Traitor American Lawyers


U.S. Muslim leaders forbid aid to troops

Islamic jurists decree giving soldiers food 'not permissible'

Posted: March 08, 2010
WorldNetDaily

American Muslims are banned from helping U.S. soldiers deployed in Afghanistan, Iraq and other "Muslim lands," according to a shocking fatwa, or religious decree, recently issued by American-based Islamic jurists.

One of the most respected Islamic law authorities in America has decreed it is "not permissible" for even Muslims who are citizens of America to send food or other aid to American troops serving in those Muslim countries.

The Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America, or AMJA, ruled it is a "sin" to help the U.S. military in its multi-front war on terror. AMJA delivered the ruling through its online "fatwa bank":

"Q: Is it permissible to participate in taking food to the American and foreign soldiers working in Muslim lands?"

"A: That would not be permissible, for that would be helping others in sin and transgression."

Critics warn that such anti-military views by Muslim scholars have translated into homegrown violence against American soldiers.

Another American cleric, Anwar Awlaki, has decreed that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are crimes against Muslims and has warned fellow Muslim Americans not to serve in the U.S. military or support U.S. military efforts in any way. Recently, he has issued fatwas declaring U.S. troops and military bases open target for jihad.

The Fort Dix Six terrorists cited Awlaki's sermons as a prime motivating factor in their plot to attack Army personnel based at the New Jersey post.

"He gave the fatwa," Muslim terrorist Dritan Duka of New Jersey said of Awlaki. "Hit them (American soldiers) here" in the U.S.

In a series of e-mail exchanges, Awlaki personally counseled Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the accused Fort Hood terrorist, who railed against the Iraq and Afghanistan wars during a PowerPoint presentation to Army colleagues. He also praised a deadly 2009 attack on an Army recruiting station in Arkansas by a Muslim American.

Hasan in late 2008 and early 2009 had asked Awlaki "about killing American soldiers and officers and whether that was legitimate or not."

In response, Awlaki gave his blessing to such attacks.

After the Fort Hood massacre, Awlaki declared Hasan a "hero" and exhorted other Muslim soldiers to "follow the footsteps of men like Nidal." Awlaki's sermons are recorded on CDs and sold as box sets at mosques and Islamic bookstores across America.

Another popular American Muslim cleric, Zaid Shakir, who is still preaching in America, has encouraged Muslims to attack U.S. military planes flying in and out of Fort Bragg, N.C., according to the book, "Muslim Mafia," an expose of the radical Muslim Brotherhood and its front groups in America. Shakir is a regular speaker at Council on American-Islamic Relations events.

Terror expert Paul Sperry, author of "Infiltration" and "Muslim Mafia," says AMJA is top-heavy with radical Muslim Brotherhood leaders posing as moderates.

He notes that many of its jurists teach Islam at the radical Saudi-funded American Open University, a fully accredited satellite campus of the Muslim Brotherhood-controlled Al-Azhar University in Egypt.

One prominent AMJA jurist listed is Sheik Omar Shahin, an admitted former supporter of Osama bin Laden and the ringleader of the so-called Flying Imams who disrupted a US Airways flight in 2006.

The Muslim Brotherhood promulgates the strict Islamic code known as Shariah.

"Bringing about the enforcement of the Divine Law (Shariah) and the abolition of man-made laws cannot be achieved only through preaching," the late Muslim Brotherhood leader Sayyid Qutb of Egypt beseeched followers in his book "Milestones." "When obstacles and practical difficulties are put in its way, it has no recourse but to remove them by force."

"Islam has the right to destroy all obstacles in the form of institutions and traditions. It is the duty of Islam to annihilate all such systems," Qutb argued. "Wherever an Islamic community exists which is a concrete example of the Divinely ordained system of life, it has a God-given right to step forward and take control of the political authority so that it may establish the Divine system on earth."

AMJA has called for reviving the call to "Shariah rule."

"Muslims are to be ruled and governed only by the Shariah," it says in one recent fatwa.

Critics say many of its rulings are misogynistic, oppressing women's rights and micromanaging every aspect of their lives.

According to AMJA's fatwas, Muslim women living in America are prohibited from:

    *

      Growing their fingernails or using nail polish;
    *

      Plucking their eyebrows;
    *

      Showing their hair in public;
    *

      Wearing jeans in public;
    *

      Handling the Quran during menstruation, or praying in the mosque during menstruation;
    *

      Traveling without a male escort who is a close relative;
    *

      Resisting their husband's sexual advances outside of the menstrual period;
    *

      Praying in close proximity to men in the mosque or anywhere near the front of the prayer room;
    *

      Swimming or sunbathing in a bathing suit even in a women-only area;
    *

      Undergoing surgical contraception such as tubal ligation;
    *

      Running for political office;
    *

      Posting photos of themselves on Facebook or MySpace.

"Women are Satan's snare," AMJA says.

AMJA supports Shariah punishment including "lashing" women who have premarital sex (zina) and "stoning" those who have sex outside their marriage.

"We should emphasize here that the way out of these problems in this day and age is to judge by Shariah and to implement the Divinely ordained criminal punishments (hudood), as commanded by Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, at the hands of the rulers," AMJA scholars agree, "for establishing one of the hadd punishments in a land is better for its people than if it were to rain every morning for 40 years."

AMJA also says President Obama, whose father and stepfather were Muslim, was born and raised a Muslim and should return to Islam.

"We ask Allah to bring him back to his religion," AMJA says.

Obama says he became a Christian as an adult while attending Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago.

 

Lawyer's conviction on terrorism charges upheld

BY PATRICIA HURTADO
STAFF WRITER, Newsday

October 26, 2005

A federal judge Tuesday upheld activist lawyer Lynne Stewart's conviction on terrorism charges, ruling that allegations her lawyers made that a juror on the case feared for her life and was coerced were unfounded.

In a separate opinion upholding the convictions of Stewart, 65, and two co-defendants, U.S. District Court Judge John Koeltl also ruled separately that they were not protected by the First Amendment.

Stewart is scheduled to be sentenced by Koeltl on Dec. 22.

Stewart was convicted Feb. 10 of conspiracy and providing material support to terrorism by releasing a statement by her imprisoned terrorist client, Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman.

Stewart represented the radical Muslim cleric in 1995 on charges he conspired in a foiled plot to bomb New York City landmarks on a single day.

Prosecutors charged that after his imprisonment, officials prohibited Abdel-Rahman from communicating with his followers in the Egyptian-based Islamic Group.

Stewart and her co-defendants, Ahmed Sattar, a paralegal and Mohammed Yousry, an interpreter, were convicted of passing messages from Abdel-Rahman to his followers regarding a cease-fire in the Islamic Group.

Stewart argued that statements she issued on the sheik's behalf were protected by the First Amendment because he was merely his expressing an "opinion."

"This argument is without merit," Koeltl wrote. "Abdel Rahman was found to have participated in the ... conspiracy to murder, rather than having merely engaged in advocacy. [The free speech] analysis does not apply to unlawful speech-acts such as conspiracy or aiding or abetting."

In a separate 25-page ruling, Koeltl denied Stewart's request for a new trial or a hearing to investigate charges that another Stewart juror lied about his background and was prejudiced against Stewart.

Stewart's lawyers cited letters from a female juror, identified only as Juror No. 39, who the defense claimed had written a letter saying she cast her guilty vote "only as a result of the fear and intimidation I was made to feel for my life," during deliberations.

Stewart's lawyers had also charged Juror No. 39 was also troubled by an incident in the last days of the case, when an unidentified person who was not part of the trial pointed to her as "the holdout."

For reasons of security, the jury was anonymous and partially sequestered, escorted to and from court by U.S. marshals in a van.

Stewart's lawyers further charged a male juror had been overheard saying that he had been in jail for a couple of nights while in the military. The defense also contended this male juror was prejudiced against Stewart.

In his ruling, Koeltl concluded that the letter allegedly sent by Juror No. 39, a month after the verdict and "was plainly written with the assistance of somebody other than Juror No. 39." He also ruled it contained statements that contradicted what she told Koeltl in an interview during the trial and differed substantially from what she said in her letter to him and what defense lawyers claim she said to them.

The judge said the allegations concerning Juror No. 82 were not reliable and that allegations the defense claimed about Juror No. 39 were "hearsay" and "double hearsay." He noted the juror's reputed concerns were never raised with him in her letter.

Stewart's appeals lawyer, Josh Dratel, could not be reached for comment.

 

MAIN INDEX

BIBLE INDEX

HINDU INDEX

MUSLIM INDEX

MORMON INDEX

BUDDHISM INDEX

WORD FAITH INDEX

WATCHTOWER INDEX

MISCELLANEOUS INDEX

CATHOLIC CHURCH INDEX

Theodore Roosevelt's ideas on Immigrants and being an AMERICAN in 1907:

“In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American... There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag.... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”