« | »

CAIR Sues Oklahoma Over Sharia Law Ban

From an outraged (at Oklahoma, of course) Associated Press:

Lawsuit filed in Okla. against Islamic law ban

November 4, 2010

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — An Oklahoma Muslim filed a federal lawsuit on Thursday to block a state constitutional amendment overwhelmingly approved by voters that would prohibit state courts from considering international law or Islamic law when deciding cases.

The measure, which got 70 percent of the vote in Tuesday’s election, was one of several on Oklahoma’s ballot that critics said pandered to conservatives and would move the state further to the right.

With 70% of the vote, it sounds like he ‘pandered’ to the voters. Which is the way our system is supposed to work.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Oklahoma City, seeks a temporary retraining order and injunction to block the election results from being certified by the state Election Board on Nov. 9. Among other things, the lawsuit alleges the ballot measure transforms Oklahoma’s Constitution into "an enduring condemnation" of Islam by singling it out for special restrictions by barring Islamic law, also known as Sharia law.

In case that there was still any doubt in anyone’s mind that Islam equals ‘Sharia law.’ Or, for that matter, that Islam is anything other than an attempt to impose a system of governance upon the world.

"We have a handful of politicians who have pushed an amendment onto our state ballot and then conducted a well-planned and well-funded campaign of misinformation and fear," said Muneer Awad, who filed the suit and is executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations in Oklahoma.

What projection. What else is CAIR but a handful of well-funded stooges who push a campaign of misinformation and fear?

"We have certain unalienable rights, and those rights cannot be taken away from me by a political campaign." About 20,000 and 30,000 Muslims live in Oklahoma, Awad estimated.

Really? We have an unalienable right to make up our own system of laws? Who knew?

Somebody should contact Joseph Smith or any of his ex-wives.

Legal experts have also questioned the measure.

Joseph Thai, a professor at the University of Oklahoma’s College of Law, said the ballot measure is "an answer in search of a problem." He said he knows of no other state that has approved similar measures.

"There is no plausible danger of international law or Sharia law overtaking the legal system," Thai said in an e-mail to The Associated Press

Really? Someone should tell that to the UK, where Sharia courts are popping up like mushrooms. Someone should tell that to Canada.

Thai said the ballot measure "raises thorny church-state problems as well" and could even affect a state judge’s ability to consider the Ten Commandments.

"The Ten Commandments, of course, is international law. It did not originate in Oklahoma or the United States," Thai said

Mr. Thai is an idiot. 

It’s [sic] author, Rep. Rex Duncan, R-Sand Springs, said it was not intended to attack Muslims but to prevent activist judges from relying on international law or Islamic law when ruling on legal cases.

"The threat posed by activist judges is clear," Duncan said. "It shouldn’t matter what the law in France or any other European country is." …

In France, for instance, husband’s have escaped punishment for beating their wives by citing their adherence to Islam’s Sharia law.

The questions are the product of a Republican-controlled Legislature, which circumvented Oklahoma Gov. Brad Henry — a Democrat — to take them to the ballot. Critics say Republicans were trying to beef up voter turnout among certain conservative groups by appealing to biases on immigration, Islam and the reach of Washington in a state where President Barack Obama failed to win a single county in 2008

Oh, those Machiavellian Republicans. By the way, remember how the press chided the Democrats for putting pot legalization on the ballot in California and elsewhere to turn out their brain dead constituents?

We don’t either.

This article was posted by Steve on Friday, November 5th, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

29 Responses to “CAIR Sues Oklahoma Over Sharia Law Ban”

  1. Liberals Demise says:

    You islam punks want sharia law?
    Move your stinkin’ asses back to the shithole where it is practiced and leave America for good. If not I’ll see you on the news where pieces of you will be spread far and wide. GD COWARDS!!
    Some nerve………..btw, we got here before you and this is “OUR” country.

  2. Right of the People says:

    I hope more states have the gonads to start putting laws like this on the ballot. I like that English is the official language of Oklahoma also.

    LD I with you, if the towelheads don’t like it here, leave and don’t let the doorknob hit you in the ass on the way out.

  3. Kaffeesatz says:

    The issue here is not the ‘towelheads’ or the ‘islam punks’ as the previous posters allude.

    Rather, the question is what document or legal code governs our laws.

    It would seem axiomatic that the Constitution would be the ultimate legal source. But this has recently come under attack. There have been several rulings where judges cites such emanations as global opinion and the laws of other nations. This is a travesty that, in a sane world, would result in such a judge being removed from the bench for legal malfeasance.

    So while Sharia law may have been singled out in this bill, this really pertains to any non-US legal system.

    I am a bit stunned, however, at the brazen stupidity of the opponents of this measure.

    Their argument is essentially that our laws are subject to the laws that exist in other jurisdictions, i.e., that we are not a sovereign nation.

    Oh, wait, that is what they really believe!

    • Right of the People says:

      While it is true that this applies to all jurisdictions outside of the US and we indeed are a sovereign nation, the only one I see protesting this is CAIR. Usually the ACLU is the first to jump on things like this or Revs Al and Jesse but nary a peep is heard from them.

      Plus it is the stated goal of Islam to subdue all of us infidel non-believers in their cult so my previous comments stand. I am not and never will be politically correct and I have a habit of telling the truth and what is on my mind, that is what this board is all about.

      As far as the Constitution coming under attack, you are correct. The loony lefties that have been placed on the Supreme Court seem to believe that it is a “living” document for them to twist and contort to their will. If indeed it is in their warped thinking then every legal document should have to pass the same test and if I decide that the contract I signed to buy my car is unfair then I should be able to “interpret” it to say that I can pay what I want per month and maybe decide that after 6 months of paying $20.00 that the contract is fulfilled.

      Once again if somebody objects to laws a state passes then they have the right to move to another state. For example I would never live in Massachusetts because of their draconian gun laws. If the state I lived in passed the same laws especially like in the case of Oklahoma where the people who lived there decided that is what they wanted and passed it by an overwhelming majority then I would move. This is the United States of America, a free society where no one can tell you where you must live or work, those are your choices. If you don’t like where you’re at, move!

    • Liberals Demise says:

      I stand by my statement and CAIR can go to hell or any other place that will take them. As for as I’m concerned…………….they’ve worn out their welcome here and must leave promptly!!

    • proreason says:

      I think all 3 posters are right.

      The issue is the rag-heads AND the issue is also rejecting the notion that we have to subject our country to any other kind of legal system, Sharia, European law, or anything else.

      I love the idea of destroying two insane concepts at the same time.

      But, as an aside, my first thought at 9 a.m., 9/11/2001 wasn’t “gee, I wonder what we can do legally to bring the alleged perpetrators to justice, and which venue would be most appropriate to demonstrate the fairness of the American justice system.”. My first thought was “We have to kill all of these bastards so this never happens again.”. And I’ll bet that was the first thought of 90% of the country and still is what 60% believes. The 10% are a lost cause, and the other 30% are easily persuaded by whoever walks into the room next.

  4. Tater Salad says:

    Are you willing to yield to Islam and its constant pressures placed upon you? Call your Congressmen and ask them to introduce legistlation to ban any future compliance by our court systems to bow to Sharia Law.


    Remember: http://www.practicalstate.com/2010/09/11/when-you-remember-911-remember-this/

    Understand this and be very vigilant America because it is now happening before our eyes:


    Here are the 4 stages of Islamic Conquest of a host Nation: America………..wake up!


  5. Mae says:

    Tap into your search engine, locate a copy of Sharia law. If that doesn’t scare the Obot out of you, nothing will. CAIR is nothing more than a hateful, Hamas-supporting, corruption-encouraging, ALIEN-thought-provoker, un-American-entity, woman-subjugating, honor-killing-supporting piece of dog crap.

    • Liberals Demise says:

      And here I thought they were only into whacking their own at mosques in their leisure time. (sarc)

  6. Chase says:

    I beg your pardon, but Joseph Smith broke no laws, nor did he institute ‘laws’ (as mayor of Nauvoo?) contrary to any in existence. While hauled into court and harassed continuously, no court ever convicted him, and all suits against him were thrown out for lack of basis or evidence or credible witnesses or complaint.

    There were no bigamy laws, in either the U.S., or in England, in 1838.

    Despite pleas to the U.S. government for aid, restitution, or even protection, even to the face of Martin Van Buren, Joseph was told that the U.S. government would do nothing for he and his people. He was murdered by a mob, in cold blood, along with his elder brother, with the likely approbation of Thomas Ford, the governor of the notorious state of Illinois. Neither Van Buren nor the governors of either Missouri and Illinois were successful in seeking successive terms.

    Joseph Smith is not an one to be used as example of lawlessness or unconstitutional abuse of influence, or that of an usurper or conspirator vs laws and the welfare of his fellow man.

    • Liberals Demise says:


    • hushpuppy says:

      1) Chase is correct on all points of law, LD; and various breakaway groups are also taking advantage of the legal precidents (called a priori). There groups in Bountiful BC that are living examples of polygamy. Same group in Bountiful, Utah.

      Even though laws are strict with regards to being married to multiple wives, many religions, islam included, practise polygamy. Here’s the nettlesome facts: freedom of religion – and all that goes with one’s belief system – has a priori jurisdiction over civil law even though bigamy itself is illegal. Why? Because it has no basis in any religion, and the spirit of the law is to defraud rather than follow the teachings of one’s religion.

      It’s called a two edged sword. And it comes with the guaranteed freedom of religion.


      “The Ten Commandments, of course, is international law. It did not originate in Oklahoma or the United States,” Thai said…”

      Mr. Thai is an idiot. ”

      He’s actually accurate. In all the countries England colonized, her laws went as well. All the territories America has protectorship over, our laws went too. These laws were based on several hundred years of English Common Law – which had as its’ foundation the Magna Carta, and the Magna Carta was founded upon the 10 Commandments. The modern term is Judeo-Christian laws. It is called this because both Christians and Jews have the Old Testament scriptures in common.

      Islam only goes back some 1400 or so years. The Babylonian Mystery Religion – the oldest pagan religion in the world – formed the foundation for all eastern, middle eastern and far eastern religions as well as forming the foundation the tenets and doctrines of the Roman Catholic church go back to about 1500 BC.

      When God taught Adam and Eve, the Commandments were already in place as the foundation of laws on earth as it is in Heaven. As parents that would have offspring, Adam and Eve would have taugh their children to Love and Honor God with the first 3 Commandments, Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy (the 4th Commandment), to honor their parents (5th Commandment) and to respect their neighbors and their neighbor’s property rights which are codified in the last 5 Commandments.

      Interestingly, only one Commandment deals with the ‘mens rea’ (the guilty mind), the others deal with the ‘actus reus’ (the guilty acts). In law in order to obtain a conviction, you have to be able to prove both aspects. If the actus reus has not occured or not yet occurred, and all you have is the mens rhea along with the plans, and you can prove the act would have followed at some point, then it becomes a ‘conspiracy to commit’.

      From Adam and Eve forward, the Law (The Torah in Hebrew) was taught to subsequent generations to include ancient peoples collectively known as Hebrews. Hebrews were the descendants of their common male progenitor Eber.

      Note: Jews were only one of the 13 tribes, and they were known as Judah.

      After the children of Israel (another name for Hebrews) were taken into captivity by the Egyptians, they began to worship all kinds of false gods. God led Israel out of captivity after 400 years, and brought them back to the land of Israel. On the way back, Moses was commanded to meet with God on the mountain wherein God wrote the 10 Commandments with His finger to remind all the tribes of Israel not to worship false gods, make idols, bow down and worhsip them and not to take His name in vain.

      These same 10 Commandments date back to Genesis and the Creation, from Eden outward throughout the middle east after Adam and Eve expelled from the Garden at Eden for disobeying God.

      Another interesting side note is that the prophet Jeremiah, his assistant and a Royal Princess sailed from Israel to what is known now as Ireland. They began teaching the same laws to the people there. In fact the Irish venerate person in antiquity : Brian Boru http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Boru

      The royal tribe of Judah were transplanted through the Princess to the Ancient Irish. The throne was overturned and went to ancient Scotland, then on to England. All the monarchs from Elizabeth II back to the ancient Kings of Israel were consecrated on Jacob’s pillar stone which was also brought from Israel to Ireland, to Scotland and then to England. It’s also referred to the Stone of Destiny or the Stone of Scone. There is an unbroken continuity of thousands of years which was prophesied to occur and indeed did occur.

      Queen Elisabeth can provably trace her lineage backwards to Scotland, to Ireland, to Israel, to the various tribes of the House of Israel backwards to Adam and Eve. You can request a copy of her family tree at the Queen’s website.

      Jesus’ lineage is given in the Gospels. He’s a descendant through his Mother Mary backwards to the royal house of Judah. A portion of her lineage branches off and that branch traces through the various tribes of the House of Israel thus fulfilling a prophecy that He would mend the breach going back to the birth of Phares and Zara. There is a Biblical prophecy which states that upon Jesus’ return to the earth for His coronation and to render nil all other thrones and monarchs, He’ll be coronated on the Stone of Stone / Jacob’s pillar stone. He will be crowned King of Kings and Lord of Lords; and of His kingdom there will be no end.

      The Giver of Law is the Creator God. Since He says He is the same yesterday, today and forever, and that all the laws that He gave us were to be kept forever by all generations, one can prove the ‘Judeo-Christian laws that eventually were to cover almost the entire globe makes it international law. Our laws were adopted by the colonized countries because they could see for themselves that our Judeo-Christianlaws were just. They’re just because our God is just therefore His laws are just.

      It’s a common practice for lawyers at some point to remind the Court of a priori decisions including international law when applicable. This comes under the heading of Case Law… and if you aren’t up on your Case Law, when you head into Court you’re ‘cooked’.

      What CAIR is trying to accomplish in all the countries islam has infested is a legal ‘Stare Decisis’ – a legal principle by which judges are obliged to respect the precedents established by prior decisions… including international law when applicable.

      So coming back to that dork from CAIR – our Judeo-Christian laws supercede islam by thousands of years. Islam cannot in any way be considered ‘international’ law because the conquered nations never adopted islam. They have only the contradictory scribblings of a madman who spoke to demons in a cave. Islam has only this one roll of toilet paper I refer to as the koran – which was carried with them wherever they invaded and conquered.

      Because their roll of toilet paper was so jumbled, confusing, contradictory and in some places utterly vague, that their false prophet mohammed had to think fast and come up with ‘sayings’ in order to try to made some sense of it all. These sayings are referred to as hadith. They were not ‘inspired’ by that moon goddess allah, nope, ol’ mohammed dreamed it all up himself.

      So you see now that islam does not have the pedigree that our Judeo Christian laws have, and you can see why our Judeo-Christian laws truly are international.


      The Ten Commandments
      “Nailed to the Cross” or Required for Salvation?


  7. sheehanjihad says:

    To the diseased individuals at “CAIR”…..if you insist on Sharia law…then you will have to abide by my “Mossberg Law”. And the second amendment allows me to protect this country from all enemies…especially you shitbirds and your cult of death and misery.

    This isn’t a slime hole Islamist state….this is the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!! Regardless of what you think, what you believe, what you want, what you expect….you will NEVER EVER introduce Sharia law in this country.

    NOT NOW….NOT EVER. Trust me Achmed….if I see you beating the hell out of your wife because her forehead shows in public….you will learn the effects of my tater stick putting a lasting impression in your greasy forehead. Without hesitation.

    Better yet…leave. Get the hell out of a country where you fit in as well as Obama is president. That’s right. Ain’t happening. LB…..spot on, brother! Semper Fi!

  8. Chase says:


    Sorry, I was responding to this throw-away (?) comment –

    “Really? We have an unalienable right to make up our own system of laws? Who knew?

    Somebody should contact Joseph Smith or any of his ex-wives.”

    Joseph Smith also had no “ex-wives,” only widows.

  9. Georgfelis says:

    Oh come on, what problems could possibly come of running traffic court under Italian law? Or divorce court under French law. Or Small Claims court under Jewish law.

    I’m more worried about the 30% who actually think it is a good idea for an Oklahoma judge to use something other than Oklahoma law when deciding an Oklahoma case.

  10. Adam Moreira says:

    They have sued…and they have been harmed how exactly? What economic damage have they suffered?

    If this lawsuit is allowed to proceed, then a judge has been bought off…plain and simple.

    As for the ACLU, they have not ruled out involvement, although I would tell them not to get involved, as I expect any case challenging the ban to be thrown out for lack of standing.

    Slightly unrelated: On my way home on the bus (I live in NYC), I was thinking: Why doesn’t the transit agency make it an offense for anyone to be on any of its vehicles in anything that obscures any part of the face (that is, below where the hat line would be).

    Slightly related: RoTP mentioned MA and its gun laws. But weren’t those strict gun laws weakened when the 2nd Amendment was incorporated against the states in McDonald v. Chicago over the summer?

  11. beautyofreason says:

    “We have certain unalienable rights, and those rights cannot be taken away from me by a political campaign.”

    Unalienable rights:
    The right to four wives.
    The right to be executed if you switch faiths
    The right to hit a wife or child (UAE)
    The right to divorce a woman with three sentences (talaq)
    The right to keep “your” women from leaving the house, traveling, having a job, or visiting a doctor without your permission (Saudi A.)
    The right to temporary marriage (muttah)

    I didn’t realize that enforcing American law violated Islam, namely the “right” of Muslim men to do whatever they want. My bad.

  12. canary says:

    I sure hope NYC learns Islam is muslims that practice Sharia law.

    Gerogfellows, 30%? well, they say Islam is the fasted speading religion in the entire world. There are so many Americans that don’t know what Sharia law is.

    I have been trying to explain to people what Sharia law is. And I wasn’t sure if I’ve been explaining that a muslim is different than someone of a middle-eastern race. I also had to recently explain that there are black muslims. Being black doesn’t mean you can’t be a muslim.

    I’m so glad CAIR expert Muneer Asswad set us straight and Obama and Dems got it wrong that they follow the Golden rule to love one another just as you love yourself.

    They love allah. They will go town to town, and give choice to convert or burn. Their allah will help them find unbelievers who hide behind rocks and trees too.
    Course those hiding might be armed.

    gosh, I wonder if California will stop buying oil from Oklahoma or retaliate like they did against Arizona.

    Oklahoma is centrally located, and must keep order as the borders are not closed.

  13. MZmaj7 says:

    “Mr. Thai is an idiot.”


  14. lepanto1571 says:

    Like all bullies, CAIR is at your feet or at your neck.

    It’s unconstitutional, they say. However, the article does not specify what part of the Constitution is being violated. Didn’t the lawsuit specify? Didn’t the hard-hitting press ask?

    I don’t recall anything in the Constitution assuring Muslims of having sharia law applied for them; or for Jews to use the Talmud or Catholics to use canon law when at trial. (I must have missed the new edition of the First Amendment specifying that the wall of separation between church and state is optional for the deeply–or just conveniently–religious. Perhaps it’s the Equal Protection Clause being interpreted as requiring that some are more equal than others.) And, for that matter, there must be “a case or controversy” for the federal court to consider, but the best that the opposition can come up with is that the law is unnecessary–which means that there is no case and no controversy. If the statute is unnecessary, where is the irreparable harm upon which injunctive relief must hang?

    So, let’s see if I understand this argument: “Your Honor, this statute that demands that Oklahoma’s judiciary follow its domestic law and the domestic law of the United States is unconstitutional because . . . uh, well, can we get back to you on that? In the meantime, trust us on this one. A legal code that institutionalizes a woman’s testimony at trial as worth one-half of a man’s really is compatible with US law. Really. Have we ever tried to mislead you before?”

    I guess I cannot understand this without going back to reading George Orwell or Lewis Carroll, assuming that there is any bona fides whatsoever in this publicity stunt.

    In a sane world, the lawyers would be facing disciplinary action from their respective state bars.

    Silver lining: more Saudi petro-dollars being spent here rather than on call girls in Monaco or wrecked Bentleys in Knightsbridge.

    • Adam Moreira says:

      The only thing I can think of is: Are OK judges forbidden from enforcing arbitration decisions coming out of Islamic arbitration committees (i.e., such decisions will not be honored in OK courts), but those coming from other religious arbitration committees are honored (thus a 14th violation)?

      That’s the only way I can see the law having a problem, but then the fix is easy…have the courts refuse to enforce any religious arbitration hearings anywhere.

  15. zTruth says:

    Can you think of a time when one individual has tried to stop the will of the people? CAIR’s new director had just recently moved to Oklahoma to assume that position. What a good way to start off his job and relationship in Oklahoma.

    A hearing is set for Monday morning before a judge appointed by Clinton. It should be interesting.

  16. canary says:

    zTruth, is this new director Ayad related to the last director Ayad who is being indicted by the FBI for funneling money overseas to terrorists.

    When Obama first came into office he formed a committee to look into forming a Sharia law judicial
    system. He stepped up in tune with the UK & Europe’s thoughts. I think Europe is banning Sharia law now, seeing it was not a good idea. When you see these parades of muslim men & young boys beating and cutting themselves to bleed in public streets guarded by UK police, THAT is not why America focused on Freedom of Religion. The idea was to have religion without blood. Thomas Jefferson spoke of this. No more torture. No more cutting heads off from the Kings wives because they didn’t bare a boy. No more Obama’s grandpa going after another new wife because the latest couldn’t bare children and made him look less manly. That type of barbaric religion.

    The 1st chapter in the bible made it clear 1 woman and 1 man join under God become one. Since when has anyone wanted life to have rules.

  17. Tater Salad says:

    Below is a draft that needs circulation and thought. Will your elected officials of your own state bring forth legislation similar to this and Oklahoma to stop the spread of sharia law and compliance thereof? Your input would be appreciated and given to http://www.concernedamericancitizens.org

    A wake up call to the President and members of Congress
    Posted on November 7, 2010 by dancingczars| 1 Comment

    As concerned American citizens we are deeply worried about the safety and security of our country. (proposed legislation)

    We believe that a dire security crisis is posed by the misuse of the Religious Freedoms afforded by the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America by organizations and/or groups of individuals as a cover and concealment for the conduct of terrorism, sedition against the United States and other crimes against humanity.

    We further believe that it is a clear violation of the natural laws upon which our Nation is formed to consider such barbaric activities as a Religion or any kind of Religious Practice the exercise of which is entitled to any kind of preference or protection. Accordingly, we are calling you our elected official to create legislative action and bring to congress the following (of course your variation)

    “”Within The United States of America, no organization, association, society or other group of individuals shall be considered to be a religion, or a religious organization, for any purpose whatsoever if it directly or indirectly advocates, promotes, endorses, encourages, sponsors, instructs, demonstrates, recruits for, trains for, or otherwise supports ANY of the following:

    1. Any system of laws for governance of the people as superior to the Constitution of the United States of America, or that is, in whole or material part, in direct conflict therewith;

    2. Terrorism against the United States of America or its citizens;

    3. Any organization that has been designated as a terrorist organization by the United States of America.

    4. Any system of laws that decriminalizes violence against women, or that diminishes the right of free speech and belief;

    5. That there is, or should be, no separation between religion and government;

    6. That any religion is superior to any other religion;

    7. That any person is of lesser or superior value to any other person based on race, gender, national origin or religious belief;

    8. That slavery is justified, or that any person must be subservient or subjugated to any other person based on race, gender, national origin, or religious belief;

    9. That any person or persons should be exterminated based on their race, gender, national origin, sexual orientation, religious belief or former religious belief; or

    10. Barbaric and inhuman punishment for petty crimes, and other cruel and unusual punishment.”

    This legislation was put forth by friends and an attorney; a great deal of thought went into not mentioning Islam or Muslims for politically correct cover. Please get back to me at your earliest convenience; I’m Jim Campbell, member http://www.concernedamericancitizens.org

  18. canary says:

    Let’s recall Obama actively supported the Kenyan Constitution enforce Sharia Law. While holding seat, Senator Obama went to Kenya to campaign for his cousin Raila Odinga for Prime Minister of Kenya. There was a big story in Kenyan and their happiness to start receiving the money again, after Bush would not fund their abortions. However, former President George Bush gave more aid to Africa in the form of fighting poverty and AIDS in 8 years, while Obama has violated freedom of religion in our country & Africa’s country.

    One of the first things Obama did coming into office as US President was illegally fund abortions in Kenya with U.S. taxpayer’s money, though it’s now just drawing renewed attention.
    Obama-Supported Kenyan Constitution Forces Sharia Law
    Kathryn Jean Lopez at National Review reported:

    U.S. financial and rhetorical support for this constitution has some members of Congress calling for an investigation. In a letter to inspectors general of the U.S. Department of State, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and the Government Accountability Office (GAO), Republican representatives Chris Smith of New Jersey, Darrell Issa of California, and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida raised questions about American constitutional lobbying in Kenya: “The Obama Administration’s advocacy in support of Kenya’s proposed constitution may constitute a serious violation of the Siljander Amendment and, as such, may be subject to civil and criminal penalties.”

    Administration officials have denied the lobbying charge. But, as the letter points out, our ambassador to Kenya has been quoted as saying that the U.S. has given Kenya $2 million for “civic education” about the constitution, and that we’re committed to more.

    “The U.S. shouldn’t be interfering with this process, and we have serious questions about why the Obama administration is promoting a constitution which allows abortion on demand and waters down protections for religious freedom,” says Rebecca Marchinda of the New York–based World Youth Alliance, which has an office in Nairobi.

    …. the proposed constitution would also create a legal system within a legal system — codifying the strengthening of sharia by making it apply to every Muslim Kenyan. As Eric Rassbach of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty points out, “People are subjected to these tribunals merely by virtue of what religious community they were born into, and they have no way of opting out.”


  19. canary says:

    Obama administration Department of Homeland Security had major Hasan who massacred U.S. Military at Ft. Hood, on their DHS team when Obama came into office. The New York Square Time bomber was on the terror-surveillance list during Bush years (1999-2008), but taken off when Obama came into office (covered by CBS & NYTimes)

    Obama Appoints Radical Muslim Apologist To Faith-Based Committee
    April 2009


« Front Page | To Top
« | »