March 29, 2007, - 7:45 am

Islam v. Judge Paruk: In Litigation Jihad, Frivolous Niqab Lawsuit Ignores Basic Law

By Debbie Schlussel
The litigation jihad on behalf of sharia (Islamic law) continues.
Last year, I wrote about courageous Hamtramck, Michigan Judge Paul J. Paruk. Judge Paruk presided over a case in which the Plaintiff, Ginnah Muhammad, wears a niqab–a full Islamic face veil, in which only the eyes are visible.
Muhammad, a convert to Islam and a Black Muslim, was asked by Judge Paruk to remove her niqab in order to testify. She refused, and her case, therefore, resulted in a judgment against her. Judge Paruk stated that he needed to see to her face to determine the truthfulness of her testimony. Since Muhammad refused to remove the veil, she was not allowed to testify and lost her case.
Yesterday, a litigious Muslim attorney and Hezbollah supporter, Nabih Ayad (who frequently represents Islamic terrorists and illegal aliens), sued Judge Paruk on Muhammad’s behalf in federal court.

niqabginnahmuhammad.jpgnabihayadginnahmuhammad.jpg

Ginnah Muhammad in her Niqab, w/ Terrorist Lawyer Nabih Ayad

That a judge and jury be able to fully assess a witness’ testimony and gauge his/her truthfulness is a standard precept taught not just in law school, but in high school law classes. Niqabs have been used to hide all sorts of things. Fawzi Mustapha Assi, who smuggled weaponry to Hezbollah, escaped the U.S. wearing a niqab to cross the Detroit border to Canada.
In a letter to Judge Paruk, Dawud Walid, belligerent Executive Director of the Michigan chapter of Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), demanded that Paruk reverse his decision regarding her niqab. Judge Paruk declined.
In the original suit, Muhammad sued an auto rental company, claiming she was not responsible for a repair bill after the car was damaged in her possession. She claims thieves broke into the vehicle.
The car rental company is suing Muhammad for the unpaid bills, a case which was to be decided this month before Judge. Muhammad and Ayad are demanding that Paruk be recused from the case and that Muhammad be allowed to wear her niqab while delivering testimony.
But Ayad and Muhammad should not only be laughed out of federal court, they should be sanctioned for filing a frivolous lawsuit. The Federal Abstention Doctrine is long accepted law that a federal court can offer no relief–monetary or otherwise (such as removing Judge Paruk or requiring him to allow Muhammad to wear the niqab during her testimony)–where the parties have not followed and exhausted all available relief and proper procedures in state courts.
Muhammad and her attorneys had 21 days to appeal Judge Paruk’s ruling in Hamtramck (or 7 days, if it was heard as a small claims case, which I believe it was), back in October. They did not do so. They also had an opportunity to file a motion before Judge Paruk to ask him to recuse himself. They did not do so. At this point, since it is well past the point for either such move, Muhammad and her attorney, Ayad, could have filed a motion before Judge Paruk for leave to appeal, a half year after her case was decided. They’ve not done that, either.
Since they did not do those things, their claim–on civil rights or any other grounds–should be dismissed as frivolous. And they should be forced to pay Rule 11 Sanctions under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for knowingly filing a frivolous lawsuit and deliberately flouting the proper procedures in place for pursuing this matter. It’s clear the only reason they filed this invalid suit is to embarrass Judge Paruk and intimidate other judges in Michigan and elsewhere into accepting the niqab as proper garb during testimony.
Will federal Judge John Feikens do the right thing and throw this case out? He is almost 90 and was first nominated to the federal bench by President Eisenhower. He headed the Michigan Republican Party in the early 1950s. The world was far different then. I hope he understands, today, why this absurd case was filed and why it should be immediately dismissed.
CAIR’s Dawud Walid, in his inappropriate letter to Judge Paruk, stressed that “the case has drawn international media attention,” and was upset that Judge Paruk didn’t cave.
In his letter response to CAIR’s Dawud Walid, Judge Paruk wrote that:

Ultimately, however, my concern has to be, not with what Islamic law requires, but with the laws of the United States and Michigan. I would not permit any other witness to testify with a covered face. I cannot have one law for the community and another for Ms. Muhammad.

Judge Paruk’s position is courageous, not only because he stood up for the American judicial process versus Islamic law, but because he is an elected judge in a city that is fast becoming an Islamic one.
Hamtramck, a small city surrounded on all sides by Detroit, was once dominated by Polish immigrants and their descendants. Today, it is dominated by Muslims from Yemen, Bangladesh, and Slavic and Balkan states. It is the first city in the nation to openly sanction the loud Muslim call to prayer, broadcast as early as 5:00 a.m. and as late as after 10:00 p.m. A well known Catholic church recently had its last mass, and is being converted into a mosque. Press accounts have documented the mysterious burning down of a Hindu temple, and violent Islamic attacks on non-Muslim, Black males at Hamtramck Public Schools.
Muslims could band together to defeat Judge Paruk (as they did to save the call to prayer broadcast, which was voted on), and he knows that. Federal election monitors from the Justice Department Civil Rights division–which you pay for–prevent challengers from challenging Muslim immigrants (many of whom are registered to vote illegally) and checking whether they should be legitimately voting in elections.
With this frivolous lawsuit against Judge Paruk and the mounting pressure from Muslim extremists in the heart of Islamic America, Judge Paruk is truly courageous.
If only we had a few thousand like him to withstand the growing political pressure to cave in to sharia throughout our government.
Unfortunately, we do not. And that’s the most frightening thing about it.
Our future is bleak against the enemy within.

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Print Friendly



Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

63 Responses

Our slow but sure path to dhimmitude continues. There’s more than one way to invade a country, and they have discovered that immigration followed by riding the wave of political correctness is working better than crashing planes into buildings. Don’t be a dhummi – read the Qur’an and see what Muslims really think.
2:98 says, “allah ado al kafareen” (God is the enemy of infidels). Is there really anything else we need to know????

stevecanuck on March 29, 2007 at 9:06 am

Debbie: thanks for the follow-up on this story.
I’m very interested in the bit about the harrassment of non-Muslim black males. I would love to hear more about this. Are these young men (and women too?) being pressured to convert, or merely terrorized. Are the teachers and administrators in these schools Muslim (which can’t be good for the non-Muslim students)?
For too long, black civil rights “leaders” have assumed that the black and Muslim interests were they same (ie, both classes are “victims”).
Of course, we who follow the march of Islam know that we non-Muslims are all infidels and will be treated as such.
Thanks in advance for any follow-up.

sonomaca on March 29, 2007 at 9:35 am

I agree. People like Al Sharpton,Jesse Jackson,Farrakhan are part of the problem. We as black people did not elect these leaders…they kind made themselves leaders by media exposure. They are nothing but opportunists. You only see them when a racially charged event occurs which is rare. But when black on black crime or injustice occurs which results in 93% of black homicides…they (the leaders)are no where to be found. But damn I have to say what the hell is going on in Michigan??? Muslims are taking over one state at a time. The reason why Muslims and black interests have been grouped together is because of the ridiculous Nation of Islam. Had there been no stupid Nation of Islam,I think America (black americans in particular)would see Islam for what it really is.

the_don on March 29, 2007 at 10:53 am

We cannot abandon state law in the name of religious tolerance.
This latest wave of lawsuits challenging well established laws of the land in search of special treatment for a select few is disturbing.
It is my hope that the federal court shows no leniency toward legal charlatans who attempt to shame favorable judgments with blatant grandstanding. Willfully ignoring procedure to maximize exposure to the public should be met with the harshest penalties allowable by law.

Koozebane on March 29, 2007 at 11:42 am

Government,Schools,Courts,Liberals all turning on us. The Islamization and Mexicification of America continues

the_don on March 29, 2007 at 11:59 am

There is the law and then there is justice. The law deals with relatives. It is administered by wise men and also by fools. That is why a split Supreme Court decision becomes law. Justice deals with absolutes. It applies to everyone or it applies to no one. It does not play favorites. The Declaration of Independence spoke to justice. The time has come to renew our independence and return to justice. Religions and pretend religions are not our law. Let us see how the fools play out this case.

Happiness Pursuer on March 29, 2007 at 12:01 pm

Polygraphs have been banned from the courts because of their inaccuracies, yet some judge is wiser than Solomon and can base convictions on how a defendant LOOKS…WTF??!!!
*the_don* brings his MASSUH IZ WE SICK Sambo-shuffle to the table over a car rental claim!!!????
Al & Louis ARE opportunist clowns…and both HAVE spoken out againt Balck-on-Black crime my little wannabe brother…in fact, were it not for the NOI, Black-on-Black crime would be a lot higher.
But how does a MINOR civil suit evoke all THIS?
Many a time these rental agencies have tried to lay that trip on ME, and one of the setbacks of renting-while-Black is that the car rental agencies WILL try to recoup any damages they may have accrued on YOU if you are on the wrong side of the colour line…what should be the story here is WHY Avis, Hertz, Dollar, et. al. have a free reign to initiate these frivolouos suits!
Just a matter of time before “we” start accusing all Muslims of the blood libel…a few Easter pogroms against those SUBHUMANS isn’t all that bad, is it?

EminemsRevenge on March 29, 2007 at 12:06 pm

If you think seeing women with full face coverings is frightening, then try to imagine what they really look like beneathe the niqab. Maybe I would rather not see it. Are they trying to cover up their beards there? What right to they have to parade cavort around in those 7th century desert costumes? Why any shallow headed woman who takes pride by allowing herself to be subjected to look like a dirty walking tent is beyond my comprehension. Truthfully, I find it just as offensive to a woman parading around scantly claded. Its not just the radical muslim agenda thats being shoved upon us alone that tickes me. Its the corrupted jurisprudence system thats pandering to throwback radicals like Ginnah Muhammad who want to impose her middle eastern barbaric culture upon us.

Jew Chick on March 29, 2007 at 12:52 pm

Another bigoted diatribe from Jew Chick there, she is at least consistent I suppose.
“What right to they have to parade cavort around in those 7th century desert costumes?”
They have a right to dress how they like, it’s none of your or anybody else’s business how they choose to dress in the morning.
It’s called ‘freedom’ a concept you clearly despise, Jew Chick.

The Purple Cow on March 29, 2007 at 1:38 pm

Em –
Car rental companies DO want to be paid by the renter for damage done to the car while in the renter’s possession, even when the renter isn’t black. It’s happened to me and I’m not black. To assume a car rental company doesn’t care about damage unless the renter is black is nothing less than stupid.
You say many times rental companies have “tried to lay that trip” on you? What the hell are you doing when you drive rental cars? I’ve had a damage issue once. Remind me to never rent you a car. And if you don’t want to pay for the damage you do, buy the insurance.

Stealthkix on March 29, 2007 at 1:46 pm

No one should be allowed to go around in disguise in this country. If the Muslim women want to be bundled up like a mental case, let them do it in the privacy of their homes. We can’t have them in malls frightening children. Freaks.

lexi on March 29, 2007 at 1:55 pm

Liberals and Feminists claim to represent “progressive” social change. They claim to be against gender apartheid and are in favor of liberating men and women from sex role bondage. Islamists are opposed to everything they supposedly believe in. Separation of church and state, gender liberation, freedom of speech, press and artistic expression. Why are Liberals so tolerant of Muslim efforts to turn back the clock and destroy all the things they hold so near and dear to their hearts?

FreethinkerNY on March 29, 2007 at 2:00 pm

Federal Abstention Doctrine. I agree that the case should be dismissed, based on this series of events.
Dhimmi Watch has the same story:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/015847.php#comments
Note that Muhammad said (according to the AP article) that she would remove her veil before a female judge. Litigants want to judge-shop for the sex of judges?

barrypopik on March 29, 2007 at 2:06 pm

Purple Cow accuses Jew Chick of launching a bigoted diatribe. If you want bigotry Purple, please open your Qur’an and read along with me:
2:89 – The curse of God is on infidels.
2:96 – You will find (Jews) of all people most greedy.
4:76 – Infidels are friends of Satan.
4:101 – Infidels are unto you open enemies.
5:44 – Jews, men who will listen to any lie.
5:75 – They do blaspheme who say Christ is God.
5:85 – Strongest in enmity to Muslims are Jews and pagans.
9:30 – God’s curse be on them (Christians and Jews).
There are many more. In fact, the main message of the Qur’an is that the world is divided between Muslims and infidels, and there are no exceptions. Muslims are good – infidels are evil.
If the Qur’an simply said infidels are misguided and will be denied Heaven unless they convert, we wouldn’t be mired in this endless 1400 year jihad. But, it says we’re evil and worthy of death – hence perpetual hostility.
And, if someone wants to bring out the old bromide that Muslims only fight in self-defense, they need to explain to me why Muslims had to go to southern France in 734 to “defend themselves”.

stevecanuck on March 29, 2007 at 2:28 pm

Congratulations Canuck Steve, you are the 10,000,000th religious bigot to quote the Sword Verses out of context.
You must be very proud.

The Purple Cow on March 29, 2007 at 2:31 pm

As a non-religious person, I am horrified that what I consider irrational beliefs and myths should be considered as the basis for any legal judgment.
If this should happen in the U.S., then I will promptly become the founding prophet of a religion based on the idea that walking naked in courtrooms is a requirement on every feast day (23rd day of each 23 days based on the holy prime number halibut).

Hall Of Record on March 29, 2007 at 2:39 pm

When does “kill” not mean kill? When a muslim is explaining the koran to an infidel. Look at the world, and see how many are being killed in the name of islam, then deny that the word “kill” is taken out of context.
As for this absolutely insane lawsuit, if this woman doesn’t like the laws in the U.S., she’s free to move to some islamic hell hole where she can live happily as a walking garbage bag.

s on March 29, 2007 at 2:42 pm

As I see it, the problem with the lawsuit begins with MCL 691.1407(5), which states that “A judge…[is] immune from tort liability for injuries to persons or damages to property if he or she is acting within the scope of his or her judicial…authority.”
This statute should bar the lawsuit. However, if the Federal Suit is a section 1983 claim, then it is possible that the State Statute can be set aside because it is limiting the 1983 claim and no state law can limit a 1983 claim. However, I suspect there’s a Federal analouge to the State statute. Judge Paruk might be able to rely on that Federal law to bar the lawsuit.
And, by the way, I’m a liberal attorney in Michigan.

Hourman on March 29, 2007 at 3:00 pm

PurpleCow,
The 10 million bigots corresponds nicely with the 10 million plus Muslims who are interpreting it in the same way and demonstrate it daily by their deadly terrorism against innocent civilians.
Your attitude is typical of the once great British people who have become impotent wimps and are blind to the great peril that faces them directly.

Facts of Life on March 29, 2007 at 3:00 pm

PurpleCow:
It seems like my bigoted statements offended your political sensibilities as always. Btw, are you one of those sharia pushing ultra – tolerant bootlicking apoligists for your throat – cutting buddies? Do you happen to wear one of those cloaks in public? Be honest with yourself. If you happen to be a devout muslim then bloody say so. Talk about freedom of speech, bear in mind that its not only limited to you liberals. AS an american just like yourself who enjoys the freedom of speech and concept that you emphazise, I am entitled to my opinions even though most of the time it objects with yours and you don’t have the right to deny that from me. You amuse me with your hypocrisy. Do you ever read your comments just to have some idea how idiotic you are? What is your flippin problem? You sound just as bigoted as you accuse me of being.

Jew Chick on March 29, 2007 at 3:58 pm

When koranic verses are quoted, I would love to see someone actually attempt to disprove it instead of just saying “nuh uh!”. Out of context is only a valid argument if you can show it IN context to prove your point. Otherwise your point is…. well…. pointless.

Stealthkix on March 29, 2007 at 4:05 pm

By the way, does that picture remind anyone of the Diva from The Fifth Element, or is it just me?

Stealthkix on March 29, 2007 at 4:35 pm

she has pretty eyes :)

the_don on March 29, 2007 at 4:56 pm

Hey, Purple. I notice that when Muslims or their supporters throw the “out-of-context” trump card on the table they NEVER explain the “true” context.
Did you know that Osama bin Laden used 18 full or partial quotes from the Qur’an in his declaration of war against the west. Context apparently isn’t a problem with him.
Also, the head of the Cairo Al-Azhar university fatwa committee issued a fatwa describing 20 bad traits of Jews as detailed in the Qur’an. And, guess what!! Not a single quote was framed in terms of context.
Anyone who has persevered through reading the Qur’an knows it’s just one very long and repetitive sermon full of stand alone proclamations. Please tell me how “God does not love infidels (3:32)” could possibly mean anything else in a different context.
I await your further blatherings, beer in hand……GO

stevecanuck on March 29, 2007 at 5:05 pm

I knew this story couldn’t fly by without “EnemasRegurgitate” and “Putrid Sow” turning the situation into another “…quit picking on the muslims” tale. If the skank wants to dress like Bozo on LSD, let her. She probably has to because she can’t find pants big enough to tuck that 30 gallon ass of hers into. Granted, she can dress how she wants but,when it comes to proper dress in the courtroom, she obeys the judge’s order like everyone else or she’s the one to blame for her case going in the tank. As far as making this a ranta about Rental Car companies making this a racial slant, how far up their collective asses did Islam’s Beavis and Butthead have to surf to find that? This doesn’t have a damn thing to do with the suit against the rental car company; it’s about being in contempt of court. That’s the law and if you don’t like it, make the big move and open a rent-a-camel business in the land of sand.
Oh yeah…you CAN tell a lot about whether a person is truthful or lying by observing their facial expressions; my money’s on the bitch is lying to begin with. She wrecked the car and is trying pass the buck on some other homey!

1shot1kill on March 29, 2007 at 6:11 pm

Having read the Qu’ran( Yusuf Ali Translation) myself you are exactly right. The Qu’ran is devoid of context,setting,or time frame. You have read Ishaqís Sira (which is the Islamic biography of Muhammad)and the Hadiths(Traditions of Muhammad) by Tabari, Bukhari, and Muslim to fully understand Islam. Those two parts of Islam are more important than the Qu’ran itself because they provide context,time,place,etc for everything in the Qu’ran. The truth is that if you think the Qu’ran is full of hatred,terrorism,pedophilia,moral decay,sexism…you need read the hadiths and sira. They paint a precise accurate picture of Muhammad and Islam further backing up everything in the Qu’ran. Here are some examples
Tabari IX:69 “Arabs are the most noble people in lineage, the most prominent, and the best in deeds. We were the first to respond to the call of the Prophet. We are Allah’s helpers and the viziers of His Messenger. We fight people until they believe in Allah. He who believes in Allah and His Messenger has protected his life and possessions from us. As for one who disbelieves, we will fight him forever in Allah’s Cause. Killing him is a small matter to us.”
Ishaq:327 “Allah said, ëA prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.'”
Ishaq:450 “It is your folly to fight the Apostle, for Allah’s army is bound to disgrace you. We brought them to the pit. Hell was their meeting place. We collected them there, black slaves, men of no descent.
Tabari I:280 “Allah said, ëIt is My obligation to make Eve bleed once every month as she made this tree bleed. I must also make Eve stupid, although I created her intelligent.’ Because Allah afflicted Eve, all of the women of this world menstruate and are stupid.”
Ishaq:185 “In hell I saw women hanging by their breasts. They had fathered bastards.”
Ishaq:250 “The bestial transformation occurred when Allah turned Jews into apes, despised.”
Ishaq:240 “The Jews are a nation of liars…. The Jews are a treacherous, lying, and evil people.”
Tabari VIII:130 “The Messenger said during his final illness, ëTwo religions cannot coexist in the Arabian Peninsula.’ Umar investigated the matter, then sent to the Jews, saying: ëAllah has given permission for you to be expelled; for I have received word that the Prophet said that two religions cannot coexist in Arabia.”
Ishaq:552″The Quraysh had put pictures in the Ka’aba including two of Jesus and one of Mary. Muhammad ordered that the pictures should be erased.”
Ishaq:322 “Allah said, ëDo not turn away from Muhammad when he is speaking to you. Do not contradict his orders. And do not be a hypocrite, one who pretends to be obedient to him and then disobeys him. Those who do so will receive My vengeance. You must respond to the Apostle when he summons you to war.”
Tabari IX:8 “The Messenger marched with 2,000 Meccans and 10,000 of his Companions who had come with him to facilitate the conquest of Mecca. Thus there were 12,000 in all.”
Tabari VIII:133 “The raiding party went to Tha’labah. One of Muhammad’s slaves, said, ëProphet, I know where Tha’labah can be taken by surprise.’ So Muhammad sent him with 130 men. They raided the town and drove off camels and sheep, bringing them back to Medina.”
Tabari VIII:143 “In this year a twenty-four man raiding party led by Shuja went to the Banu Amir. He launched a raid on them and took camels and sheep. The shares of booty came to fifteen camels for each man. Also a raid led by Amr went to Dhat. He set out with fifteen men. He encountered a large force whom he summoned to Islam. They refused to respond so he killed all of them.”

the_don on March 29, 2007 at 6:11 pm

To the ones who repeatedly post quranic verses here, consider the following biblical verses and explain their context as you do so well with the quranic verses.
Don said
ìThe truth is that if you think the Qu’ran is full of hatred,terrorism,pedophilia,moral decay,sexism…you need read the hadiths and sira. They paint a precise accurate picture of Muhammad and Islam further backing up everything in the Qu’ran. Here are some examplesî
The truth is that bible is also full of these thingsÖ you actually need to read them. Here are some examples.
Joshua 8:8
8 When you have taken the city, set it on fire. Do what the LORD has commanded. See to it; you have my orders.”
Deuteronomy 7:2
2 And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them:
Deutenomomy 20:13-14,16
13 When the LORD your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it.
14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the LORD your God gives you from your enemies.
16 However, in the cities of the nations the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes.
Numbers 31:17
17. Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.
18. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves
Psalm 137
“Blessed is he who smashes your children against a rock.”
Ezechial 9:4-6
“The Lord commands: “… slay old men outright, young men and maidens, little children and women”
Leviticus 12:1-5
Women are dirty and sinful after childbirth, so God prescribes rituals for their purification. If a boy is born, the mother is unclean for 7 days and must be purified for 33 days; but if a girl is born, the mother is unclean for 14 days and be purified for 66 days. This is because, in the eyes of God, girls are twice as dirty as boys.
Leviticus 15:24
A man who has sex with a menstruating woman “shall be unclean seven days.”
18:19
“Also thou shalt not approach unto a woman to uncover her nakedness, as long as she is apart for her uncleanness,” Don’t even look at a menstruating woman.
Ecclesiasticus 25:19,24
“No wickedness comes anywhere near the wickedness of a woman
Timothy 2:11-14
“A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I don’t permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner”
Ecclesiasticus 22:3
“The birth of a daughter is a loss”
Corinthians 11:3-10
“Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonours his head. And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonours her head – it is just as though her head were shaved. If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut off or shaved off, she should cover her head. A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head”
19:20-22
If a man has sex with an engaged slave woman, scourge the woman, but don’t punish the man.
Exodus 21:20-21
If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.
Samuel 15:3,7-8
“This is what the Lord says: Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have; do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass …. And Saul … utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword.”
Bible following conservatives are no different to the OBL-like fundamentalists, there is absolutely no difference..
They preach hatred
They are the terrorists attacking other terrorists
Fundamentalist against other fundamentalist
You only differ in your tactics due to technological sophistication.. but you are nonetheless warmongering hateful bigots.

anti-virus on March 29, 2007 at 9:05 pm

ìPlease tell me how “God does not love infidels (3:32)” could possibly mean anything else in a different contextî.
John 3:36
Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life. Instead, he will see God’s constant anger.”
So according to bible god also hates nonbelivers (muslims) and whoever does not believe jesus to be the son of god.

anti-virus on March 29, 2007 at 9:07 pm

Michigan law, unless it has changed in the last few years, forbids appearing in public wearing a mask.

Dr.Dale on March 29, 2007 at 9:23 pm

anti virus quoted

John 3:36
Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life. Instead, he will see God’s constant anger
Sorry but the reference is:
“he that believeth on the son hath everlasting life: and he that believe not the son shall not see life: but the wrath of god shall abideth on him”
I believe these two quotes to have two compleatly different meanings. It has a lot to do with more recent translations of the bible. Some have way to many secular influences
The only English version of the bible that exists without secular influences is the king james version and that should also be checked at all times against the original manuscripts any deviation has huge ramifications

Will on March 29, 2007 at 11:18 pm

The woman who will not take off the mask should be treated like she is– a masked bandito–or is that bandita? Whatever. Thank G-d this judge has the stones to not back down to this muslim whining and harrassment. She no doubt is scamming to get out of paying for her damage she did (or at least is responsible for).
As for the distortions posted by the “anti-virus,” we all know that a tree is known by its fruit. Look at the fruit of Judaism and Christianity in contrast to that of islam. Whenever a Jew or a Christian commits abominations in the name of G-d, the faithful of those faiths publicly, privately and every other way– disown him! When a muslim murders Jews or beheads a Christian or does any other of their garden variety attrocities, they attack the Jews and Christians as “deserving death” and worthy of the humiliation. There is NO OUTCRY against the beheaders/mutilators–no, we hear chants of “death to America, death to Israel, death to infidels, Allahu Akbar!” When was there ever any time we saw muslims speak out against those who do these things? Hello? Did we see ANY muslims saying they despised Zarqawi for cutting Nick Berg’s head off on camera? No, we only heard he was a filthy Jew/American.
One other thing AV–as for the Bible verses and non-Bible verses you mix in your meatloaf with your “commentary” –you obviously despise the G-d of the Bible. It would take time to respond to every distortion as though it was needed, but again, a tree is know by its fruit. Take off the mask or go back to your own land where they live like that. This is America–not islamabad.

BB on March 29, 2007 at 11:44 pm

Hey Anti-Virus,
How many murderors in the last 3 centuries are you aware of who cited the Torah or the Bible in justification of their actions?
Can you name one?
Now ask yourself, how many news stories this week alone involve Muslims justifying murder on the basis of the Koran?
You think your sense of moral equivalence makes you smart? clever? Your lack of proportion and historical context make you an idiot. Stalin called people like you a useful idiot. I’m sure the Ayatollahs feel the same way.
If you think the risks of Christian fundamentalism are just as bad as the risks of Jihad, why not move to Saudi Arabia. They must have the “equivalent” amount of freedom if Christians pose an equivalent amount of risk to that freedom?
You must have no idea what freedom is. Very sad.
What is the Christian equivalent of Shariah law? What groups in the U.S. are citing the Bible in an attempt to overthrow the Constitution?
Are the countries of Ireland, Poland, and Italy sponsoring Catholic churches in the U.S. that also participate in the smuggling of arms?
Pat Robertson may be a nut, but when was the last time he was involved in trying to kill innocent people?
When is the last time the Pope issued a statement urging people to violence?
It is because of people like you, anti-virus, that these Jihadists think they can win.
You might be proud of yourself, but the West will still prevail . . . it will prevail in spite of you and your lack of perspective.

JSobieski on March 30, 2007 at 12:39 am

Thanks Debbie for keeping us posted on these events. You are a soldier in the heart of hostile territory. “MICHIGANISTAN”!! Keep up the good work.

Infidel One on March 30, 2007 at 3:56 am

“you obviously despise the G-d of the Bible. It would take time to respond to every distortion as though it was needed, but again, a tree is know by its fruit. Take off the mask or go back to your own land where they live like that. This is America–not islamabad”.
No i dont despite the god of the bible. You think the biblical verses quoted are distortion. Distorion by whom?? Open your bible and you’ll see they are writen exactly as you read the above. And BTW i dont wera a mask and would’nt want to live in America.
“How many murderors in the last 3 centuries are you aware of who cited the Torah or the Bible in justification of their actions”.
How about the KKK, the nazis and the Zionists. They have been inspired from bible and torah.
“When is the last time the Pope issued a statement urging people to violence”
But he would happily coverup sex abuse and child molestation in the church.
“It is because of people like you, anti-virus, that these Jihadists think they can win”
No not really..Jihadist think they will win anyway regardless of what you or I think.

anti-virus on March 30, 2007 at 4:10 am

The woman is clearly misinformed. She is being stricter than what is required of her. The sharia ruling clearly requires a woman to take her veil of her face (as it does in various other situations) when she has to give evidence or testify in a court in front of a judge, regardless of whether the judge is muslim or not, male or female. You can not blame her actions on islam.. yes she is muslim but she is not obeying the islamic law in this case.

sue-me on March 30, 2007 at 6:22 am

1shot—i can see WHY you’d be intimidated by a big beautiful Black derriere as i’m sure you’re other aliases might be “30 seconds” and “2 Inch Man” which is why you’re probably turnt on by all the anorexic ‘beauties’ in the media…LOL
Sobieski…you SOUND intelligent, but you can’t really be serious right???
How many murderors in the last 3 centuries are you aware of who cited the Torah or the Bible in justification of their actions? Can you name one?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/daily/may99/amir14.htm comes to mind when the Torah is mentioned, and they had a whole movement of bible-citing murders who POGROMed on their way to the Holy Land to kill some infidels in the name of Jesus…guess you never heard of the CRUSADERS, huh???

EminemsRevenge on March 30, 2007 at 6:52 am

Anti-Virus–
You prove my point–the Nazis and the KKK are disowned by the faithful of the faiths you seek to trash/equate with islam. What Zionists are committing beheadings and attrocities you moron?
As for the verses you miss-quote, misrepresent:
Eccesiasticus in not even in the Bible–it is a Catholic apochryphal book.
In Ezekiel 9 for example read the context moron:
Ezekiel 9
Idolaters Killed
1 Then I heard him call out in a loud voice, “Bring the guards of the city here, each with a weapon in his hand.” 2 And I saw six men coming from the direction of the upper gate, which faces north, each with a deadly weapon in his hand. With them was a man clothed in linen who had a writing kit at his side. They came in and stood beside the bronze altar.
3 Now the glory of the God of Israel went up from above the cherubim, where it had been, and moved to the threshold of the temple. Then the LORD called to the man clothed in linen who had the writing kit at his side 4 and said to him, “Go throughout the city of Jerusalem and put a mark on the foreheads of those who grieve and lament over all the detestable things that are done in it.”
5 As I listened, he said to the others, “Follow him through the city and kill, without showing pity or compassion. 6 Slaughter old men, young men and maidens, women and children, but do not touch anyone who has the mark. Begin at my sanctuary.” So they began with the elders who were in front of the temple.
7 Then he said to them, “Defile the temple and fill the courts with the slain. Go!” So they went out and began killing throughout the city. 8 While they were killing and I was left alone, I fell facedown, crying out, “Ah, Sovereign LORD! Are you going to destroy the entire remnant of Israel in this outpouring of your wrath on Jerusalem?”
9 He answered me, “The sin of the house of Israel and Judah is exceedingly great; the land is full of bloodshed and the city is full of injustice. They say, ‘The LORD has forsaken the land; the LORD does not see.’ 10 So I will not look on them with pity or spare them, but I will bring down on their own heads what they have done.”
________________________________
This is a passage of G-d’s wrath being pronounced on HIS OWN PEOPLE for those who were committing idolatry–NOT a call for his people to commit attrocities–you moron. The passages of “conquest” when Israel came out of Egypt were indeed judgments specific to the way Y-hw-H had his people take the land He had sworn to them. They are not calls for ongoing jihad as we all know. And we could take the rest of your verses and deal with them too. You are a moron–as noted above, a useful idiot.

BB on March 30, 2007 at 8:18 am

When you use the KKK and nazis to prove your argument that Christianity is as evil as islam, you only prove that you have no argument. Show me a Christian who does not condemn both. You can’t because there aren’t any. And when you include Zionists in that group you prove where you’re really coming from. Your credibility is gone.

Stealthkix on March 30, 2007 at 9:46 am

And Em –
The Crusades. The only comparison to today’s islam (which is the same as 600 years ago islam) that the terrorist supporters can come up with. Show me a Christian today who is proud of the Crusades and thinks it was the right thing to do. You can’t. Now show me a muslim today who thinks the jihad and sharia ISN’T the right thing to do. There are a few, but they’re reeeeaaallly hard to find.
You were saying?

Stealthkix on March 30, 2007 at 9:56 am

I’m surprised someone like Purple hasn’t brought up Timothy McVeigh. The argument goes something like this: Just as Christianity isn’t blamed for the terrorist act of Timothy McVeigh, so Islam shouldn’t be blamed for those of Osama bin Laden.
We’ve all heard this from time to time and it’s further proof that Muslims and their voluntary dhummis don’t have any credibility.
McVeigh didn’t blow up that building in the name of Jesus. He was an anti-government nut-bar.
He has been utterly denounced by virtually every Christian in the world.
His world-wide network consisted of a guy named Terry.
If that’s the best comarison you have to bin Laden, you sure don’t have much.

stevecanuck on March 30, 2007 at 10:08 am

Those biblical quotes were skewed and taken out of context. You see bible has an actual context. The Qu’ran has no context. Of course both books have violence in them. Here is where the difference lies between the Bible and the Qu’ran. The bible doesn’t instruct Christians to carry out violence against non-Christians. The Qu’ran,Hadith,and Sira clearly specifically instruct Muslims to kill anyone who criticizes Muhammad,Islam or anyone who is an infidel(non Muslim). People can criticize or ridicule Christianity or Judaism and nothing will happen. The minute you say anything negative or try to expose the truth about Muhammad or the Qu’ran…Muslims threaten your life. Look at all the rioting that happened after those stupid Muhammad cartoons were printed. How come there is no rioting when Jesus Christ is ridiculed? Muslim apologists and supporters like to bring up the Crusades without bringing up the facts about what started it. In a nutshell the Crusades began because the Muslim (Umayyad caliphate)conquest of Jerusalem and The Byzantine empire. More importantly, the Crusades happened 716 years ago and only lasted 196 years. The Crusades started out as defensive moral war and then became an offensive immoral war which no one is proud of. Muslims have been holy waring with each other(Sunni-Shia-etc)and against non-Muslims for 1400 years.
Major Terrorist Attacks:
+ The 1972 Munich massacre during the 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich, West Germany
+ The December 1975 hostage taking at the OPEC headquarters in Vienna, Austria
+ The destruction of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland on December 21, 1988
+ The 1993 World Trade Center bombing
+ The 1993 Mumbai bombings
+ The 1994 AMIA Bombing of the Jewish center in Buenos Aires, where Argentina charges Hezbollah & Iran
+ The US embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania on August 7, 1998
+ The September 11, 2001 attacks in New York, and Washington D.C.
+ The 2001 Indian Parliament attack on December 13, 2001
+ The Passover Massacre on March 27, 2002 in Netanya, Israel
+ The Moscow theatre siege and the Beslan school siege in Russia
+ The Bali bombing in October 2002
+ The March 11, 2004 attacks in Madrid
+ The July 7, 2005 bombings in London
+ The second Bali bombing on October 1, 2005
+ The Mumbai train bombings on 11 July 2006.
over 90% percent of Terrorists are Muslim
Islam’s bad reputation in the “civilized” world didn’t just happen over night. It took 1400 years and countless terrorist attacks to get to where it is today. To say that fundamentalist Christians are just as dangerous as fundamentalist Islamists is not only a fallacy but an outright denial of the truth.
How many Christian terrorists attacks have there been?
How many Christian suicide bombings have there been?
Terrorism and Islam are synonymous…that is a fact not an opinion. Of course there are rare exceptions but the reason why terrorist groups are overwhelming muslim is because the Qu’ran/Hadith
encourages terrorism,jihadism and martyrdom. If you refute this fact you are in denial and don’t want acknowledge the unbiased truth.

the_don on March 30, 2007 at 11:28 am

Hey “EnemaBoy”,
First off, anorexics don’t turn me on, fat welfare sisters don’t, and neither do your wannabe islamic douchebags. More so, there’s not much in this world that scares or intimidates me and your BIG Black Bovine ain’t one of them. Sounds more like your bag because you’re probably so pathetic that’s the only thing you can wag your toothpick at and get some attention. I wouldn’t let my dog near that. She probably bathed in the Detroit River which is why they’ll never get the smell off the fish.
You’re a waste of DNA and you’re breathing my air.

1shot1kill on March 30, 2007 at 11:30 am

Jew Chick,Canuck & the rest of you,
It looks like Purple Jackass has picked up a virus. The kind that claims to be harmless or against it’s own true personna. Purple also seems to have attracted a poor immitation of M ‘n M who seems to be rapping negative words that ultimately make no sense.
Truth is guys, we have done our part. The Bible says to bring before that person a witness and explain the truth to them. If they reject it then they can go back to him again with more witnesses. If he still rejects the truth then leave him be to his own sin.
Remember the Bible says that no one understands the Spirit of God unless they first seek His son Jesus. They who are without the Holy Spirit are blinded to God and see only the ways of the world. The world is their God.
Sorry but these guys do not have the true Spirit of Knowledge because they do not know Jesus personally. We should let them be & pray for them to come to the Revelation of Jesus Christ.
We will accept their rejection at this time with a hope for their future knowledge of Christ. But as an added bonus we will… NOT EVEN ORDER THEIR EXECUTION FOR BEING AN INFIDEL. I think that is certainly fair enough and rather Christian not jihadist on our part.

LAMadDog on March 30, 2007 at 11:34 am

LAMadDog, please take your holy bible and stick it up your ass. I don’t need it, and I don’t need lectures from the poor deluded fools who believe what it says.
Let me explain my position in simple terms.
1. there is no such thing as god.
2. there is no such thing as allah.
3. there is no such place as heaven.
4. there is no such place as hell.
5. life, your body, my body, is a random collection of sub-atomic partles that have been around since the beginning of the universe. we simply borrow them for three-score-years-and-ten. Once we die our body decays and the particles return to ever-increasing randomness. That’s it, there is nothing else, there is no such things as a ‘spirit’ or a ‘soul’, nothing else, nada, niente, nicks.
You know what else? if there is such a thing as god, he certainly owes us an apolgy. When a tsunami rips a baby out of a young mother’s arms, the tsunami may well be serving “god’s mysterious will” but it’s not serving humanity – and I don’t want to cow-tow to a god that treats us like shit.
**
Back to the thread for a moment, I don’t actually like to see women dressed in hajibs or abayas. But I don’t write hysterical diatribes on extremist websites about it. You know why? Because it’s none of my fucking business what women choose to wear or not to wear.
Unlike you conservatives, I believe in freedom.
I don’t want to live in a society where one adult gets to decide what another adult puts on when they dress in the morning.
And you’re right lamadpuppy, I do not know this jesus christ guy personally, I suspect that this might be because he died more that 2000 fucking years ago.

The Purple Cow on March 30, 2007 at 1:06 pm

The fact that a Jew or Christian commits violence is not the same thing as citing the Torah or Bible in justification of the violence. The link sent in response to my question did not include a citation to the Torah. It did not include anyone citing the Torah to justify violence.
If a Christian commits violences that is loosely “inspired” by the New Testament, Christians condemn the action and can show how the New Testament abhors violence. If a Muslim commits violence, they can point to specific provisions in the Koran that relate to violence. 97% of the references to Jihad in the Koran occur in the context of physical violence. There is no turning the other cheak in Islam.
The Nazis did not kill Jews and say, see here in Mark Chapter X Verses Y-Z, it says to kill Jews.
The KKK did not lynch blacks and say, see here in Luke Chapter X Verses Y-Z, it says to kill Blacks.
The Pope did not give a speech to urge violence or abuse kids. Failure to discipline, manage, and otherwise hold bad actors to account is different than affirmatively inspiring REQUIRING and INSPIRING BAD ACTS.
The Jihadists do commit murder and other attrocities and cite specific Koranic verses in support. There are numerous Imams who AFFIRMATIVELY preach for them to do so.
My questions were very specific–Violent urgings justified by specific citations to specific texts.
Claims that Christianity or Judaism are equivalent to Islam in terms of a threat are laughable.
The ability of the Blame America First crowd to excuse so many purposeful attrocities by Muslims while simultaneously condemning non-systematic failings of Western society is amazing.
Nazism, Communism, and Jihadism. With the passage of time, the number of Westerners eager to excuse the enemy continues to grow. The presence of useful idiots does embolden our enemies. Hitler became more aggressive due to Chamberlain. Communism and Jihadsim became more aggressive due to Carter.
If you really think that the U.S. is under threat from Christians, move to Europe where Christianity is dying and see how well things go. Or better yet, someplace like China or Saudi Arabia where the “threat” of Christianity is kept in check.
The threat is obviously imminent, so you might want to start packing. Hope you don’t mind if I give you a nice wave and a smile on your way out.
I’d wish you good luck, but you might think I was trying to pray for you.

JSobieski on March 30, 2007 at 1:21 pm

Thanks for keeping the light shining on this back door war, Debbie, waged with multi-culti nonsense and politically correct traitorous blather. We are down to a handful of courageous Americans in the judiciary and legislative branches still manning the barricades.

Bernard on March 30, 2007 at 1:42 pm

Purple, as a fellow atheist, I completely agree with points 1 through 5. Surprised??
As to not wanting to live where one adult tells another how to dress, you obviously choose not to acknowledge the existence of that very law in Islamic utopias like Saudi Arabia. They impose that law on ALL women – Muslima or not.

stevecanuck on March 30, 2007 at 1:57 pm

ì97% of the references to Jihad in the Koran occur in the context of physical violence. ìThere is no turning the other cheak in Islam.î
Total, total, total, bollocks.
The term Jihad refers to struggle, the struggle against tyranny. The Quran states that you can have a Jihad of the sword, but you can also have Jihads of the lips, and the pen ñ for instance. As well as the external Jihad, there is also a much more important Jihad. Each of us in trying to get by in a world full of temptations is involved in an internal struggle. That struggle to be the best person we can be is also a Jihad, the most important Jihad of all. We are all of us involved in our own personal Jihad.
**
ìThe Nazis did not kill Jews and say, see here in Mark Chapter X Verses Y-Z, it says to kill Jews.î
Actually, yes they did.
**
ìThe KKK did not lynch blacks and say, see here in Luke Chapter X Verses Y-Z, it says to kill Blacks.î
Actually, yes they did.
**
ìThe Pope did not give a speech to urge violence or abuse kids. Failure to discipline, manage, and otherwise hold bad actors to account is different than affirmatively inspiring REQUIRING and INSPIRING BAD ACTS.î
That depends upon what your definition of a bad act is.
**
ìThe Jihadists do commit murder and other attrocities and cite specific Koranic verses in support. There are numerous Imams who AFFIRMATIVELY preach for them to do so.í
I agree, but what has this to do with Islam?
**
ìClaims that Christianity or Judaism are equivalent to Islam in terms of a threat are laughable.î
Oh grow up. It was Christians who invaded Iraq causing the deaths of 650,000 people and counting. Do Muslim armies have their troops on the streets of New York, London or Beijing?
**
ìThe ability of the Blame America First crowd to excuse so many purposeful attrocities by Muslims while simultaneously condemning non-systematic failings of Western society is amazing.î
Never having heard of this supposed ìBlame America First Crowdî so I couldnít possibly comment.
**
ìHitler became more aggressive due to Chamberlain. Communism and Jihadsim became more aggressive due to Carter.î
What??? Are you insane? Hitler had committed many of his atrocities years before 1937, and donít forget it was America who wanted to sue for peace with Germany in 1940. At that time Britain stood alone in opposing Hitler.
Blaming Carter for Jihadism (!) ñ I think Iíve heard some crackpot theories in my time, but this one takes the biscuit. It was the failure of the Islamists to make headway at the election box during the 1980ís that triggered radical Islam in the 1990ís. Long, long, after Jimmy was off the scene.
**
ìIf you really think that the U.S. is under threat from Christians, move to Europe where Christianity is dying and see how well things go.ì
I already live in Europe you dumb shit.
**
ìThe threat is obviously imminentÖî
What threat? What are you talking about?
**
ìHope you don’t mind if I give you a nice wave and a smile on your way out.î
Way out of where? Stop babbling, man.
**
ìI’d wish you good luck, but you might think I was trying to pray for you.î
Itís not me that needs luck buddy, itís you. Your political philosophy is going down the tubes. The entire world (including the US of A) is turning itís back on your extreme brand of conservatism, with itís petty hatreds, bigotry and denial of freedoms.

The Purple Cow on March 30, 2007 at 2:17 pm

“Purple, as a fellow atheist, I completely agree with points 1 through 5. Surprised??”
Yes. Having read your earlier posts it hadn’t occured to me that you might have a functioning brain.
**
“As to not wanting to live where one adult tells another how to dress, you obviously choose not to acknowledge the existence of that very law in Islamic utopias like Saudi Arabia. They impose that law on ALL women – Muslima or not.”
I wasn’t ‘choosing not to acknowledge ‘ what happens in Saudi Arabia, I just don’t give a shit what happens in Saudi Arabia, for the simple reason that I don’t live there and I have absolutely no interest in ever living there.

The Purple Cow on March 30, 2007 at 2:21 pm

Bernard –
We are down to a handful of courageous Americans in the judiciary and legislative branches because we have allowed it to be so. We have let the wrong people have the loudest voices and now we are paying for it by losing our country to socialists. Is it too late? Maybe. But it’s still worth fighting for. Every one of us should be calling and writing to our congressmen to encourage them when they’re right and condemn them when they’re wrong. We put them there, we can take their asses out. We should also be contacting the media and holding them accountable for reporting propoganda instead of news. Make some friggin noise!

Stealthkix on March 30, 2007 at 2:23 pm

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field