Denmark: Lars hedegaard Acquitted!

From The American Thinker:

January 31, 2011


Breaking news: Lars Hedegaard Acquitted! (Updated with victory statement)

Andrew G. Bostom

Just received the following e-mail from Lars Hedegaard:





"I was acquitted. A major victory for free speech!"





For background on Lars Hedegaard and hbis struggle for free speech about Islam in Denmark, see this and this.



A victory for free speech, and a defeat for Islamists and their abbetors in Europe.



Update -- here is Lars Hedegaard's official statement:



Statement by Lars Hedegaard on his acquittal





Copenhagen, January 31, 2011





As my ancient forefathers, the vikings, would have said: It is always good to fight. It is better to win.





My detractors - the foes of free speech and the enablers of an Islamic ascendancy in the West - will claim that I was acquitted on a technicality, namely that the judge in the Court of Frederiksberg resolved that my supposedly offensive comments on the violations against little Muslim girls were not intended for public dissemination.





That is absolutely true. The judge chose to the way out provided by my capable counsel.





However, the public prosecutor has been privy to the circumstances surrounding my case for a year - and yet he chose to prosecute me. Obviously in the hope that he could secure a conviction given the Islamophile sentiment among our ruling classes.





My acquittal is therefore a major victory for free speech.





I have no doubt that the massive support I have received from freedom fighters around the world has been instrumental in securing my acquittal.





This outcome will encourage people all over the West and beyond to speak up.





The battle for freedom is far from lost.

Posted at 09:59 AM

Embarrassed By His Statements, Ground Zero Mega-Mosque Organizaers Distance Themselves From Their New Imam

From Jihad Watch:

Embarrassed by his statements, Ground Zero Mosque organizers distance themselves from their new imam


They just finished distancing themselves from Rauf after he was exposed as anything but "moderate." That's why they brought in Adhami in the first place. And now they "sought yesterday to distance themselves from Adhami's comments and backpedal on his role in the $100 million project."



Who will be next? Will the thuggish and shady Ground Zero Mosque developer Sharif El-Gamal and his henchmen finally be able to find a plausible "moderate" they can sell successfully to an ignorant and unwitting non-Muslim public? Or will there be an endless stream of imams with unsavory ties to jihadists and Islamic supremacists and histories full of "extreme" statements?



What do you think?



"Outrageous teachings by new GZ mosque big," by Isabel Vincent and Melissa Klein in the New York Post, January 30 (thanks to Mackie):



The new imam at the Ground Zero mosque and cultural center believes people who are gay were probably abused as children and that people who leave Islam and preach a new religion should be jailed.

Abdallah Adhami's remarks on homosexuals, religious freedom and other topics have brought renewed criticism of the proposed community center and mosque near the World Trade Center site, which purports to be an inclusive organization.



Adhami, in a lecture on the Web site of his nonprofit, Sakeenah, says being gay is a "painful trial" caused by past trauma.



"An enormously overwhelming percentage of people struggle with homosexual feeling because of some form of violent emotional or sexual abuse at some point in their life," he says. "A small, tiny percentage of people are born with a natural inclination that they cannot explain. You find this in the animal kingdom at some level as well."



He says gays must fight this "propensity."...



Adhami also notes that if a Muslim leaves the faith and "preaches their views, they're jailed."



"The only thing you do not have the right to do is spread this conviction, lest you, quote unquote, 'pollute' others," he said when asked to give his personal opinion about apostates....



The organizers of the mosque sought yesterday to distance themselves from Adhami's comments and backpedal on his role in the $100 million project.



The Park51 organization announced earlier this month that he was a "senior adviser" to the effort.



But the Park51 organizers posted on Twitter that Adhami is only an "adviser" and that his views do not reflect those of the project....



Posted by Robert on January 30, 2011 11:15 AM

Trend: Burn A Koran, Get Arrested

From Islamist Watch:

Trend: Burn a Koran, Get Arrested


by David J. Rusin • Jan 31, 2011 at 1:41 pm



http://www.islamist-watch.org/blog/2011/01/trend-burn-a-koran-get-arrested



Send RSS Share:

Be the first of your friends to like this.

Koran burnings by Westerners are rightly frowned upon, but more regrettable is the trend of investigating, arresting, and even prosecuting those who set them aflame. Consider the cases to make the news since a Florida pastor first promised to torch Korans on the anniversary of 9/11.



Examples from the United States:



In September, the East Lansing Police Department offered a $10,000 reward for information about the person responsible for leaving a charred Koran outside a Michigan mosque. An individual surrendered, but the prosecutor shelved the case because "there is no criminal offense that I can charge under Michigan law."



In December, Jesse Quinn Harrison of Tulsa, Oklahoma, was charged with a hate crime for allegedly sending an "intimidating" letter to a mosque and uploading a video in which a Koran and pork chops are grilled, placed on a bun, and fed to a dog. Prosecutors claimed that the video intends to "produce violence directed to others because of their religious beliefs." Harrison was held at a mental facility before charges were dropped.



Examples from Europe:



In September, several self-described "English nationalists" were arrested on suspicion of inciting racial hatred for allegedly posting a video of them burning a Koran behind a pub in Gateshead, Tyneside. Due to insufficient evidence, no charges were brought.



In October, French police arrested an individual from Bischheim, Bas-Rhin, over an online video that "shows a man tearing off a page of the Koran, making a paper plane, and throwing it onto two glasses representing the World Trade Center. The man then burns the page and urinates onto its ashes." The citation against him for promoting racial hatred has been dismissed due to procedural errors, but a new hearing may be imminent.



In November, UK police arrested a teenage girl on suspicion of inciting religious hatred for allegedly burning a Koran on the premises of her West Midlands school, videotaping the incident, and posting it online. Despite the Crown Prosecution Service claiming "sufficient evidence" to move the case forward, it decided not to pursue charges.



In January, UK police arrested a man in Carlisle, Cumbria, who allegedly was "making pronouncements against the Muslim religion in front of a large crowd" and then "set fire to the Koran he was holding." He was arrested for "using racially aggravated threatening words or behavior" and has been released on bail as the investigation continues.



Yes, those taken into custody for burning Korans often escape charges, but why are they being detained in the first place? Does not true Western freedom imply the ability to express unpopular and even offensive views — without the risk of an involuntary trip to the police station?

The myth And Reality Of Sharia Courts In Canada: A Delayed Opportunity For The Indigenization Of Islamic Legal Rulings

From SSRN and ADF:

The Myth and Reality of 'Shari'a' Courts in Canada: A Delayed Opportunity for the Indigenization of Islamic Legal Rulings




Faisal Kutty

Valparaiso University - Law School







University of St. Thomas Law Journal, Vol. 7





Abstract:

The Ontario government’s passage of the Family Statute Law Amendment Act, 2005 ostensibly precluding the enforcement of faith-based decisions issued by arbitration panels pursuant to the Arbitrations Act, 1991, in the area of family law, brought to the fore a debate that has been raging in liberal democracies for some time.



Those opposed to allowing the use of religious principles in resolving family disputes using the Arbitrations Act, 1991, raised some legitimate concerns about gender rights within religious communities. They also questioned the role of religion in secular society and opposed what they saw as privatization of the legal system. Opponents contended that religious groups should be able to govern their lives according to their conscience within the parameters of law if the constitutional right to freedom of religion and association is to have any real value. Consenting and informed adults, they argued, must be able to make religious choices even if others do not believe these are “correct” choices.



The issues, of course, transcend dispute resolution and tug at fundamental tensions surrounding multiculturalism and national identity, the limits of accommodation and legal pluralism within a liberal democracy and the separation of church and state. I argue that Ontario lost a timely opportunity to devise a way to balance these competing rights and interests in a manner that respects all parties and protects the vulnerable.



The controversy was a prime case to examine whether Islamic law and liberal democracy can co-exist within a liberal constitutional framework. Moreover, I also argue that Ontario also delayed an opportunity to indigenize or Canadianize Islamic law rulings in a manner that would help in the integration process of its Muslim citizens.



Keywords: Islamic law, Sharia, Shari'a, Shariah, Arbitrations Act 1991, Ontario, Canada, Family Statute Law Amendment Act 2005, Legal Pluralism, Ijtihad, Ijma, Qiyas, Maqasid, Alternative Dispute Resolution, Religious Law, Multiculturalism, Gender Equality, Islamic Feminism, Faisal Kutty, Ahmad Kutty



Accepted Paper Series

Date posted: January 27, 2011

Muslim Countries Are The Leading Destination For Human Trafficking

From The Patriot Word:

5:16 PM (2 hours ago)Muslim Countries are the leading destination for Human Trafficking... You can help stop this.from The Patriot Word by Walter L. Brown Jr.Every year, as many as 300,000 U.S. children are forced into sexual slavery. The Attorney General of Texas expects 10,000 cases of human trafficking in the DFW area during Superbowl Week.






Keep a close eye on your kids, and be alert when you are travelling. Muslim Countries in Mideast, Africa Lead World in Human Trafficking.











Your concern may be the only thing that stands between life and death for an innocent young girl. Airline Ambassadors has taken a proactive role to educate airlines and flight crews about this growing phenomenon.





The following guide was developed for airline flight crews, please take a moment to read it. Then look at the young women and children you see while travelling. If you're wrong you'll be embarrassed, if you're right you'll save a young girl from a brutal abusive life and early death...



Common Traits of Victims




• Scripted/inconsistent stories

• Branding or tattoo with “Daddy,”a man’s name, or money symbols

• Wounds, whip marks, and bruises at various stages of healing

• Frightened, ashamed, or nervous

• Malnourished and/or eats as if ravenously hungry

• No eye contact or watchful to the extent of paranoia

• None or few personal items

• Accompanied by someone far better dressed

• Dressed inappropriately: immodestly or not right for weather

• Unsure of destination or if traveling alone, who will meet them

• Afraid of uniformed security

• Under the control of those they are with: not allowed to speak for themselves, not in posession of own

passport, money, or papers, and not free to walk alone, even to stroll through plane or use restroom



Action Steps

• If a young woman is traveling alone, ask the reason for her trip. If she has been promised a job, ask the nature of the job and if she knows the person who will be meeting her. False employment promises and

modeling jobs are common lures.

• If a child is traveling with someone who does not appear to be his/her parent, ask if you may take the child on a tour of the plane. If the adult refuses to allow it, be suspiscious.



Muslim Countries in Mideast, Africa Lead World in Human Traffic - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News



Muslim countries in the Middle East and north-central Africa lead the world in human trafficking, according to a new U.S. State Department report. Of the 17 countries that were given the "Tier 3" listing reserved for the worst offenders, nine were Muslim countries or countries with a large Muslim population from these two regions. Tier 3 countries are defined as those “whose governments do not fully comply with the minimum standards" of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 and "are not making significant efforts to do so.” That's a nice way of saying the governments either openly or tacitly support human trafficking...



The Middle Eastern countries with Tier 3 status are Iran, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Syria. The north-central African countries are Mauritania, Chad, Sudan, Niger and Eritrea, all of which have very large Muslim populations. Tier 3 countries are shaded maroon, in the maps below.



Algeria, Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, Iraq, Yemen, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE and Lebanon are on the Tier 2 Watchlist – one step above Tier 3.








The data in the US State Department Report on Human Trafficking indicates that Muslim countries in the Middle East and Africa are continuing their centuries-old practice of human trafficking. Historians estimate that between 9 and 14 million black Africans were brought to the Americas in the Atlantic slave trade and between 11 and 18 million black African slaves crossed the Red Sea, Indian Ocean, and Sahara Desert between the Muslim conquests in the 7th century and 1900.






Iran: The report says that “Iran is a source, transit, and destination for men, women, and children trafficked for the purposes of sexual exploitation and involuntary servitude. Iranian women are trafficked internally for the purpose of forced prostitution and forced marriage. Iranian and Afghan children living in Iran are trafficked internally for the purpose of forced marriage, commercial sexual exploitation, and involuntary servitude as beggars or laborers to pay debts, provide income, or support drug addiction of their families. Iranian women and girls are also trafficked to Pakistan, Turkey, Qatar, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Iraq, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom for commercial sexual exploitation.”




The State Department report noted that “the Government of Iran does not fully comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking, and is not making significant efforts to do so. Lack of access to Iran by U.S. Government officials impedes the collection of information on the country’s human trafficking problem and the government’s efforts to curb it.”



North Africa and Middle East: Tier 3 countries are shaded maroon. (Traffic in Persons Report 2009).



Saudi Arabia, the report says, “is a destination country for men and women trafficked for the purposes of involuntary servitude and, to a lesser extent, commercial sexual exploitation. Men and women from Bangladesh, India, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Pakistan, the Philippines, Indonesia, Sudan, Ethiopia, and many other countries voluntarily travel to Saudi Arabia as domestic servants or other low-skilled laborers, but some subsequently face conditions indicative of involuntary servitude, including restrictions on movement, withholding of passports, threats, physical or sexual abuse, and non-payment of wages.



“Some Saudi men have also used legally contracted ‘temporary marriages’ in countries such as Mauritania, Yemen, and Indonesia as a means by which to sexually exploit migrant workers. Females as young as seven years old are led to believe they are being wed in earnest, but upon arrival in Saudi Arabia subsequently become their husbands’ sexual slaves, are forced into domestic labor and, in some cases, prostitution. The Government of Saudi Arabia does not fully comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking and is not making discernible efforts to do so.”



Syria is “principally a destination country for women and children trafficked for the purposes of domestic servitude and commercial sexual exploitation. Women from Iraq, Eastern Europe, former Soviet states, Somalia, and Morocco are recruited as cabaret dancers and subsequently forced into prostitution after their employers confiscate their passports and confine them to their work premises. A significant number of women and children in the large Iraqi refugee community in Syria are forced into sexual exploitation by criminal gangs or, in some cases, their families. Some desperate Iraqi families reportedly abandon their girls at the border with the expectation that traffickers on the Syrian side would arrange forged documents for the children and ‘work’ in a nightclub or brothel. Iraqi families arrange for young girls to work in clubs and to be “married,” often multiple times, to men for the sole purpose of prostitution.”






Africa: Tier 3 countries are shaded maroon. (Traffic in Persons Report 2009).



In Kuwait, the majority of trafficking victims are from among the over 500,000 foreign women recruited for domestic service work. “Men and women migrate from Nepal, India, Sri Lanka, the Philippines, Indonesia, Pakistan, and Bangladesh in search of work in the domestic and sanitation industries. Although they migrate willingly to Kuwait, upon arrival some are subjected to conditions of forced labor from their ‘sponsors’ and labor agents, such as withholding of passports, confinement, physical sexual abuse and threats of such abuse or other serious harm, and non-payment of wages with the intent of compelling their continued service.”



“Adult female migrant workers are particularly vulnerable, and consequently are often victims of sexual exploitation and forced prostitution. There have been instances of domestic workers who have fled from their employers, lured by the promise of well-paying service industry jobs, and being coerced into prostitution. In other cases, the terms of employment in Kuwait are wholly different from those agreed to in their home countries. The Government of Kuwait does not fully comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking and is not making sufficient efforts to do so.”



What Obama did not mention



The report has four tiers altogether: Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 2 Watchlist and Tier 3. Israel is in Tier 2, the second-best listing. It should be noted, however, that statistics regarding trafficking in Israel are largely provided by powerful organizations inside Israel which have been accused of exaggerating the severity of the situation there for political reasons.



U.S. President Barack Obama, himself a descendant of black Africans, did not mention the subject of Muslim human trafficking in his recent speech to the Arab world in Cairo. He did mention, however, that “for centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation,” but did so in the context of talking about Palestinian suffering.






(IsraelNationalNews.com)

Brooklyn: Muslim Brotherhood Group Building Mosque In Defiance Of Stop-Work Orders

From Jihad Watch:

Brooklyn: Muslim Brotherhood group building mosque in defiance of stop-work orders






Islamic supremacist contempt for the law in Brooklyn. The Muslim American Society is the chief Muslim Brotherhood organization in the United States. The Muslim Brotherhood is dedicated in its own words, according to a captured internal document, to "eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within."



"A Mega-Mosque Grows on a Quiet Residential Brooklyn Street: Why There?," by Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs, January 27:



On a quiet, tree-lined residential street in Brooklyn, the Muslim Brotherhood front, MAS, is building a mega mosque, despite the fierce opposition from the neighborhood and in violation of zoning ordinances and stop work orders. Why there?

Voorhies Avenue is a beautiful little street in Sheepshead Bay. Small, pretty, well-cared for homes line the street. There are no stores, churches, synagogues or businesses there. So why would the Muslim Brotherhood want to build a beachhead there? There are no Muslims who live on the street and not many in the neighborhood. Why there?



MAS has ignored procedure, flouted the law and violated stop work orders. They respect the sharia (Islamic law), American rule of law? Not so much. Check out the video -- why are they yelling to stop filming? What else are they hiding from the neighbors? Thanks to Logan for the video.



The neighborhood coalition that opposes the mosque wants to keep the street residential and quiet. Hardly unreasonable. The idea of a giant mosque, out of all proportion to the other homes on the street, is offensive. The traffic, congestion, noise, call to prayer changes the landscape of this otherwise quiet street. Don't neighborhoods have a say on what can or cannot be built? Don't neighborhoods have a right to preserve the sanctity of their streets and their homes? The MAS Islamic supremacists have been consistently dishonest. Their obfuscation, misrepresentation of the project and morphing mosque design hardly instill confidence that they are being straight about anything. And more to the point, why there?



They are ignoring DOB inspectors, complaints by neighbors and a stop work order, and are furiously building the massive structure in violation of code and certain requirements....





Read it all. And Pamela has more here.
From Atlas Shrugs:

Friday, January 28, 2011


Islamic Imperialism in Brooklyn





I recently wrote of the stealth mosque going up on a sweet, quiet, tree-lined residential street in Brooklyn. The Muslim Brotherhood's public face, MAS (Muslim American Society), is building a mega-mosque, despite the fierce opposition from the neighborhood and in violation of zoning ordinances and stop work orders.

Why there?



Voorhies Avenue is a beautiful little street in Sheepshead Bay. Small, pretty, well-cared for homes line the street. There are no stores, churches, synagogues or businesses there. So why would the Muslim Brotherhood want to build a beachhead there? There are no Muslims who live on the street and not many in the neighborhood.

Why there?



MAS has ignored procedure, flouted the law and violated stop work orders. They respect the sharia (Islamic law), American rule of law? Not so much.



The neighborhood coalition that opposes the mosque wants to keep the street residential and quiet. Hardly unreasonable. The idea of a giant mosque, out of all proportion to the other homes on the street, is offensive. The traffic, congestion, noise, call to prayer change the landscape of this otherwise quiet street. Don't neighborhoods have a say on what can or cannot be built? Don't neighborhoods have a right to preserve the sanctity of their streets and their homes? The MAS Islamic supremacists have been consistently dishonest. Their obfuscation, misrepresentation of the project and morphing mosque design hardly instill confidence that they are being straight about anything. And more to the point:



So why there?



Infidel flight because of harassment, attrition, and hostility.





Media-quest sent me this 2008 article. This pretty well explains everything and what will happen to Voorhies Avenue and Sheepshead Bay in no short order.



Another Tack: A masjid grows in Brooklyn Jul. 3, 2008

Sarah Honig, THE JERUSALEM POST





I was Brooklyn bound - or so I thought. I took the subway to see a fellow alumna of New York's High School of Music and Art (as today's LaGuardia High School for the Arts was then called). I looked forward to the nostalgic reunion. I hadn't been in NYC for ages, and catching up with an old classmate seemed an indispensable component of walking down memory lane.



What's more, Kathy still lives at the same address in the cozy middle-class neighborhood where I sometimes visited her way back then. It was common for the house-proud Irish to keep property in the family, and hence I'd soon reenter the two-story red-brick home in whose wood-paneled rec-room we occasionally whiled away hours.



But when I climbed up the grimy station stairs and surveyed the street, I suspected that some supernatural time-and-space warp had transported me to Islamabad. This couldn't be Brooklyn.

Women strode attired in hijabs and male passersby sported all manner of Muslim headgear and long flowing tunics. Kathy met me at the train and astounded me by pointing out long kurta shirts as distinguished from a salwar kameez. She couldn't help becoming an expert.



She's now a member of a fast-dwindling minority because "people are running away. We're among the last holdouts of our generation. My kids have fled."



Pakistani and Bangladeshi groceries lined the main shopping drag, and everywhere stickers boldly beckoned: "Discover Jesus in the Koran." An unremarkable low-slung building on the corner of Kathy's block was now dominated by an oversized green sign identifying it as Masjid Nur al-Islam (the Light of Islam Mosque) and announcing that "only Allah is worthy of worship and Muhammad is his LAST prophet." Here too Christians were urged to "turn to the Koran" if they were "genuinely faithful to Jesus."



It wasn't hard to identify the remaining non-Muslim residences. Kathy's was typical. A huge American flag fluttered demonstratively in the manicured front yard, accompanied by a large cross on the door and an assortment of patriotic/jingoistic banners.



"We're besieged," she explained. "Making a statement is about all we can do. They aren't delighted to see our flag wave. This is enemy territory."



LEST I judge her paranoid, Kathy began regaling me with what she knew about the mosque a few doors down her street, still as tree-lined as I remember but somehow less pretty and tidy, even vaguely grubby.



Kathy had compiled a bulging dossier of press clippings and computer printouts about the masjid that grew in a once heavily Jewish area. Until the mid-1990s, its imam was the late Egyptian-educated Gulshair el-Shukrijumah, dispatched by the Saudis as a Wahhabi missionary in 1985 and financed by them thereafter. His disciple, Clement Rodney Hampton-El, an explosives specialist, possibly helped assemble the bomb detonated in the '93 World Trade Center attack. He was convicted of plotting to blow up the UN, FBI headquarters and the Holland and Lincoln tunnels. Gulshair acted as interpreter for Omar Abdel-Rahman, the "Blind Sheikh" now serving life for the first WTC bombing, conspiring to use explosives at other NYC landmarks and colluding to assassinate US politicians.



Nabbed operational commander of the 9/11 plot, Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, fingered Gulshair's eldest son Adnan as having been designated by al-Qaida and personally approved by Osama Bin-Laden to lead new terror assaults and serve as successor to Muhammad Atta, with whom Adnan was connected. Adnan received flight training and is dubbed "Jaffar the pilot." He was likewise linked to "dirty bomber" Jose Padilla, Hamas and al-Qaida fund-raiser Adham Hassoun, and terrorist Imran Mandhai (convicted of conspiring to bomb the National Guard armory, South Florida electrical substations, Jewish-owned businesses and community centers, and Mount Rushmore).



Kathy's ex-neighbor is now a fugitive and subject of a worldwide FBI manhunt. Adnan's brother Nabil, incidentally, uploaded to his Web page an image of Jerusalem ablaze with the caption: "Al Kuds, we are coming."



BUT OF more immediate concern to Kathy and the few leftover neighborhood natives is the "in-your-face insolence of the immigrants." For years the mosque had been calling the faithful to prayers via a rooftop loudspeaker five times daily. Police intervention persuaded the imam to omit the pre-dawn sonorous summons. Catholic Kathy knows all about "Allahu akhbar" and how the muezzin intones it.



"I'm not a bigot," she stressed repeatedly. "The Jewish community which once flourished here was so different. This was always a pluralistic live-and-let-live section. The jihadists, however, aren't here to coexist but to conquer. The Jewish community here was so different. They weren't on the offensive. They just wanted to be left alone."



She recalled her brother Eddie, whose best childhood friend was the son of a nearby Orthodox rabbi. During his teens Eddie was regularly recruited by his chum to the minyan until he was roused too early one winter morning and exclaimed: "What do you want from me? I'm not even Jewish!"



"This kind of a relationship," Kathy commented, "just isn't possible these days. Muslims call us infidels and want all infidels out. We're threatened."







Posted by Pamela Geller on Friday, January 28, 2011 at 11:33 AM


Posted by Robert on January 28, 2011 9:13 AM

Stoning In Afghanistan: "Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar!"

From Jihad Watch:

Stoning in Afghanistan: "Allahu akbar! Allahu akbar! Allahu akbar!"


Jihad Watch reader Myles has sent in the link for the full video from this story. It probably goes without saying that the footage below is disturbing; it shows two people dying a horrible death.



But this is Sharia, and all of its various horrors, abuses, and absurdities must be exposed so they may be resisted.



This is an act Muhammad not only prescribed, but participated in, according to canonical Islamic sources. The fact that it is not in the Qur'an means nothing.



There is a greater level of frenzy over killing the woman, Siddqa. The perverse excitement of the crowd is palpable, and the cries of "Allahu akbar" are more numerous. But in the end, it is an equal-opportunity double murder, with two pulverized bodies to show as testimony to Allah's greatness. This is Sharia.

Posted by Marisol on January 27, 2011 8:44 PM
 
 
And this, related, also from Jihad Watch:
 
"Anyone who knows about Islam knows that stoning is Islamic law. There are people who call it inhuman, but in doing so, they insult the prophet"






Six months later, there have been no arrests in the stoning deaths of a young Afghan couple who had eloped. One will recall that this was the case where Afghanistan's president, Hamid Karzai, condemned the execution without trial, but did not say a word about the method of execution. Our moderate "Friend and Ally" would not condemn stoning as he tried to win the favor of clerics who want the worst of Sharia's punishments enforced.



There is a video at the link to the report, with the predictable shouts of "Allahu akbar." "Afghan police pledge justice for Taliban stoning," by Quentin Sommerville for BBC News, January 26:



The men who stoned a couple to death in north Afghanistan will be brought to justice, say officials, after footage of the killings came to light.

The man and woman were accused of adultery in the district of Dashte Archi in Kunduz province last August.

Hundreds of people attended the stoning but no-one was charged. The area is still under Taliban control.

After viewing the footage, regional police chief Gen Daoud Daoud said those responsible could be recognised.

"Special police investigators will be sent there, we will find them and they will be brought to justice," he told the BBC.

A mobile phone recording of the killings has only just been seen by Afghan and Nato officials. Most of the video is too graphic to be shown.

The video begins with Siddqa, a 25-year-old woman, standing waist-deep in a hole in the ground.

She is entirely hidden in a blue burka. Hundreds of men from the village are gathered as two mullahs pass sentence. As Taliban fighters look on, the sentence is passed and she is found guilty of adultery.

The stoning lasts two minutes. Hundreds of rocks - some larger than a man's fist - are thrown at her head and body. She tries to crawl out of the hole, but is beaten back by the stones. A boulder is then thrown at her head, her burka is soaked in blood, and she collapses inside the hole.

Incredibly Siddqa was still alive. The mullahs are heard saying she should be left alone. But a Taliban fighter steps forward with a rifle and she is shot three times.

Then her lover, Khayyam, is brought to the crowd. His hands are tied behind his back. Before he is blindfolded he looks into the mobile phone camera. He appears defiant.

The attack on him is even more ferocious. His body, lying face down, jerks as the rocks meet their target. He is heard to be crying, but is soon silent.

The couple had earlier eloped to Pakistan, but were lured back with the false promise that they would not be harmed.

Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid defended the sentencing.

In a telephone interview he said: "Anyone who knows about Islam knows that stoning is in the Koran, and that it is Islamic law.

"There are people who call it inhuman - but in doing so they insult the Prophet. They want to bring foreign thinking to this country."...

This is curious: the paraphrase here does not match the translated quotation in the video, which does not include the part about the Qur'an.



Stoning is not in the Qur'an as we know it, of course, but that does not mean Islam is off the hook. Apologists willingly (and deceitfully) give the impression of Islam as a sola scriptura affair. It helps to create an image of the Qur'an as uncreated, complete unto itself, and not dependent on the cultural and temporal context of 7th-century Arabia. But the Qur'an-only movement within Islam is a small, heretical group. Nonetheless, there is this intriguing hadith:



Umar said, "I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, "We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book," and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed. Lo! I confirm that the penalty of Rajam be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if he is already married and the crime is proved by witnesses or pregnancy or confession." Sufyan added, "I have memorized this narration in this way." 'Umar added, "Surely Allah's Apostle carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him" (Sahih Bukhari 8.82.816).

Muhammad carried out stonings. Islamic law prescribes them. And apologists' insistence on ignoring or downplaying that ensures the future suffering of men and women like Khayyam and Siddqa. Clearly, they would rather live with that than, as the Taliban spokesman said above, "insult the prophet."

Posted by Marisol on January 27, 2011 7:11 AM

Honor Killings In America

From The American Thinker:

January 27, 2011


Honor Killing in America

By Pamela Geller

The trials of two "honor killers" are underway in America this week: one in Buffalo, New York, and the other in Arizona.





In Buffalo, the moderate Muslim beheader and bridge-builder to the West, Muzzammil Hassan, was granted the right Monday to act as his own attorney. That should make for some interesting trial transcripts. Hassan had an attorney, Jeremy Schwartz, but Schwartz told the judge that he met with Hassan on Friday and they had an impasse and "irreconcilable differences and opinions" that go to the heart of the defense.





Muzzammil Hassan was a respected Muslim businessman in Buffalo. He founded the BridgesTV network several years ago to improve the image of Muslims in the United States. But now he is standing trial for the decapitation of his estranged wife, Aasiya Zubair Hassan, in February 2009. He beheaded her at his company's office in Orchard Park, New York -- that's right, in the offices of BridgesTV. Police records show that Muzzammil Hassan had abused Aasiya for years. And that means that the Buffalo-area Muslim community writ large ought to be on trial as well; they knew of the brutal violence Aasiya suffered and apparently kept silent. The Muslim community knew of Hassan's abuse.





And in Arizona, an Iraqi Muslim named Faleh Almaleki went on trial this week for murdering his daughter for being too "westernized." The Almaleki trial damn near didn't happen. They were negotiating a plea deal for this cold-blooded adherent to the sharia. But readers of my website AtlasShrugs.com called, wrote, and e-mailed, and in a huge victory for Atlas readers who fought the impending plea deal, it was withdrawn.





Muslim dad Faleh Almaleki ran over his daughter, Noor Almaleki. He is now showing his utter contempt for the infidel system of jurisprudence by saying that he ran down and murdered his daughter with his car accidentally while he was "concentrating on spitting at another woman." Spitting on a woman: the metaphor should not be lost on anyone. This disgusting defense and out-and-out lie contradicts Faleh Almaleki's admission in November 2009 (here) that, according to state prosecutor Stephanie Low, Faleh Almaleki admitted that he ran over his daughter on purpose:





By his own admission, this was an intentional act and the reason was that his daughter had brought shame on him and his family. This was an attempt at an honor killing.





Then-prosecutor Low said "attempt" because Noor Almaleki had not yet succumbed to her injuries. She hung on by a thread for two weeks.





After her father ran her over, he backed up his vehicle and ran her over again. Was this, too, in an attempt to spit?





Remember that these are not isolated incidents or actions of a "fringe" element within Islam. They are happening with increasing frequency. The Harry Potter actress Afshan Azad was recently almost killed by her father and brother in another attempted Islamic honor killing. How much more in the mainstream can you get? Yet despite who she is, the celebrity of the victim, still the dhimmedia shills for, aids, abets, and covers for Islamic misogyny. And even more galling was Azad's family's concern -- not with their Afshan, but with "what the Muslim community will think." That was their worry and obsession.





The horror of these young girls, terror-stricken victims who live in homemade concentration camps, is given the imprimatur of the West in its complicit silence. Notice how news accounts never mention the religion of the people involved. The West is intent upon putting an urbane face on bloodthirsty savagery. The West looks away, and more girls lead desperate, brutal lives. The "feminists" look away and pretend that Islamic honor killing is outside the realm of women's rights. The leftists are tools of Islamic jihad: these useful idiots are on someone's payroll, or else they fear Islam so much that they are willing to see these girls die.





Either way, get out of the way. Shame on all of you for failing our women, our children, our girls, our very way of life. How dare you throw away our superior culture with both hands?





As Muslim populations grow in the West, the status of women diminishes. The horrific murders of wives, daughters, moms, and sisters are the worst and ultimate punishment of Islamic gender apartheid, and something we see on the rise in the West. It should be a capital crime in America.





Pamela Geller is the editor and publisher of the Atlas Shrugs website and former associate publisher of the New York Observer. She is the author of The Post-American Presidency.

Awaiting The Verdict

From IFPS:

Awaiting the Verdict


By admin02 • on January 25, 2011

Lars Hedegaard’s final words in the Court of Frederiksberg, January 24, 2011



My counsel has instructed me that in cases brought under Article 266b, the only thing that determines whether one is convicted or not is a matter of the perceived insult whereas one is barred from proving the truth of the statement.



The article deals with public statements whereby a group of people are “threatened, insulted or degraded”. But as my lawyer has already noted, I have made no public statement.



When it comes to Article 266b, there is no equality before the law. I am daily insulted and degraded by something I read or hear and I am sure that most people have the same experience.



For example, I am not only insulted and degraded and threatened, but shaken to the core of my being when I hear a well known Danish imam state that, of course, sharia law – Muslim law – will be instituted as Denmark’s official legal regime when there are a sufficient number of Muslims. I strongly urge our country’s jurists to get acquainted with the implications of the sharia, not only for Muslims but equally for non-Muslims, who – if they are lucky – will be reduced to a life as subhuman outlaws. And if one cannot be bothered with tedious dissertations, one may take a look at the legal order pertaining in areas where the sharia holds sway either de jure or de facto. One will then encounter a legal order the like of which we have not known since the passing of the Law of Jutland in 1241 and probably not before.



But the imam wants this disorder introduced in the country where I was born. And I must admit that I am troubled. I am also troubled when said imam defends the killing of Muslims who have left Islam and when he confirms that women and men guilty of fornication must be pelted with stones until they are dead. He thinks that is God’s commandment, which he cannot ignore.



Should I go to the police and tell them how threatened, insulted and degraded I feel? I wouldn’t dream of it for I support free speech. And if free speech has any real meaning, it must also – and in particular – protect statements people do not want to hear. Regardless of how revolting such statements may be.



Besides it would be futile to report the imam and those similarly disposed to the police for the public prosecutor would never indict them. Otherwise it would have happened long ago.



As jurisprudence shows, not only in Denmark but in all European countries with similar insult articles in their penal code, these insult articles open the gates to inequality before the law. There are insulted who enjoy the tender graces of the public prosecutor, and there are the less favoured who must endure insults directed at them.



But perhaps this is to do with the notion that one must not insult minorities whereas minorities are free to insult majorities? If that is the explanation of why I am in court today, it is a peculiar one. In 2002, the imam I have already mentioned explained to his flock that all Muslims in the world – 1,6 billion or whatever the number is – constitute one people, one umma. The same thing is emphasised by the Islamic Conference Organisation, OIC, encompassing 57 member countries. In other words, the five million non-Muslim Danes are a microscopic minority but nevertheless a minority whose members stand to be punished if they make statements on cultural norms in the umma.



What does the public prosecutor hope to accomplish by my conviction? He may drag me in front of a court. He may portray me as a racist, a right-wing extremist and a non-human. He may do the same to hundreds and thousands of others who insist on their right of free speech to describe Islam and Muslim culture just like we would deal with any other phenomenon in a free society.



But what will he have gained? Does the public prosecutor believe that people will start talking about Islam and Muslim culture with greater respect and reverence? Perhaps in public because people fear fines and jail. But what will people say to each other when they think that the thought police are not listening?



And what does the public prosecutor imagine people will think of a religion, a political ideology and a culture that need the protection of legislators, police, the public prosecutor and the courts because they cannot defend themselves in a free and open debate?



In 1644, when the English parliament considered the institution of religious censorship, that Christian defender of free speech John Milton wrote: “There is yet behind of what I purpos’d to lay open, the incredible losse, and detriment that this plot of licencing puts us to, more then if som enemy at sea should stop up all our hav’ns and ports, and creeks, it hinders and retards the importation of our richest Marchandize, Truth.”



And further:



“There be who perpetually complain of schisms and sects, and make it such a calamity that any man dissents from their maxims. ‘Tis their own pride and ignorance which causes the disturbing, who neither will hear with meeknes, nor can convince, yet all must be suppresst which is not found in their Syntagma.”



Milton concluded with this exhortation:



“Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties.”



In conclusion permit me to mention the true victims in this case. The public prosecutor has not considered the 20,000 women in the Muslim world who every year fall victim to so-called honour killings, or the 50,000 Muslim girls in Germany who the federal police consider threatened with genital mutilation, nor the hundreds of thousands of little girls in Muslim majority societies who have been sold into marriage with much older men and who must therefore live a life of constant rape, while Islamic scholars preach that this is in complete accordance with religious orthodoxy.



I hope that the judge as opposed to the public prosecutor will consider the fate of these unfortunate human beings. Likewise I hope that the judge will realise the absurdity of prosecuting me for statements made within the confines of my own four walls. For ten months the prosecutor has been aware of the conditions under which I spoke. That has not affected him in the slightest. I hope it will affect the judge.



The Judge heard both sides and has deferred judgment until January 31st, 2011. In the meantime, we will continue to post expressions of support for Lars Hedegaard’s right to freedom of speech. We wish to once again thank all those who have written so eloquently and passionately on the subject of his trial. Lars reports that he is in fine shape – not least due to all of the support he has received. He knows that he is not alone which has made a tremendous difference in keeping his spirits up.

Arizona: Accused Islamic Honor Murderer Says He Ran Over His Daughter While Spitting At Another Woman

From Jihad Watch:

Arizona: Accused Islamic honor murderer says he ran over his daughter by accident while spitting at another woman




You see, your honor, I was busy showing my hatred and contempt for a different woman



Not guilty by reason of spittle! This utterly contemptible defense contradicts Almaleki's earlier statement: in November 2009, the Arizona Republic reported (thanks to Pamela Geller) that, according to state prosecutor Stephanie Low, Faleh Almaleki admitted that he ran over his daughter on purpose: "By his own admission, this was an intentional act and the reason was that his daughter had brought shame on him and his family. This was an attempt at an honor killing."



"Iraqi dad's 'spit' defense in Ariz. 'honor slay,'" by Rita Delfiner for AP, January 25:



A fanatical Iraqi-born Muslim charged with killing his beautiful daughter because she wanted to live a normal American life whined yesterday that he ran her over by accident -- because he was concentrating on spitting at another woman.

Faleh Almaleki -- whose murder trial began in Phoenix -- sent his Jeep crashing into daughter Noor Almaleki, 20, on Oct. 20, 2009, in a parking lot after she left his abusive home to live with her boyfriend's family and refused an arranged marriage, officials said.



Prosecutors have called the woman's death an "honor killing," referring to a practice in some Islamic countries in which someone -- often a woman who is believed to have shamed the family -- is killed.



The unforgivable "shame" Noor brought on her father was a taste for fast food, texting her friends with the greeting "dude" and liking clothes from Forever 21, according to a report in Marie Claire magazine.



Almaleki's lawyer said his client was only trying to demonstrate his disgust with the woman standing next to Noor -- her boyfriend's mother -- and wound up hitting them both.



But a prosecutor said in opening remarks that Almaleki was so enraged by his daughter's Westernization that he "revved and raced" his car directly at his child.



"Noor wanted to live her life like those her own age, but the defendant would not allow it," said Laura Reckart.



After Almaleki moved in with her boyfriend's family, her father told the dad that if Noor didn't leave, "something bad was going to happen," a court document said....



Noor was in a coma for two weeks before dying, while Khalaf survived.



Almaleki -- who fled to Mexico, then London, where he was arrested -- has pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder, attempted murder, aggravated assault and leaving the scene of an accident.





Yes, after he "accidentally" ran over his daughter, he decided it was a perfect time for a vacation in Mexico and England.

Posted by Robert on January 25, 2011 6:46 AM

Bewitched Animals And The Muslim Media

From Middle East Forum:

Bewitched Animals and the Muslim Media


by Raymond Ibrahim

Hudson New York

January 26, 2011



http://www.meforum.org/2825/bewitched-animals-and-the-muslim-media



Send RSS Share:

Be the first of your friends to like this.

Because conspiracy theories emanating from the Muslim world are nothing new—a decade ago, Israel was accused of perpetrating the strikes of 9/11, today it is accused of perpetrating the bombings of a Coptic church—they tend to be dismissed in the West.



A close examination of these theories, however, reveals pathological trends that need to be acknowledged—especially by Western leaders who stubbornly interact with the Muslim world under the assumption that all Muslims "think just like us."



Consider, for starters, those conspiracy theories dealing with subversive animals:



"Iranians arrest fourteen squirrels for spying": According to Iranian state-sponsored news agency IRNA, "Intelligence operatives have arrested 14 squirrels within Iran's borders. The squirrels were carrying spy gear of foreign agencies, and were stopped before they could act, thanks to the alertness of our intelligence services." (Iran has also arrested "spying pigeons" accused of working for Israel.)

Israel unleashes rats and pigs against Jerusalem Arabs: According to the Palestinian Authority's official news agency, Wafa, Israel is "using wild pigs to drive Palestinians out of their homes" and "Rats have become an Israeli weapon to displace and expel Arab residents of the occupied Old City of Jerusalem."

"Israel responsible for fatal shark attack and lethal jellyfish in Red Sea": According to South Sinai Governor Mohamed Abdel, "Mossad throwing the deadly shark (in the sea) to hit tourism in Egypt is not out of the question, but it needs time to confirm."

Saudi Arabia "arrests" a vulture as part of a "Zionist plot": According to a BBC report, the vulture appears to have been tagged by Tel Aviv University researchers studying migration patterns; even so, "the bird could meet a horrible punishment in the notoriously severe Saudi justice system."

As the reader mulls over the plausibility of these charges, here is the latest example, from just last month. According to released Gitmo inmate Walid Muhammad Hajj, the Jews at the base cast "spells" on the Muslim inmates—including through the use of bewitched birds and a phantom feline that tried to sodomize Walid:



The most common method to wear down the brothers [Muslim inmates] was witchcraft…. There were, of course, Jews among the [staff of] the Guantanamo Base, and they would set traps for the guys…. I remembered an incident with a guy who sat next to me in the morning. When they brought the milk, he began to urinate into the milk. I said to him: "Why are you urinating in the milk?" That's when we knew that he was under a spell. After he had recovered a little, after we read Koranic verses to him, he said to me: "The birds on the barbed wire would talk to me, and tell me to urinate in the milk"…. Once, when I was sleeping—on the floor, not on a bed—I suddenly felt that a cat was trying to penetrate me. It tried to penetrate me again and again. I recited the kursi verse again and again [Koran 2:255] until the cat left.



Considering that the Koran depicts talking ants and birds, vouches for the power of sorcery, and has an entire chapter dedicated to the Jinn (Sura 72); that Hamas arrested 150 "witches" in Gaza last year; that Islam's prophet Muhammad decreed that black dogs must die, "for they are devils"; that there is a fatwa to kill Mickey Mouse (a cartoon character), since rodents are "corrupters, steered by Satan"—considering all this, it should come as no surprise that animals are being portrayed as infidel operatives.



Rather, the surprise lies in who is making and disseminating these stories. After all, conspiracy theories are not the sole domain of the Muslim world; the West has its share of crackpot theories. Yet, they are not in the mainstream. Conversely, far from coming from a marginalized periphery, all of the aforementioned animal accusations were either made or disseminated by "authoritative" sources in the Muslim world: Spying squirrels, Iranian state-sponsored news; rampaging rats and pigs, Mahmoud Abbas' Palestinian Authority media; tourism-destroying shark, an Egyptian official; spying vulture awaiting Sharia justice, Saudi media.



Consider the most recent example of Gitmo witchery. The problem is not that one Walid Muhammad Hajj believes this, but that Al Jazeera—by far, the highest rated news network in the Arab world—aired it on prime time. That the suit-and-tie host was very sympathetic, never once casting doubt on Hajj's narrative, speaks volumes. (Incidentally, this Gitmo story was aired on the same show that earlier provided Muhammad al-Awwa a platform to incite Egypt's Muslims against its Christian minority—thereby contributing to the latest slaughter of Copts in Egypt on New Year's Eve.)



The point here is simple: if the media—especially news and current affairs programs—reflect the concerns of their society, imagine if a prime-time CNN program hosted someone who earnestly accused people of witchcraft, talking birds, and rapist cats—all to a sincerely concerned host. What would that suggest about the American mindset?



What does it suggest about the Muslim mindset?



Raymond Ibrahim is associate director of the Middle East Forum, author of The Al Qaeda Reader, and guest lecturer at the National Defense Intelligence College.



Related Topics: Conspiracy theories, Media
Raymond Ibrahim



This text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL.

Muslims Defy "Stop Work Order" To Build Brooklyn Mosque

From Creeping Sharia:

Muslims defy ‘stop work order’ to build Brooklyn mosque


Posted on January 24, 2011 by creeping

Updates on the proposed Sheepshead Bay mosque crammed into a residential neighborhood, and yet another example of the ‘zoning jihad‘ being waged nationwide. via Eye on the World, Brooklyn, NY: Muslims ignore ‘stop work order’ and continue to build the Voorhies Avenue mosque



Rules just don’t apply to them.



Excerpt from the e-mail:



The DOB is dragging its feet reviewing multiple Public Challenges associated with the property, while construction crews are rushing work at the site, ignoring DOB inspectors, complaints by neighbors and a Stop Work order. After multiple complaints, letters to local politicians, demonstrations and media reports, city administration is still trying to ignore the obvious violations associated with the project in question. Just like the Sanitation Department abandoned you when you needed help the most, other city agencies are not doing much to protect your quality of life. The Community Center designed to accommodate hundreds of people on a daily basis is bad for the neighborhood, and creates “objectionable influence” as stated in our zoning laws, and endangering our lives as emergency vehicles



New variations of the paperwork get submitted to the Department of Buildings (DOB) by the project architects on a regular basis, and despite obvious omissions and mistakes, like absence of dates and signatures, wrong addresses and floor counts, the city signs off on all of them almost instantaneously.



The Department of Transportation (DOT) issued construction permits for parking, roadway and sidewalk blockages, without taking into consideration the specific location of the site. Voorhies Avenue, which has only one lane in each direction, becomes very dangerous when one of those lanes is occupied by several parked dump trucks and motorists have to drive against traffic. Announcements were made at PS 52 informing teachers that cars parked in front of 2812 Voorhies would be towed away. But there is no extra parking available in the neighborhood. Each spot counts, and when teachers and parents are forced to circle around dump trucks looking for parking, our kids are endangered as they walk to/from school, especially since they can’t use the southern side of Voorhies Avenue sidewalk, which is also blocked by dump truck/excavator.



Fortunately, the evidence of violations provided by lawyers and engineers working with Bay People is so overwhelming, that City Council member, Lewis A. Fidler, realized that his constituents really need help and contacted the DOB asking for explanations. He specifically urged the DOB to make sure the architectural plans are accessible, no mistakes are made while reviewing the plans, and 311 complaints don’t go unanswered.



We’d clarify that it is “laws” that apparently don’t apply

Denmark: Lars Hedegaard--Defending Free Speech From Western Enablers Of Totalitarian Islam

From The American Thinker:

January 24, 2011


Lars Hedegaard: Defending Free Speech from Western Enablers of Totalitarian Islam

Andrew G. Bostom

The Kafka-esque trial proceedings against Danish journalist and historian Lars Hedegaard today included a final statement by the defendant. Next Monday (January 31,2011) the (pre-ordained) verdict will be handed down.





What follows are Mr. Hedegaard's courageous and illuminating, if depressing, remarks.





***





My counsel has instructed me that in cases brought under Article 266b, the only thing that determines whether one is convicted or not is a matter of the perceived insult whereas one is barred from proving the truth of the statement.





The article deals with public statements whereby a group of people are "threatened, insulted or degraded". But as my lawyer has already noted, I have made no public statement.





When it comes to Article 266b, there is no equality before the law. I am daily insulted and degraded by something I read or hear and I am sure that most people have the same experience.





For example, I am not only insulted and degraded and threatened, but shaken to the core of my being when I hear a well known Danish imam state that, of course, sharia law - Muslim law - will be instituted as Denmark's official legal regime when there are a sufficient number of Muslims. I strongly urge our country's jurists to get acquainted with the implications of the sharia, not only for Muslims but equally for non-Muslims, who - if they are lucky - will be reduced to a life as subhuman outlaws. And if one cannot be bothered with tedious dissertations, one may take a look at the legal order pertaining in areas where the sharia holds sway either de jure or de facto. One will then encounter a legal order the like of which we have not known since the passing of the Law of Jutland in 1241 and probably not before.





But the imam wants this disorder introduced in the country where I was born. And I must admit that I am troubled. I am also troubled when said imam defends the killing of Muslims who have left Islam and when he confirms that women and men guilty of fornication must be pelt with stones until they are dead. He thinks that is God's commandment, which he cannot ignore.





Should I go to the police and tell them how threatened, insulted and degraded I feel? I wouldn't dream of it for I support free speech. And if free speech has any real meaning, it must also - and in particular - protect statements people do not want to hear. Regardless of how revolting such statements may be.





Besides it would be futile to report the imam and those similarly disposed to the police for the public prosecutor would never indict them. Otherwise it would have happened long ago.





As jurisprudence shows, not only in Denmark but in all European countries with similar insult articles in their penal code, these insult articles open the gates to inequality before the law. There are insulted who enjoy the tender graces of the public prosecutor, and there are the less favoured who must endure insults directed at them.





But perhaps this is to do with the notion that one must not insult minorities whereas minorities are free to insult majorities? If that is the explanation of why I am in court today, it is a peculiar one. In 2002, the imam I have already mentioned explained to his flock that all Muslims in the world - 1,6 billion or whatever the number is - constitute one people, one umma. The same thing is emphasised by the Islamic Conference Organisation, OIC, encompassing 57 member countries. In other words, the five million non-Muslim Danes are a microscopic minority but nevertheless a minority whose members stand to be punished if they make statements on cultural norms in the umma.





What does the public prosecutor hope to accomplish by my conviction? He may drag me in front of a court. He may portray me as a racist, a right-wing extremist and a non-human. He may do the same to hundreds and thousands of others who insist on their right of free speech to describe Islam and Muslim culture just like we would deal with any other phenomenon in a free society.





But what will he have gained? Does the public prosecutor believe that people will start talking about Islam and Muslim culture with greater respect and reverence? Perhaps in public because people fear fines and jail. But what will people say to each other when they think that the thought police are not listening?





And what does the public prosecutor imagine people will think of a religion, a political ideology and a culture that need the protection of legislators, police, the public prosecutor and the courts because they cannot defend themselves in a free and open debate?





In 1644, when the English parliament considered the institution of religious censorship, that Christian defender of free speech John Milton wrote: "There is yet behind of what I purpos'd to lay open, the incredible losse, and detriment that this plot of licencing puts us to, more then if som enemy at sea should stop up all our hav'ns and ports, and creeks, it hinders and retards the importation of our richest Marchandize, Truth."





And further:





"There be who perpetually complain of schisms and sects, and make it such a calamity that any man dissents from their maxims. 'Tis their own pride and ignorance which causes the disturbing, who neither will hear with meeknes, nor can convince, yet all must be suppresst which is not found in their Syntagma."





Milton concluded with this exhortation:





"Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties."





In conclusion permit me to mention the true victims in this case. The public prosecutor has not considered the 20,000 women in the Muslim world who every year fall victim to so-called honour killings, or the 50,000 Muslim girls in Germany who the federal police consider threatened with genital mutilation, nor the hundreds of thousands of little girls in Muslim majority societies who have been sold into marriage with much older men and who must therefore live a life of constant rape, while Islamic scholars preach that this is in complete accordance with religious orthodoxy.





I hope that the judge as opposed to the public prosecutor will consider the fate of these unfortunate human beings. Likewise I hope that the judge will realise the absurdity of prosecuting me for statements made within the confines of my own four walls. For ten months the prosecutor has been aware of the conditions under which I spoke. That has not affected him in the slightest. I hope it will affect the judge.

Posted at 06:27 PM

Religious Persecution By Muslims? Perish The Thought!

From The American Spectator:

5:19 AM (10 hours ago)Religious Persecution by Muslims? Perish the Thought!from The American Spectator and AmSpecBlog by Doug BandowReligious dialogue is worthwhile endeavor. In particular, Christians and Muslims should engage one another. While miracles are unlikely to result, greater familiarity may reduce unintended misunderstanding and insult.




However, any dialogue must be based on truth. Including the pervasive Islamic persecution of Christians, Jews, and other religious minorities.



Unfortunately, truth apparently is not a concern of the Muslim side of one well-publicized engagement process with Catholics. The al-Azhar Islamic Research Council, Sunni Islam's highest seat of learning, held an emergency meeting and decided to suspend its bi-annual meetings with the Vatican.



The reason: "repeatedly insulting remarks issued by the Vatican Pope towards Islam and his statement that Muslims are discriminating against others who live with them in the Middle East." The Cairo-based Council also criticized Pope Benedict XVI's "unjustified claim that Copts are persecuted in Egypt and the Middle East." Indeed, added the Council, the Pope had "repeatedly addressed Islam negatively." Sheikh Ahmed el-Tayeb, the grand imam of al-Azhar University, further denounced the Pope's "unacceptable interference in Egypt's affairs."



Even before the Council acted, the Egyptian government had attacked the Vatican's "unacceptable interference in its internal affairs" and recalled its ambassador from the Holy See. Ambassador Lamia Aly Mekhemar, who returned to Cairo for "consultation," explained that "We do not share the views that Christians are persecuted in our part of the world." Nor, he added, does his government agree that "some governments in the area have not provided protection for the Christians in the Middle East." Moreover, Arab leaders gathered for an economic summit in Sharm al-Sheikh expressed "total rejection" of foreign interference regarding Christian minorities in the Middle East.



The Council, Egyptian government, and other Middle Eastern states are angry because the Pope denounced the murder of Christians in Egypt, Iraq, and Nigeria. He spoke of "the urgent need for the governments of the region" to protect religious minorities and urged Christian communities to maintain a nonviolent response to "a strategy of violence that has Christians as a target."




Apparently the al-Azhar Islamic Research Council believes in inter-faith dialogue, but only so long as it does not include the fact that members of one side of that dialogue are busy killing members of the other side. Indeed, pointing to ongoing attacks constitutes "insulting remarks." Moreover, America's Arab allies enjoy cashing big checks from Uncle Sam, but are outraged, simply outraged, that the latter has the temerity to mention the lack of religious liberty in those same nations.



Almost makes you wonder whether adherents of the "religion of peace" think it really is the "religion of peace." Or at least that being the "religion of peace" actually requires believing in, well, "peace."



The reaction of the Council and Arab governments is extraordinarily revealing because Islamic brutality, both discrimination and violence, against Christians is so pervasive. The Pope spoke out after a bombing in Alexandria outside a Coptic Church on New Year's Eve which killed 25 people and injured more than 90 others. Christians continue to be killed in Iraq and Nigeria.



Christian converts risk judicial murder in Afghanistan. Pakistan is threatening to execute a Christian "blasphemer" in Pakistan. Iran recently initiated a campaign against Christians. Even in relatively liberal Muslim states, like Kuwait, where Christians can worship openly, proselytism is forbidden.



Egypt is a particularly apt case since the number of Christians is relatively large, constituting as much as 15 percent of a population of more than 80 million.



Violence is common. In mid-November an off-duty police officer boarded a train and opened fire, murdering a 71-year-old Copt and injuring five other Christians. Last November Muslim mobs destroyed a score of homes and shops in Qena Province. Earlier in the year six Copts along with a Muslim guard were killed and another nine Copts wounded in a drive-by shooting in the town of Nag Hammadi. Kathryn Cameron Porter of the Council for Human Rights observed afterwards: "Copts in Egypt continuously face ongoing discrimination and outright persecution, either by the Egyptian government or through its tacit approval."



Although Cairo routinely discriminates against non-Muslims, it does not directly engage in what we typically think of as persecution. But it does little to prevent private violence. Unfortunately, the effect is basically the same.




Dina Guirguis of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy testified last week before the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission of the House Foreign Affairs Committee: "Egypt's native Christians … are the Middle East's largest Christian minority but in the past decade have faced an alarming escalation of violence as state protection has dwindled." Yet when the Copts attempt to protect themselves, as in the city of Giza last November, the police do intervene -- against the victims.



Guirguis pointed to one case where a judge and his two sons, who were prosecutors, led a mob in destroying a Greek Orthodox church. "At least half a dozen murders of Christians by Muslims in the last four years were rendered crimes without punishment due to the refusal of the state to follow the requirements of the rule of law in prosecuting felonies," she added. The complicity of security forces and legal officials in violence as well as discrimination demonstrates to all Egyptians that "sectarian violence is a crime to be committed with impunity," Guirguis warned.



The government also routinely interferes with Copts simply seeking to live out their faith. The state often refuses to allow construction or repair of churches or other buildings, even those for social functions. Christians have been ordered to take down crosses outside of churches and even charged for private worship without a permit. Moreover, the government has discriminated against Copts when fulfilling its civil role, such as issuing identification cards.



Egypt's wretched record is well established. In its report last year on international religious freedom, the State Department observed: "Christians and members of the Baha'i faith, which the government does not recognize, face personal and collective discrimination, especially in government employment and their ability to build, renovate, and repair places of worship. The government also sometimes arrested, detained, and harassed Muslims such as Shi'a. Ahmadiyas, Quaranists, converts from Islam to Christianity, and members of other religious groups whose beliefs and/or practices it deemed to deviate from mainstream Islamic beliefs and whose activities it alleged to jeopardize communal harmony."



For the same reasons the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom placed Egypt on its "watch list." The Commission pointed to widespread "discrimination, intolerance, and other human rights violations against members of religious minorities, as well as disfavored Muslims." Last year's Commission report cited "a significant upsurge in violence" against Copts as well as "a growing climate of impunity" for those who commit such crimes.




The group International Christian Concern placed Egypt in this year's annual "Hall of Shame." Explained ICC: "While Egypt escaped being included in the Hall of Shame in 2010, escalating atrocities committed against the Arab world's largest Christian minority forced us to include Egypt in this year's report." Indeed, last year, reported ICC, was "one of Egypt's worse years of persecution in recent memory."



One can't help but wonder where Pope Benedict came up with the silly idea that Christians face discrimination and persecution in the Middle East. No wonder the al-Azhar Islamic Research Council was upset. Tsk, tsk.



Vatican spokesman Federico Lombardi responded to the Council decision: "The pontifical council for inter-religious dialogue's line of openness and desire to dialogue is unchanged." That's a truly "Christian" response, but the Vatican obviously should not expect the same in return, at least not from its Islamic counterparts.



There is much to criticize in the policies of Western governments, including of the U.S. But that has nothing to do with an inter-faith dialogue. It certainly has nothing to do with how Christians, Jews, Baha'is, and other religious minorities are, or at least should be, treated in majority Muslim nations.



Moreover, until Muslim governments treat all of their people, irrespective of faith, with respect and dignity, they have no credibility to complain about the treatment of Muslims elsewhere. As Jesus explained, we should take the plank out of our own eye before seeking to pull a speck out of someone else's eye (Matthew 7:3-5). His advice should be widely shared and, more importantly, heeded in Cairo and throughout the Muslim world.



Mr. Bandow is a Senior Fellow in International Religious Persecution at the Institute on Religion and Public Policy.

Islam Has Become The KKK Of The 21st Century; The KKK Was Banned For Far Less Than Islam Does Every Day

From The Patriot Word:

6:59 AM (9 hours ago)Islam has become the KKK of the 21st century... The KKK was banned for far less than Islam does every dayfrom The Patriot Word by Walter L. Brown Jr.Islam is identical to the KKK. Criticize them or make fun of them; point out the inconsistencies in their doctrine; expose the rampant evil they propagate, photograph them committing acts of terrorism, and you face a death threat. They hate Jews, they hate Gays, they hate anyone that isn't part of their organization and are justified in killing anyone they choose. Are all Moslems terrorists? No, but the leadership of Mohammedism (aka Islam) is absolutely, unquestionably, undeniably committed to using violence to advance their cause.




Mohammedism is a violent criminal organization; the fact that millions of its members don't understand what they are part of or think they can reform Mohammedism doesn't change the fundamental facts.



Do we really want to wait until Islamic rape, violence, and murder is out of control in the the US like in Europe before we take action? We know how to deal with sedition, we have defeated seditious efforts to destroy our form of government before. Every generation has its own challenge to overcome, ours is defeating Islam and relegating it to the historical infamy that it deserves.



The following comes from Gentile Islam: "Combining the racism of the KKK, the world conquest goals of the Third Reich and the mortal dissident censorship of North Korea, Islam is the most successful and lethal political system the earth has ever known. For 1400 years Islam has been emulating a 7th Century warlord, steadily annihilating cultures, subverting governments and subjugating unwilling people to brutal Islamic Sharia Law. 66 Countries have succumbed to the horrors of Islam thus far. If a liberal led West continues to pretend Islam is innocent and not out to conquer every government, religion and nation, we will lose all we hold dear and Islam will be our master.



There is such a thing as UNLAWFUL RELIGION. The KKK was banned for inciting unlawful activities. Religious protections and freedoms only apply to lawful religions. One can't form an ideology and practice of violence, sedition, terrorism, aid and comfort to enemies of the state, call it a religion, and expect special privilege to skirt United States laws against violence and sedition.



The KKK has always based its precepts on Christianity, as well as racial identity. It also reacted with violence, rallies, death threats and killing when it was threatened. It careened far away from being a mere "idea" or religious theology and became a terrorist organization. And it became a terrorist organization even though literally millions of Americans that belonged to or identified with the Klan were not themselves violent, evil, or dangerous citizens.






The leadership of the Klan supported violence. The leadership preached violence. The leadership planned and fomented it. Therefore, it had to go because it became a danger to every law-abiding citizen, whether they agreed with the racial and religious concepts the Klan espoused or not.



Islam has become the KKK of the 21st century. The sooner we awake to this truth and take steps to ban the religion, or somehow curtail its pernicious influence the better. The west is going to have to put sever restrictions on Islamic Mosques and public display of Islam. Further, those who espouse, adhere to and claim allegiance to Islam should not be allowed to hold public office or serve in the military or occupy any positions that might facilitate sabotage against the state."



Read it all.  From Islam Is Unlawful:
 
United States Laws on Treason, Sedition, Subversive Activities and Incitement


The Law

United States Code

as published by Cornell Law School:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/Treason-Sedition-Subversive-Activities.html







TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115

CHAPTER 115—TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES





TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > § 2381

§ 2381. Treason







Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned



not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.



TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > § 2383

§ 2383. Rebellion or insurrection







Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.



TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > § 2382

§ 2382. Misprision of treason







Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both.

TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > § 2384

§ 2384. Seditious conspiracy



If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.



TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > § 2385

§ 2385. Advocating overthrow of Government







Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government; or

Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or

Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof



Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.

If two or more persons conspire to commit any offense named in this section, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.

As used in this section, the terms "organizes" and "organize", with respect to any society, group, or assembly of persons, include the recruiting of new members, the forming of new units, and the regrouping or expansion of existing clubs, classes, and other units of such society, group, or assembly of persons.



TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > § 2386

§ 2386. Registration of certain organizations



(A) For the purposes of this section:

"Attorney General" means the Attorney General of the United States;

"Organization" means any group, club, league, society, committee, association, political party, or combination of individuals, whether incorporated or otherwise, but such term shall not include any corporation, association, community chest, fund, or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, literary, or educational purposes;

"Political activity" means any activity the purpose or aim of which, or one of the purposes or aims of which, is the control by force or overthrow of the Government of the United States or a political subdivision thereof, or any State or political subdivision thereof;

An organization is engaged in "civilian military activity" if:

(1) it gives instruction to, or prescribes instruction for, its members in the use of firearms or other weapons or any substitute therefor, or military or naval science; or

(2) it receives from any other organization or from any individual instruction in military or naval science; or

(3) it engages in any military or naval maneuvers or activities; or

(4) it engages, either with or without arms, in drills or parades of a military or naval character; or

(5) it engages in any other form of organized activity which in the opinion of the Attorney General constitutes preparation for military action;

An organization is "subject to foreign control" if:

(a) it solicits or accepts financial contributions, loans, or support of any kind, directly or indirectly, from, or is affiliated directly or indirectly with, a foreign government or a political subdivision thereof, or an agent, agency, or instrumentality of a foreign government or political subdivision thereof, or a political party in a foreign country, or an international political organization; or

(b) its policies, or any of them, are determined by or at the suggestion of, or in collaboration with, a foreign government or political subdivision thereof, or an agent, agency, or instrumentality of a foreign government or a political subdivision thereof, or a political party in a foreign country, or an international political organization.

(B)

(1) The following organizations shall be required to register with the Attorney General:

Every organization subject to foreign control which engages in political activity;

Every organization which engages both in civilian military activity and in political activity;

Every organization subject to foreign control which engages in civilian military activity; and

Every organization, the purpose or aim of which, or one of the purposes or aims of which, is the establishment, control, conduct, seizure, or overthrow of a government or subdivision thereof by the use of force, violence, military measures, or threats of any one or more of the foregoing.

Every such organization shall register by filing with the Attorney General, on such forms and in such detail as the Attorney General may by rules and regulations prescribe, a registration statement containing the information and documents prescribed in subsection (B)(3) and shall within thirty days after the expiration of each period of six months succeeding the filing of such registration statement, file with the Attorney General, on such forms and in such detail as the Attorney General may by rules and regulations prescribe, a supplemental statement containing such information and documents as may be necessary to make the information and documents previously filed under this section accurate and current with respect to such preceding six months' period. Every statement required to be filed by this section shall be subscribed, under oath, by all of the officers of the organization.

(2) This section shall not require registration or the filing of any statement with the Attorney General by:

(a) The armed forces of the United States; or

(b) The organized militia or National Guard of any State, Territory, District, or possession of the United States; or

(c) Any law-enforcement agency of the United States or of any Territory, District or possession thereof, or of any State or political subdivision of a State, or of any agency or instrumentality of one or more States; or

(d) Any duly established diplomatic mission or consular office of a foreign government which is so recognized by the Department of State; or

(e) Any nationally recognized organization of persons who are veterans of the armed forces of the United States, or affiliates of such organizations.

(3) Every registration statement required to be filed by any organization shall contain the following information and documents:

(a) The name and post-office address of the organization in the United States, and the names and addresses of all branches, chapters, and affiliates of such organization;

(b) The name, address, and nationality of each officer, and of each person who performs the functions of an officer, of the organization, and of each branch, chapter, and affiliate of the organization;

(c) The qualifications for membership in the organization;

(d) The existing and proposed aims and purposes of the organization, and all the means by which these aims or purposes are being attained or are to be attained;

(e) The address or addresses of meeting places of the organization, and of each branch, chapter, or affiliate of the organization, and the times of meetings;

(f) The name and address of each person who has contributed any money, dues, property, or other thing of value to the organization or to any branch, chapter, or affiliate of the organization;

(g) A detailed statement of the assets of the organization, and of each branch, chapter, and affiliate of the organization, the manner in which such assets were acquired, and a detailed statement of the liabilities and income of the organization and of each branch, chapter, and affiliate of the organization;

(h) A detailed description of the activities of the organization, and of each chapter, branch, and affiliate of the organization;

(i) A description of the uniforms, badges, insignia, or other means of identification prescribed by the organization, and worn or carried by its officers or members, or any of such officers or members;

(j) A copy of each book, pamphlet, leaflet, or other publication or item of written, printed, or graphic matter issued or distributed directly or indirectly by the organization, or by any chapter, branch, or affiliate of the organization, or by any of the members of the organization under its authority or within its knowledge, together with the name of its author or authors and the name and address of the publisher;

(k) A description of all firearms or other weapons owned by the organization, or by any chapter, branch, or affiliate of the organization, identified by the manufacturer's number thereon;

(l) In case the organization is subject to foreign control, the manner in which it is so subject;

(m) A copy of the charter, articles of association, constitution, bylaws, rules, regulations, agreements, resolutions, and all other instruments relating to the organization, powers, and purposes of the organization and to the powers of the officers of the organization and of each chapter, branch, and affiliate of the organization; and

(n) Such other information and documents pertinent to the purposes of this section as the Attorney General may from time to time require.

All statements filed under this section shall be public records and open to public examination and inspection at all reasonable hours under such rules and regulations as the Attorney General may prescribe.

(C) The Attorney General is authorized at any time to make, amend, and rescind such rules and regulations as may be necessary to carry out this section, including rules and regulations governing the statements required to be filed.

(D) Whoever violates any of the provisions of this section shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

Whoever in a statement filed pursuant to this section willfully makes any false statement or willfully omits to state any fact which is required to be stated, or which is necessary to make the statements made not misleading, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.





TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > § 2388

§ 2388. Activities affecting armed forces during war



(a) Whoever, when the United States is at war, willfully makes or conveys false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies; or

Whoever, when the United States is at war, willfully causes or attempts to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or willfully obstructs the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States, to the injury of the service or the United States, or attempts to do so—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

(b) If two or more persons conspire to violate subsection (a) of this section and one or more such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be punished as provided in said subsection (a).

(c) Whoever harbors or conceals any person who he knows, or has reasonable grounds to believe or suspect, has committed, or is about to commit, an offense under this section, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

(d) This section shall apply within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States, and on the high seas, as well as within the United States.





TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > § 2387

§ 2387. Activities affecting armed forces generally



(a) Whoever, with intent to interfere with, impair, or influence the loyalty, morale, or discipline of the military or naval forces of the United States:

(1) advises, counsels, urges, or in any manner causes or attempts to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty by any member of the military or naval forces of the United States; or

(2) distributes or attempts to distribute any written or printed matter which advises, counsels, or urges insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty by any member of the military or naval forces of the United States—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.

(b) For the purposes of this section, the term "military or naval forces of the United States" includes the Army of the United States, the Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, Navy Reserve, Marine Corps Reserve, and Coast Guard Reserve of the United States; and, when any merchant vessel is commissioned in the Navy or is in the service of the Army or the Navy, includes the master, officers, and crew of such vessel.



TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > § 2389

§ 2389. Recruiting for service against United States



Whoever recruits soldiers or sailors within the United States, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction thereof, to engage in armed hostility against the same; or

Whoever opens within the United States, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction thereof, a recruiting station for the enlistment of such soldiers or sailors to serve in any manner in armed hostility against the United States—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.



TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > § 2390

§ 2390. Enlistment to serve against United States



Whoever enlists or is engaged within the United States or in any place subject to the jurisdiction thereof, with intent to serve in armed hostility against the United States, shall be fined under this title [1] or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.