[LEGALEAGLE]

Originally Posted by jinnzaman

Keep your degenerated teenybopperish to yourself!

Well Jinn there's another one where me and Mo are laying into him

Tarek Fatah (Toronto, ON) wrote
at 9:27am on March 5th, 2008
Is this the same CAIR that endorsed Bush in 2000 that now prances as if it is a great voice for civil rights? Is this the same guys who became cheer eaders of the visting Taliban representative who toured the US in 2000?

This infatuation with Islamists as if they are today's Sandanistas or latter day Che Guevaras is a mistaken route to take for anyone who believes in civil rights. The sharia, burqa, jihad and the placement of women in the back rows of mosques and the promotion of polygamy is not the manifesto of anti-imperialism and equity; its a manifesto of the Muslim Brotherhood.

By supporting the imposition of sharia law in Canada's family courts, CAIR revealed its true agenda--a medieval mindset.

As far as the claim that Arabs have sufffered most in the US, that is baloney. Ask the 20,000 Pakistanis deported from NY and African-Americans and you will discover the truth. The fact is that all Muslims have suffered, not just ONE ethnicity.
Message

LegalEagle (no network) wrote
at 2:40pm on March 5th, 2008

Saba there are many legal avenues to protest in a democratic society. Generally aggressive protests do not draw people to your cause. The answer if you are opposed to something is to make your voice heard and campaign.

I'm not sure if the people who are so vocally opposing CAIR for it's support for sharia family law are aware of a number of issues.

1. Canada inherited the English common law tradition that if a group of people decide to use their own forum to resolve a dispute that the courts will recognise their right to do so provided it is not manifestly unfair and/or illegal.

2. sharia law is applied not only in cases of family law but also in financial matters and it's interesting to note that the majority of people who are using sharia compliant financial schemes in the UK are non-muslim. Interestingly the same media which froth at the mouth when discussing sharia family law are curiously silent when discussing the financial aspects.
Delete

Tarek Fatah (Toronto, ON) wrote
at 2:54pm on March 5th, 2008
LegalEagle,

Sharia banking is a fraud; a $300 billion dollar deception, in the words of a former Muslim CEO of a US bank.

Defending the practise of this fraud in the name of Islam, merely exposes the lack of integrity of both the banks and the Islamists who embarce these corporations while acting as if they were latter day anti-establishment activists.

More on this matter in the Globe and Mail:
"Banks are helping sharia make a back-door entrance"
globeandmail.com: National
Message

LegalEagle(no network) wrote
at 2:55pm on March 5th, 2008
3. The Islamic market is growing as is the desire and willingness of muslims to ensure that they are no longer marginalized. Consider for instance that communist China now has sharia compliant Islamic banking which has been rapidly followed by Great Britain (2 weeks after a moral panic about 'sharia courts') not to mention Morgan Stanley and other 'the mozlems are taking over' who were forced a few weeks ago to go cap in hand.

The Islamic umma's economic role in world affairs is growing as well as it's self-consciousness.

Those nations which can respond positively to this change which is no less a change than the rise of China in world affairs after several centuries will thrive. Those which do not will be left outside of the new world order.
Delete

LegalEagle (no network) wrote
at 3:05pm on March 5th, 2008
Tarek I'm not sure if you're aware of this but the people who have supported the concept did oppose usury in Pakistan and various other jurisdictions despite government pressure. Kindly give them some respect for standing up to government pressure in the third world.

Iin Islamic law apart from certain extreme sects there has also been the acceptance that people can disagree with each other without it being a sin provided they have investigated the matter and used their judgement.

Unfortunately in this instance you seem to be on the same side as certain extreme sects. Which doesn't really surprise me as the Khwareej ultimately morphed into the Mutazilites and as a wise jewish employer said to me the two extremes of a circle meet.

I'm a lawyer and have worked in Islamic banking. I've also checked the fatwa's from Mufti Taqi Usmani. The people who seem to disagree frequently make comments without having read the contractual documentation.
Delete

Mo (Miami, FL) wrote
at 5:32pm on March 5th, 2008
TAREK, ADDRESS THE CONTEXT OF THE SITUATION.

"This infatuation with Islamists as if they are today's Sandanistas or latter day Che Guevaras is a mistaken route to take for anyone who believes in civil rights."

I could respond to this in various ways, but I have a question, Tarek:

If you were at this event, would you join the protest of CAIR or the counter-Protest? honestly, i find it fascinating that you haven't even taken into consideration the context of this situation. These people were protesting the fact that the local government allowed CAIR to use a public space to hold a banquet. In addition to this, I was told to go "back to my country." I was told that "All Muslims are terrorists." I was told: that "Muslims are dogs" by a group of Indians who also, at the same time, praised RSS (Tarek, you know which group I am referring to here) as "one of the most honorable organizations on earth."
Message

Mo (Miami, FL) wrote
at 5:38pm on March 5th, 2008
One Indian person found it fit to remind me that South Asian Muslims are nothing but "Hindus who centuries ago were raped and then turned into the dogs [Muslims] they are today." An elderly Jewish woman told me that I should go back to "Palestine" (as though I were an Arab) even when I told her that I was not from Palestine and am Kashmiri; at one point she angrily told me that "there is no difference because they are both murderers." When Altaf Ali, the Executive Director of CAIR--FL, arrived he received various slurs but never responded with vitriol; he was called a "faggot" repeatedly.

So, given the context of this, take into consideration that the issue is much larger than CAIR. It appears that these groups used the fact that CAIR was holding a banquet as a pretext to lash out at Muslims, in general.
Message

Mo (Miami, FL) wrote
at 5:42pm on March 5th, 2008
Tarek, that you are not interested in responding to this situation and this context, honestly, confuses me. Interestingly, on various topics you and I can agree upon (along with many Muslims disagreeing with us); but on this topic, I am curious why you never bothered to address the context.

Perhaps I should have made it clear that the two groups who were protesting CAIR have spouted racism and bigotry quite frequently. Ironically, one group goes by the misnomer "Americans United Against Hatred." I say "misnomer" because it was clear from watching and responding to their protest that hatred, fear, and ignorance were motivated much of their remarks.
Message

Mo (Miami, FL) wrote
at 5:47pm on March 5th, 2008
And as far as the issue of "effectiveness" is concerned, by uniting in counter-protest against these people and withstanding their racist remarks, eventually a social space opened up in which we could use REASON to sort issues out. I took a few people off to the side and examined their claims one by one. After some discussion, a few of them decided not to join the people on their side who were screaming at the top of their lungs various insults (we have taped most of the protest and it is replete with racist remarks). A few told me that before they come out to a protest next time, they will read more about the groups and reasons they are protesting.

After the protest, I was glad that reason overcame illogic. But in order for these kind of exchanges to occur, groups such as these need to be confronted. What do you think, Tarek? The issue isn't just about CAIR.
Message

Mo (Miami, FL) wrote
at 6:01pm on March 5th, 2008
btw: in organizing the counter-protest, we made it clear that we would not respond to their slurs with further slurs. reason was a guiding principle is this demonstration; CAIR was a group targeted by the protesting groups. But we wanted to directly address the fact that a group called "Americans United Against Hatred" should disarm itself of hatred as a motivating factor in its protest before it can legitimately be considered what the name of its group seeks to explicitly reflect.

We also wanted to address that Allen West, a human rights violator, was one of the speakers at this event; while he has the right to speak, he has no right to talk about terrorism as though he is the most qualified person to fight it, especially considering the fact that he was pressured to leave the military for torturing an Iraqi and watching his men beat up an Iraqi without ordering them to stop.

Person who tortured an Iraqi along w/ a group spouting racist comments. Would you speak out against them?