannot be assimilated except at immense costs in terms of accommodation and social upheaval, ultimately leading to the overthrow of our culture and way of life and our forced conversion to the muslim religion or “dhimmitude”, i.e. slavery.

Who in their right mind would expect us to put up with that? 

If muslims don’t appreciate their White, Christian benefactors then they can go back where they came from, and take their honour killings, “no-go zones”, and female genital mutilations with them.

Jeff Goodall.

Kansas outlaws Sharia

Voice of Russia
Vladimir Gladkov: May 29th, 2012

Kansas Governor Sam Brownback has signed a bill prohibiting local courts from relying on foreign laws in decision-making if they fail to guarantee the rights guaranteed by the legislation of the United States.

Although the move does make sense, the Kansas Muslim community has slammed it as discrimination and threatened to sue. Unlike Europe, America has had no trouble integrating Muslims into its society. Yet, the unexpected controversy over the Kansas bill is an alarming signal to the authorities. Ever since the bill was motioned, there’s been a loud voice of discontent from the local Muslims as they sought to press Governor Brownback into vetoing it. The authors of the law have brushed off accusations of religious discrimination as groundless for the bill makes no mention whatsoever of the Sharia norms.

Most analysts are confident, however, that forbidding the use of Sharia in America is precisely what the new bill actually aims at. What’s more, some U.S. states already have similar laws and several others intend to follow suit. Oklahoma became the first state to pass a bill banning courts from considering the Islamic Sharia law in their judgments. Later, a federal appeals court blocked the Oklahoma bill as unconstitutional.

While the majority of American Muslims are law-abiding citizens, incidents like the shooting spree staged in November 2009 by a U.S. army officer, Major Nidal Malik Hasan who killed 13 people at the Fort Hood base in Texas, prove that the Islamist propaganda sometimes hits the target.

Incidentally, some of the authorities’ actions may potentially fuel tension between Muslims and non-Muslims. Suffice it to recall a Muslim surveillance program launched by the New York police in cooperation with the CIA, notwithstanding the fact that the agency whose task is to gather intelligence data abroad has no permission to spy on Americans inside the country. Or take the notorious false plots hatched by the FBI to trap people into artificially created radical groups. Caliph al-Akili, a resident of Pittsburg, sent letters to human rights organizations before being arrested, in which he said that he had fallen victim to a police conspiracy.

The recent revelations by a former FBI informer, Craig Montell, have caused quite a fuss.  The FBI used him to spy on New York Muslims and weave artificial terrorist conspiracies. The Guardian newspaper quotes him as saying that he was forced into having sex with Muslim women in order to record their conversations.

Such tactics is dangerous as it plays into the hands of real Islamists. On the other hand, the example of Europe shows that complete tolerance may be even worse. So the White House is faced with the need to find a compromise that would prevent a social split and whatever consequences it might entail.

See original here.

See the Wikipedia definition of ‘dhimmitude’ here.

Read about the two “Barbary Wars” engaged in by the U.S. to protect American shipping from muslim pirates in the Mediterranean during the early 1800’s here.

See “Muslims and Jihad: Time for the West to wake up” here, “Muslims reject democracy and integration” here, “Welfare and warfare: Muslim immigrants in Sweden” here, and “Informal ‘Honor Police’ Use Taxis as Patrol Cars” here.

Comments are closed.