Florida judge defends decision to allow case to proceed under Islamic law

"This [American] case (#08-03497 in the circuit court of the thirteenth judicial circuit in and for Hillsborough county Florida) will proceed under Eccesiastical Islamic Law."

Wellington, what in Hell is going on here?

The issue involves whether an arbitration award in the case by an Islamic scholar, called an a'lim, was proper.

The attack on Libya, led by American taxpayer dollars, is being spent to clean up a Moslem mess that Moslems decline to clean up themselves but prefer to have Infidels fix. (To wit: Bahrain, Arabia, Egypt etc.)

The same goes for this lawsuit. Once it's escalated to the Florida judicial system, Moslems are shifting costs for their mess to us.

*** 33:21 ***

The way to rid ourselves of this needless cost is to do away with Sharia altogether, and to summarily dismiss all Moslem-Moslem claims that do not involve matters of American law.

What? You say that Jewish courts are allowed to operate in America, and thus so should Sharia courts. Two things:

1) Jewish courts limit themselves to internal religious matters; Sharia courts do the opposite, and are by self-definition meant to displace all civil courts across the globe to rule over all peoples, Moslem and Infidel alike. Another big difference is that Sharia courts claim jurisdiction over criminal matters.

2) Jewish courts involve Jews, an intelligent and responsible people; Sharia courts involve Moslems, who are again quite the opposite.

Judge Nielson is completely ignorant of sharia law. He is unqualified as a dhimmi and must recuse himself to sit in judgment over true muslims. According to sharia HE must rise when THEY come into the room not the otherway around. He would not be allowed to sit in an exalted position behing the bench above muslims!
This case is the beginning of cultural suicide for us nonmuslimsand evil sharia law is our noose!

Judge Nielson appears to ignorant with regard to State Law.

The article seems to be missing any references to the justifications, but that is probably because Judge Nielson does not have any.

Isn't there case for the commission of the crime of sedition against the judge?

TAMPA — A Hillsborough judge under withering attack from conservatives for saying he will use Islamic law...
.......................

Every decent American should be appalled by this. The idea that *imposing Shari'ah law* is something only "conservatives" find objectionable is—or should be—*insane*.

More:

The issue involves whether an arbitration award in the case by an Islamic scholar, called an a'lim, was proper. The a'lim ruled Dec. 28 that the mosque's ex-trustees were ousted improperly...
.......................

I really wonder what exactly happened here. There are so many cases of more comparatively "moderate" mosque leadership being ousted—sometimes violently—by a more "extreme" element.

I don't know if that's what happened here, but this sounds very odd. I'm sure there's a lot more behind this story, but I doubt we'll ever learn what it is...

The actions of this poor excuse for a judge, is a prime example of the worst kind of liberalism. Serving the few at the expense of many, has reached a new milestone. Not only are they compromising our Constitution, but they are aiding an enemy, who has vowed to destroy western society from within.

I no longer feel that these judges are unwittingly making these pro Shari'ah decisions, nor do I have the compunction to call them anything but enemy traitors.

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/the-episcopal-church-wages-jihad-against-eight-virginia-churches/

thought this might be relevant..

I'm just not a fan of forced national associations that dictate the 'progressive' values down local's throats.. especially since no law should be made that "respects" and "establishment" of a religion..

No court has the authority to declare which faith is the one true path of belief..

strange days indeed...

"What? You say that Jewish courts are allowed to operate in America, and thus so should Sharia courts. Two things:"

To Alarmed Pig Farmer's retorts, let me add the following:

For some 2,500 years, Jews have operated under the principle of "dina d'malkhuta dina", which is Aramaic for "the law of the land is the law". A Jewish court cannot rule in a fashion that is contrary to that established law of the land.

There is no comparable notion under Islam, for secular man-made law is by its nature illegitimate - only the law of Allah is binding. This is also the reason there is no separation of mosque and state, as state law is only legitimate if consistent with shari'a. It's why in Pakistan the very notion of the state dropping apostasy laws, to take one example, is deemed illegitimate.

The judge is thus completely out of line. Once a matter comes before his court he can *only* rule in accordance with the laws of the land. If he does otherwise, he should be recalled or impeached.

Have you seen the new American Silver Dollars?
The guy who did them got 15 years behind the bar.
I wonder what's the inscription engraved on
the other side of the coin?
It reads: " IN ALLAH WE TRUST "?

Fox News has an article about this at

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/03/23/florida-judge-defends-decision-apply-islamic-law-tampa-case/?test=latestnews

In this article it says "The two parties reportedly agreed ahead of time to use an imam and Islamic Law to resolve any potential differences through arbitration."

Anyone who viewed the other supporting items that pertain to this case, did they agree or not? It seems from what I've read there is no written agreement between the parties. Has there been an attempt to find out from involved parties if there was an oral agreement between them? I think this is crucial to the case. It is only one aspect but if there was no agreement it knocks the legs out of Judge Nielsen's argument.

This is precious: "The mosque argues that state law should decide the issue and to inject religion into the case violates the U.S. Constitution."

Come again? Did they mean the Constitution that CAIR biggees and other Muslim spokesmen have asserted they want to replace with Sharia? And is or is not Sharia a religous code of law, practiced only by Muslims? So, how could religion NOT be injected into the case?

If your mind is doing a double-take over this statement, it means you've been fed a large helping of taqiyya and you should treat it as such.

Richard Nielsen should be disbarred and sent back to law school at his own expense, not mine. He should learn that one can't serve two masters: American law and Muslim.

Carroll,

Would you be good enough to provide the judge's site ? Having a personal site, tells much. Knowing that he has one, tells a need for attention.

Thank you,
Domenick

Carroll,

Would you be good enough to provide the judge's site ? Having a personal site, tells much. Knowing that he has one, tells a need for attention.

Thank you,
Domenick