Sharia in Pennsylvania: Muslim admits to attacking atheist over "Zombie Muhammad"; Muslim judge dismisses case, tells atheist he'd be killed in Muslim lands

Dear Brothers

Let us focus on what Youcef is doing today for standing for his faith in this difficult time, saints of God lift up your voice for God to come in with breakthrough. Youssef

http://www.maghrebchristians.com/2012/02/23/iranian-pastor-youcef-nadarkhani-face-of-the-persecuted-church/

God bless

Youssef

Not surprised anymore. I wonder what would happen if I went to Iran or Saudi Arabia and got caught having consensual sex with other men. I wonder if I could claim ignorance of the law? F**k this traitor judge. He should either respect the rule of law and the constitution despite his personal opinions or resign.

If a muzzlum is found innocent because his culture, religion and his "essence" "is trashed" shouldn't, by the same token, an American go free for kicking the sh*t out of the judge for trashing American culture and Constitution with that grotesque travesty of justice?

This judge needs to be removed from the bench immediately.

I cannot speak for Pennsylvania law but in California this would be considered an assault which is 242PC. For some reason the officer filed it as an harassment charge which essentially reflects no real criminal intent or penalty in most cases. This judge is 100 percent wrong in his comments to the victim. He ignored the evidence (video),he ignored the rights under the first amendment to the victim, and had the unmitigated nerve to introduce what would occur under Islamic law in a Middle eastern country using the sharia. Those comments do not belong in an American court at all. This judge needs to be disciplined for his unbelievable attitude towards the victim in an American court. If this judge claims to be ?Muslim? then he is probably practicing a certain amount sharia in his court, this to should be fully investigated.

America is not an Islamic country,it allows for freedom of expression under the first amendment no matter how distasteful it may be. This judges actions only embolden the supremacists behavior of Muslims in America.

Maybe someone like David Yerulshami can write a legal letter criticizing this judges actions on this case.

The enemy within. This is what happens when Muslims are allowed to infiltrate, subvert and sabotage our institutions. They are a cancer in the Body Politic: http://crombouke.blogspot.com/2010/01/muslim-subversion-sedition-and-social.html

Yea, this judge needs to be recalled if not have his ass beat in public. Any non-Muslim brought before this clown in any action should request a different judge.

'Zombie Mohammad' Ernest Perce threatened with jail for releasing audio of trial

YouTube audio of court hearing, ff to 31:00 in video to hear the judge performing dawa from the bench which devolves to chastising Ernie (the atheist)with the following:

"I don't think you are aware, sir, there's a big difference between how Americans practice Christianity, I understand you're and atheist, but ssee Islam is not just a religion, it's their culture, their culture, it's their very essence, their very being. They pray five times a day, towards Mecca. To be a good Muslim before you die you have to make a pilgrimage to Mecca unless you are otherwise told you can not because you are too ill, too elderly, whatever, but you must make the attempt. Their greetings, salam alaikum, wa-laikum as-Salam (is answered by voice), uh, May God be with you. Whenever it is very common their language when they're speaking to each other, ti's very common for them to say, uh, Allah willing, this will happen, it's they are so immersed in it. And what you've don is, you've completely trashed their essence, their being. They find it very, very,very, offensive.

I'M A MUSLIM. I FIND IT OFFENSIVE. I FIND WHAT'S ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS [sign] VERY OFFENSIVE. REVERSE OF SIGN SIAID ['only Muhammed can rape America!'] But you have that right, but you are way outside your bounds of First Amendment rights.

A commenter under the nic "Brandy" posted the following information about this incident at Atlas's thread on this topic:

Pennsylvania judges may be removed in one of two ways:
•The judicial conduct board investigates complaints regarding judicial conduct filed by individuals or initiated by the board. The board determines whether probable cause exists to file formal charges, and presents its case to the court of judicial discipline. The court has the authority to impose sanctions, ranging from a reprimand to removal from office, if the formal charges are sustained.

•Judges may be impeached by the house of representatives and convicted by two thirds of the senate.
====================================================================================

I believe this is where to file or send complaints:

Wanda W. Sweigart, Court Administrator
wanda.sweigart@pacourts.us
phone: 717-772-3771

The Court of Judicial Discipline of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania Judicial Center
601 Commonwealth Avenue, Suite 5500
P.O. Box 62595, Harrisburg, PA 17106-2595
Phone: (717) 772-3771 • Fax: (717) 772-3774

Mark W. Martin
Fax: 717-766-2238

Potential things to fax could include copies of the Danish cartoons, and the drawings of Lars Vilks.

Judge Mark W. Martin must be removed from the bench. The people must act and their representatives must respond. Now.

This is a coup against the constitution, individual liberties, universal rights and the rule of law of a secular nation like the U.S. That coupist pseudo-judge and full time imam should be prosecuted and jailed along with his comrade, the sociopathic and troglodyte assailant, he should be jailed for assault, aggravated battery, public disorder and child abuse/distress and then he should be deported.

Also, ignorance of the law doesn't exclude one of breaking the law and getting away with it.

Do not remove this judge by recall,he must be IMPEACHED! His behavior is so vile and illegal as a judge, who has sworn duty to uphold the law, that he is a CRIMMINAL himself. He should serve time in prison, for his behavior is only slightly better than Roland Friesler the infamous nazi jurist.

In JW earlier today, Marisol said
"..such incidents would not happen without pre-existing dysfunction within the society: the inclination and the understanding that it would be ok to kill, or to destroy property, or generally to wallow in collective rage in the event of certain insults or offenses."

That was of course a remark about Afghan society, but it would appear to apply to Pennsylvania.

What made(in past tense unfortunately) western civilization great in the last century or so was free speech. The fact that we can all insult, offend and make fun of each other. People have the right to insult and be insulted, to offend and be offended, to mock and be mocked, that's part of free speech and expression. One thing is speech and another thing is violating the physical integrity of another human being, starting with the most important individual liberty which is life itself. The assailant in this case curtailed the unalienable individual liberty of physical integrity, he harmed someone, he commited aggravated battery against the victim and the pseudo-judge/imam legitimized and apologized that and that's the most surreal aspect of it all.

This has been coming for a long time ever since we by- passed the, Excutive, Legistlative and Judical branch of government, which was founded by are fore fathers. Sad to say, Judges and lawyers have been making law rather than abiding by the law.

By Judge Martin's Shari Law rulling, the door has been opened to future rullings like this by other judges; and they do not have to be muslim judges. This is truly a travesty of justice. This Shari Law rulling needs to be challanged and over turned; Islam is not the only one trying to bring down this government, you have liberal leftys out there and this is there agenda as well. We need Anti-sharia Law legistlation and we needed it yesterday.

Atheists' are known for putting up a fight, and for having the money and clout to do so. I hope the atheists' put Judge Martin on their special watch list of people who need to be removed from their position. And oh by the way, where is the atheists' good and close friend, the ACLU?

The bottom line here is that Judge Martin needs to be removed from his position. If he can't be voted out, then he needs to be brought up on charges for mis-conduct; I know judges and lawyers have a Jusiciary Review Board, which governs this type of mis-conduct. Judge Martin could have and should have recused himself; why, because he was too immersed in his religious faith, Islam, to render a fair and impartial rulling.

We've needed to remove alot of judges from the bench for along time now, Judge Martin is a good place to start.

This is a 911 people.

Sharia in Pennsylvania: Muslim admits to attacking atheist over "Zombie Muhammad"; Muslim judge dismisses case, tells atheist he'd be killed in Muslim lands

This is enforcement of Sharia in a Pennsylvania court.
...................................

*Oh my God*—I'm *horrified*. I well remember this ugly case from Hallowe'en. I was quite—foolishly, it turns out—quite certain that the attacker would be charged and convicted of assault.

More:

The attacker supposedly got off because he "is an immigrant and claims he did not know his actions were illegal, or that it was legal in this country to represent Muhammad in any form.
...................................

Whatever happened to "ignorance of the law is no excuse"? And this is not some small point of parking or tax law or some such, but assaulting a peaceful victim on the street and *trying to murder him*.

Why are we not making it clear to "immigrants" that this is illegal? Madness.

More:

To add insult to injury, he also testified that his 9 year old son was present, and the man said he felt he needed to show his young son that he was willing to fight for his Prophet."
...................................

In that case, he should also be charged with child abuse if he thought he was presenting a "good model" for his young son.

More:

Then, Judge Mark Martin, himself a Muslim, told the atheist, Ernest Perce V.:

“Having had the benefit of having spent over 2 and a half years in predominantly Muslim countries I think I know a little bit about the faith of Islam. In fact I have a copy of the Koran here and I challenge you sir to show me where it says in the Koran that Mohammad arose and walked among the dead. I think you misinterpreted things. Before you start mocking someone else’s religion you may want to find out a little bit more about it it makes you look like a dufus and Mr. (Defendant) is correct. In many Arabic speaking countries something like this is definitely against the law there. In their society in fact it can be punishable by death and it frequently is in their society.
...................................

I'm **just speechless**. This vile POS "judge" was essentially *threatening the victim*.

He was also positing Shari'ah norms in an American court of law—vile and alarming.

Also—he was noting the murder of atheists in Muslim countries **with approval**—and openly considered it a "benefit" to have lived in such horrific, unfree countries.

Also—his assertion that the "Prophet" Muhammed may not be depicted other than he is in Muslim texts is *just crap*. We have no such strictures *in a free country*.

This is yet more positing of Shari'ah norms. Who gives a crap what the Qur'an says in this instance?

More:

Travesty upon travesty. It should be noted that no Catholics were reported to have assaulted the atheists over "Zombie Pope."
...................................

Of course. And there is nothing in Christian texts that posits the existence of a "Zombie Pope", either.

Whether one considers these costumes tasteful or not is immaterial. No one claimed that the person wearing the "Zombie Pope" costume was in theological error, nor that his costume presented some sort of canonical depiction of pontiffs. In fact, I feel silly even typing that last line.

More:

The case went to trial, and as circumstances would dictate, Judge Mark Martin is also a Muslim.
...................................

*What happened here?* Did this case just fall by happenstance to a Muslim judge in rotation? Or was this judge *specifically picked* to adjudicate this case *because the defendant was Muslim*?

Surely there can't be many Muslim judges in Pennsylvania, of all places. If the scenario was the latter, it is even *more appalling*, and would seem to indicate legal prejudice.

More:

Judge Martin then offered a lesson in Islam, stating,

“Islam is not just a religion, it’s their culture, their culture. It’s their very essence their very being. They pray five times a day towards Mecca to be a good Muslim, before you die you have to make a pilgrimage to Mecca unless you are otherwise told you can not because you are too ill too elderly, whatever but you must make the attempt. Their greetings wa-laikum as-Salâm (is answered by voice) may god be with you. Whenever, it’s very common when speaking to each other it’s very common for them to say uh this will happen it’s it they are so immersed in it."
...................................

I am appalled and enraged. Tolerance and freedom of speech is a central part of **our** culture—and a central point of *American law*—which this creep is supposed to be enforcing.

Clearly this judge does not believe that Mr. Ernest Perce V has the right to practice *his* culture.

More:

“Then what you have done is you have completely trashed their essence, their being. They find it very very very offensive. I’m a Muslim, I find it offensive. But you have that right, but you’re way outside your boundaries or first amendment rights.
...................................

I'm *shocked*. It is very rare for American judges to make personal statements like this—this proves that he was not objective in his ruling. He should be disbarred.

Also, the idea that the victim was "way outside the boundaries of first amendment rights" is **Utterly false**. He was peacefully expressing himself with his costume, and did *nothing* to hurt his assailant.

More:

This is what, and I said I spent about 7 and a half years living in other countries. when we go to other countries it’s not uncommon for people to refer to us as ugly Americans this is why we are referred to as ugly Americans, because we are so concerned about our own rights we don’t care about other people’s rights as long as we get our say but we don’t care about the other people’s say”
...................................

So there is nothing ugly about ***murdering atheists***, but dressing up in a costume makes you "ugly" and insensitive? My God, *what madness*.

More:

But wait, it gets worse. The Judge refused to allow the video into evidence, and then said,

“All that aside I’ve got here basically.. I don’t want to say he said she said but I’ve got two sides of the story that are in conflict with each other.”

Not only did Judge Martin completely ignore video evidence, but a Police Officer who was at the scene also testified on Mr. Perce’s behalf, to which the Judge also dismissed by saying the officer didn’t give an accurate account or doesn’t give it any weight.
...................................

**Lies**. The video clearly shows what happened. The Muslim attacker *admitted the assault*, and said why he did it. This *is not* a case where one party claims assault, and the other either denies that such assault occurred, or that he was the assailant.

And them, there was the testimony of an *officer of the law*, confirming the victim's charge.

Instead, this vile judge is making the case that a Muslim assaulting an Infidel—especially an atheist, apparently—if he has "offended" him **is not a crime**.

I have heard some damn disturbing things about creeping Shari'ah in America over the past several years—but this is as bad as anything I have ever heard.

Even the appalling judge in neighboring New Jersey who ok'd a Muslim's raping and beating his wife because it was "his culture" did not also lecture the victims on how she would have been honor killed in a proper Muslim country.

This case was finally overturned by a higher court.

I don't know if Mr. Perce will have the option of taking this to a higher court. I hope he will. And I hope "Judge" Martin is disbarred.

What a travesty of justice. That this happened in an American court makes me physically ill.

I hope Mr. Ernest Perce will take his case to a higher court and win in that court. He deserves to win and to have the muslim penalised for assault and also get damages for wrong judgement in a lower court from judges lacking in their knowledge of American laws.

One of the most bizzarre things is that the pseudo-judge and full time imam was ok with muslims in muslim nations massacring non-muslims when they feel insulted and offended. Universal rights are universal but for theocrats, pathological sociopaths and scumbags like him, muslims can trample those universal rights.

He'd be killed in Muslim lands!? What Islamophobia! I thought only Islamophobic bigots spouted such nonsense. Audhobillah!

This is the reason I freaked out after Gov Chris Christie appointed a muslim immigration lawyer to NJ's highest court. Proof enough that CC should be nowhere near the White House.

The judge and Sharia law do not recognize a simple maxim:

Sticks and stones may break my bones,
but words will never hurt me.

United States jurisprudence is radically different from this judge's idea of the law. How did he ever become a judge in the United States?

And remember, it's been clearly explained to us all that we're just ignorant Islamophobes for supporting any anti-Sharia leglislation in the US, because there's no real desire on the part of Muslims to implement Sharia.

Not only impeached but (assuming he's a lawyer) permanently disbarred. The man has no concept of equal justice under the law. He isn't fit to practice in a court of law, except maybe in Mecca.

Martin was reelected after running unopposed in 2011. He cross-filed with the Republican and Democratic parties with his term expiring in 2018 if this judgement is permitted to pass.
Cumberland County, Unofficial 2011 Municipal Election Results

Perhaps I was a bit harsh as far as prison for him but he must be disbarred from the law society and banned from serving in any legal capacity, and should be made to face victims of muslim violence from around the world

Pennsylvaniastan!

"Sir, show me where it says in the Koran that Mohammad arose and walked among the dead."

Dear Judge, I think this is exactly what the atheist was pointing out with the "Zombie Prophet" or at least everybody should point out when somebody is saying that his Prophet is the "Best Of Creation". Though he was counted among the living, Mohammed was (so) insane that everybody who met him should have said without a hint of doubt : "For Allah's sake you are brain-dead". He also left a legacy of a Brain-Dead Death Cult called Islam. Who's followers can be (so) brain-dead like you "Judge" Martin; Being unable to distinguish truth form nonsense. Dear Judge, even the worst lawyer would have had enough mental capability to recognize that you've neglected to address the fact that the ignorance of the law does not justify an assault .

The Zombie custom is more than appropriate. It denotes many things that comes to (my) mind whenever the word Islam is mentioned. Unpleasant things like Death, Brain-death, Terror, Bloodshed, Slavery, Inhumanity etc...

Can anyone respect any decision by this judge on any matter?

Is this inverted First Amendment ruling typical for any Muslim who would sit as a judge in any American court?

Judge Mark Martin. Screwball.

THAT'S IT... I immigrated to north america so I can live free and safe.Free to be obnoxious if I choose to and safe from the self appointed street judges and excutioners called Moslems.That arrogant judge took everything away from me I am angry.Very very angry. Does any body know of a place that is Moslem free so I can go and Live there? (Other than the kingdom of heaven please,I meant a place on planet earth)

Now i get it...Islam is a Culture.

We no longer have to suffer the demands/insistance/pressures of Islam.
It's a culture not a religion.

Hallelujah, we're all wrong.

It should be a mis-trial because of a conflict of interest. Unfortunately under America's double-jeopardy laws, the muslim criminal cannot be tried for the same crime twice.

OMG, this judge needs to be dismissed immediately!!! This should not stand!

And to all the leftists who laugh about people who are worried about Sharia supremacism being used in American courts, what do you have to say now?

In the ABC video the muslim's attorney stated that "the so-called victim was the antagonist."

Up is down, and down is up.

Does anyone know if the DA will be appealing this? As a matter of law an assault took place.

I had to check my calendar to make sure this isn't April 1st. This is WAY over the top. It can't stand and it won't stand. And if it DOES stand, then I'm joining Medhat in search of a muslim-free country...

Someone needs to kidnap this judge, strap him down in front of a very large TV and force him to watch episode after episode of SOUTH PARK!

Next, this victim needs to SUE this municipality or the state and then SUE this judge personally for violation of his Constitutional rights.

This judge needs to be removed NOW.

Email sent and I encourage you all to do the same. Let them know we are watching!

The victim, Earnest Perce, is hanging tough. This man is a hero.

Apparently the judge told him that he would *hold him in contempt of court* if he released the video of the assault. How is this even legal?

It is also ridiculous—I already saw that video *last October*. I'm sure it has been floating around the internet ever since.

Also according to Perce, the judge told the assailant, Talaaq E, "Allah bless you"! This is more and more appalling. More here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sv9IyrpOnbs

I haven't had time to watch the whole thing yet—but it all seems very damning—and not against the victim.

Why this Muzzy Judge still calls himself by his Christian name of Mark Martin? Is this also one of the 'takyyias' used against the infidels?Just like the Muslim land and house broakers in USA,UK and Canada keep a Christian name for their business dealing- knowing full well people over here don't trust a Muslim name?.That grieved peerson should go for an appeal against this fuzzy Muzzy Judge.

This zombie judge should be fired/impeached right away!! He has violated the oath of office to uphold the US constitution and given a judgement based on sharia law which has no validity in US. It is for this reason Muslims should not be allowed in any US government services and law enforcement services as they will not uphold the law of the land!!

Lennin-McCarthy,

Uh yeah it can be appealed and the judgment can be thrown out and the case re-tried under a different judge.

This is absolutely *appalling.* This is the answer to those traitorous leftists who are constantly bleating that sharia law poses no threat to your Constitution, and rule of law.

In essence, a *muslim* judge has let off a *muslim* who has committed a crime under your law, simply because as a *muslim* he sympathizes with, and *condones* the crime.

This is the first real blast of sharia against law and Constitution. The victim should be backed by the ACLU, SIOA etc. This traitorous judge should be disbarred, and thrown off the bench. Is there an e-mail address for him ? He needs to be inundated with people telling him how wrong his 'judgement' is. This really does beggar belief. It's the sort of thing I'm momentarily expecting to happen in the UK, but not America.

There is a facebook page for Pastor Yousef Nadarkhani

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Save-Yousef-Nadarkhani-from-Execution/223781327659046

@Jaladhi @Medhat

I see countries like Japan being the last bastions, sharia free zones. Japan and similar countries are not perfect, even the U.S. has its faults here and there, i just don't picture them in burkas and submitting to cavemen and cavemanish/theocratic laws.

@Jan

What are you talking about? the ACLU is a buffoonish and sharia compliant org. they keep quite about stuff like this.

I called the number provided and she said to call this number
Judicial Conduct Board of PA

717-234- 7911

www.jcbpa.org

The judge also stated in his ruling that a violent attack to "harass, annoy or alarm" is a crime, but the SAME violent response, if done to "negate" an offensive situation, it is not a crime.

This case is setting a dangerous precedent in which people can violently "negate" any situation they deem offensive. All they have to do is insist the attack was not intended to harass, but rather to stop an offensive display.

Welcome to new Sharia America.

When the judge is a brainwashed muslim, sorry for the redundancy, it is no surprise he acted in such a highly prejudicial and pronounced biased fashion in favor of the zombie attacker. The jihadist judge not only failed to bring the perpetrator of violence to justice but he also compounded the injustice to the victim by imposing his own personal religious beliefs over the absolute constitutional rights of the victim.

islam has never coexisted in harmony with the non-muslim, never.

Wow!!

I hope they are going to appeal!!

That was an Islamic court. That wan't a western court of law.

The judge forgot to also mention that in the Islamic world Muslims have more rights than others under the Shari'a. Which means they can do almost anything to a non-Muslim - a get away with it. Kidnap, rape, and even kill. It is a Muslim's word against a non-Muslim's.

Checkout Christian lives in Muslim world:
Egypts Rubbish People
http://www.veoh.com/videos/v16576898FKXC4Gz2

::

They must go back to court and get that Islamic law ruling squashed.

Someone needs to tap that judge on the shoulder - and remind him which law he presides over - when he sits in that chair.

While I have to admit I have heard some judges express opinions about cases, those opinions have been truly relevant to the case (usually with a suitably cutting bit of humor included)...not the judge's religious and cultural beliefs.
Hopefully the victim sues. As for the Double Jeopardy issue, I believe there is an exception for cases that are dismissed, I believe its meant to apply to people found innocent by a jury. The DA will have to make sure that there is a different judge presiding.
Given that judicial officers take an oath to uphold the Constitution, getting rid of the judge should be relatively easy...assuming some miserale politician doesn't stick their snouts into it. Somehow I foresee the current administration meddling in this matter, unasked for.
While I suspect that the victim was merely annoying another religious group, as certain Atheist factions are want to do, I do find something particularly fitting about the idea of a zombie Mohammad. Muslims do bear a resemblance to zombies when it comes to their blind devotion to their culture and religion and its bas ackwards views.

This is not the first time a coupist pseudo-judge does whatever he wants while trampling the constitution, look what happned this week in Ohio: http://j.mp/AdyGAa free expression means nothing for these wannabe Judge Dredds, dictators and tyrants.

You atheist are wrong to go around mocking over people religions like you are doing lately. In the future christian judge are going to rule against you atheist. It about time you christian defend your religion from atheist attack.

Judge Martin goes into a nice little rant about the nasty behavior of "ugly Americans" in foreign countries, but then finds the nasty behavior of "ugly Moslems" in the U.S. to be perfectly acceptable, even laudable.

Medhat:

There is only one place left on earth for you: JAPAN! They only have a few Muslims and are unlikely to get many more except, as they say, through "natural increase". Japan does not allow large scale immigration so they have remained more or less Muslim free.

However, I think with the next few decades a reconquista of sorts may take place in some Western countries. Certainly, after all the non-Muslims have fled Muslim countries, some Westerners may start to wonder why we are accepting so many Muslims. When people see the Alawites fleeing to Israel from Syria and all the Copts leave Egypt, some Westerners may get a clue.

SHAME ON THIS JUDGE. WHAT AN IGNORANCE OF WHAT IS GOING ON IN THE WORLD. THIS IS A US JUDGE? WE ARE IN TROUBLE.

Are we ever going to be able to pass laws against using sharia in our court system? This is the most disturbing thing I've read all week and as we all know we read disturbing things every day. We probably all saw this video when it happened, and what happened is obvious. There should not be a muslim judge on the bench anywhere in this country, and certainly not in cases involving muslim defendents.

DefenderofIslam,

Uh, here is a news flash, in the US and other free countries we have the freedom to make fun of your beleifs and you have that same freedom. Free speech doesn't just protect what we like, but what we don't like as well.

Here is another news flash, the US is not a Christian country, it is a country with lots of Christians in it. So no, no US judge is going to rule against Atheists mocking Christianity anytime soon. Watch some South park.

You muslims need to understand that your religious beliefs only extend as far as yourself. They simply do not apply to people who think they are stupid. And the mor eyou get angry and resort to violance the easiter it is to mock you and your religion because it shows how weak your religious beliefs really are.

"You atheist are wrong to go around mocking over people religions like you are doing lately."

Oh, like muslims who mock, threaten, jail, attack, rape, kill, massacre and mass murder non-muslims(including atheists and apostates) in muslim nations and elsewhere?. Besides thief, buffoon.

"It about time you christian defend your religion from atheist attack."

You mean it's about time for non-muslims to defend their ideals, physical integrity, and universal rights from muslim attacks in muslim countries and elsewhere?. Again, Besides thief, buffoon.

DefenderofIslam:

You are so ignorant that it is almost pathetic.

Defenderofislam,

In the United States Christians are mocked all the time. They may not like it, but they understand what living in a free society with first amendment rights is all about. Muslims who react with violence to mockery do not understand this. Please address your thoughts in this matter to your fellow supremacists in the Islamic fold.

I wrote to Governor Corbett encouraging that the judge be investigated. If you want to do similar, the link is:

http://www.governor.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/contact/2998/e-mail_the_governor%27s_office/465341

I also emailed the PA Court Administrator. Glad to know it only takes one complaint for them to take action, but the more pressure the better.

If this Judge can be allowed to rule in this manner what expectation can anyone have of exercising freedom of speech?

That is not the US when someone can get away with physical violence and harrassment towards someone expressing their freedom of speech. Hope this judge has his clock thoroughly cleaned, if not removed from the bench. I can't imagine he can really defend his position, and if he can't change his way of thinking he has no business being a judge. Let him be on notice.

@Jan

I'm not American either but i know the ACLU has an ideological agenda, the're on the same ideological spectrum as the socialists in Europe who end up defending this kind of thing and end up attacking people who oppose sharia. They're a front, a charade, a travesty!.

folks: I just listened to the entire hearing. while this judge is a DB muslim who was lecturing the athiest how he offended this muslim and by his accent he is an Arab guy, he dismissed it because of the lack of evidence. check it for you self. google this judge and you can see the hearing. it is about 45 min. be nice to get some feed back from others here speccially if someone here is a lawyer.
M

Fun Fact: This Muslim judge's sharia ruling was made a few short blocks from the US Army War College (Carlisle, PA)... where they publish pro-Hamas studies.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/01/us-army-funding-papers-supporting-hamas.html

OT:

Does anyone know if there's an english translation of the islamic exegesis "Tanzil" (al Baghawi) available anywhere on the web? Even a partial one?

Caught on tape.

The judge probably thought he got away with it.

It's a Halloween costume.

He has converted to Islam and is using a western court of law to issue Islamic rulings.

::

In places like Egypt non-Muslims find it near impossible to bring a case against Muslims.

If your Christian daughter is kidnapped in Egypt by a Muslim - it's her own father/relatives who would be arrested for trying to rescue her.

As once she is kidnapped - she becomes the property of the Muslim man. And it is seen as a religious conversion matter - of which no one is legally allowed to leave Islam.

::

Just like Muslim women have fewer rights than Muslim man in an Islamic court of law - at times 4 Muslim women are needed to testify against one man - non-Muslims have less rights than both Muslim men and Muslim women - combined.

This was a ruling not based on facts or evidence - it was a ruling based on giving Muslims priority - which is more in line with the Sharia and not western law.

Given the judge's speech - this was clearly about respect for Islam over the individual's rights under the law.

Out of respect for Robert and JW, I'm going to keep my EXTREME four-letter condemnation of this "judge" (stated as loosely as humanly possible) in check. At the very, VERY least, that piece of human waste should be NOWHERE near a courthouse in the "public official" capacity. Quite frankly, his ass should be handed to him and he should be banished from the country. Send him to Saudi Arabia or some other wasteland.

What is happening to this country? How have we allowed this to happen?

May Islam die the most painful death.

Islam: where freedom ends and slavery begins.

I'm glad to see this thread has aroused nearly 80 comments, though I suspect unfortunately it probably has more to do with the static flack generated by Muslim trolls than a decent swell of outrage punctuated by intelligent intolerance of Muslims that by now we should all have come to cultivate; to become the substance of a nucleus of a Body Public that will actually come, in the hopefully nearer future, to grow sufficiently in numbers and influence to be able to institute throughout the West (or even just one Western country for criminy sake) actual policy to do something not only about the problem of Islam (a body of inert ideas based upon ink on paper and ones and zeros on screens) -- but, more importantly, also about the Problem of Muslims (you know, those actual people increasingly putting all that ink and ones and zeros into violent action all over the world).

The law is only as good as those entrusted to rule on it.

Surreal is a good word to describe this outlandish judgement. "Judge" Mark Martin is an absolute disgrace, a traitor implementing sharia principles by letting the Muslim perpetrator off the hook while giving an absurd verbal reprimand to the non-Muslim victim. (And if we think this act of a supposedly American judge is bad, imagine how terrible the bias was historically under Islamic rule and is in Islamic countries today).

I propose next year for the atheist parade they depict this so-called "judge" (or more accurately, qadi wannabee) Mark Martin.

This case should be appealed and taken all the way to the supreme court if necessary. The U.S. is supposed to have freedom of expression. If "judge" Mark Martin doesn't like that, I invite him to spend many, many more years in Islamic countries having and being judged by all the sharia he likes.

In his tirade, "judge" Mark Martin said:
"In many Arabic speaking countries something like this is definitely against the law there. In their society in fact it can be punishable by death and it frequently is in their society."

If any of us here point out that fact, by way of protest or criticism, we are labelled Islamophobes by the American left. Yet Mark Martin doesn't seem to be complaining or objecting at all. He seems to like the death penalty for blasphemy.

More irrelevant Islamic b.s. from imam Mark Martin:
"In fact I have a copy of the Koran here and I challenge you sir to show me where it says in the Koran that Mohammad arose and walked among the dead. I think you misinterpreted things."

This is so breathtakingly irrelevant; the "zombie" versions of the religious figures such as Muhammad and the Pope were just fantasy. The judge is simply using this case as an excuse and opportunity to proselytize at length about what he views as the wonders of Islam and the supposed ignorance of non-Muslims.

I do not have an expert view, however this is my analysis: The Court recognizes a series of exceptions to provisions protecting the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment. While freedom of speech in the United States is a constitutional right, these exceptions make that right a somewhat limited one. Speech that involves incitement, false statements of fact, obscenity, child pornography, fighting words and offensive speech, threats, and speech owned by others are all completely exempt from First Amendment protections.

fighting words and offensive speech: "Inciting speech is characterized by the speaker's intent to make someone else the instrument of his or her unlawful will. Fighting words, by contrast, are intended to cause the hearer to react to the speaker."

Fighting words is something new that I ever read before. I think this is Sharia takeover in a daylight. Except the BS the judge told about Muslims, otherwise we have a problem within the First Amendment.

It's ALIVE!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xos2MnVxe-c

Let's just hope the victim's lawyer has a big smile on his face thinking about all the money he and his client are gonna get. He should sue the state, the city, the judge himself! Appeal time needs to come soon, and this judge should be suspended immediately, a look into his past rulings should be made as well. Lets hope no domestic violence or pedophilia cases came up and he ruled accorfding to his radical (obviously) beliefs!

Sharia Judge: "In fact I have a copy of the Koran here..."

Objection: That is inadmissible evidence, your "Honor."

Sharia Judge: Over-ruled!

First of all, the judge is perfectly correct in everything he says in this quote of his words:

"I don't think you are aware, sir, there's a big difference between how Americans practice Christianity, I understand you're and atheist, but ssee Islam is not just a religion, it's their culture, their culture, it's their very essence, their very being. They pray five times a day, towards Mecca. To be a good Muslim before you die you have to make a pilgrimage to Mecca unless you are otherwise told you can not because you are too ill, too elderly, whatever, but you must make the attempt. Their greetings, salam alaikum, wa-laikum as-Salam (is answered by voice), uh, May God be with you. Whenever it is very common their language when they're speaking to each other, ti's very common for them to say, uh, Allah willing, this will happen, it's they are so immersed in it. And what you've don is, you've completely trashed their essence, their being. They find it very, very,very, offensive.

Secondly: The problem is not this description, which is factual about Muslims and their psychology and culture (those two things being fused more tightly than they are among Westerners). The problem (a problem far broader throughout the West than one or two people including this judge, but in fact probably comprising a majority, including many if not most who support this very website here) is the inability to conclude logically from this description that such people it is accurately describing 1) comprise all Muslims until otherwise proven to the contrary through rigorous proof; and 2) must be ejected from our societies -- for reasons included in the description, and for a thousand other compelling reasons in addition; reasons which demonstrate that Muslims through their Islam are a) evil, b) unjust, c) dangerous and d) deadly seditionists.

What a travesty. We infidels are always being lectured on how we constantly upset the sensitive Muslim dears, but you don't hear anything about how Muslims and their Islam insult us, how their horrid Koran insults and denigrates us extremely - but Obama says we should respect it! Even our generals must respect it while it spits in their faces.

I hope this verdict is appealed, if possible. This un-American judge should be impeached. Who the heck elects or appoints such Muslims to the position of judges? No doubt he was presented as a "moderate". There is no way in Islam that a man can be a true Muslim AND a responsible American judge. God preserve us from the zombie militants but also from the these "moderates"!

The judge finds the defendant's ignorance of American laws no problem and excusable, but the victim's lack of knowledge about FOREIGN laws unacceptable. In America. Breathtaking.
He seemed to like the death penalty for insulting Islam. Are converts the worst Muslims of all?
In a Muslim country recently I said some pretty critical things about Islam and Muslims - and got away with it. I'm glad this judge wasn't around...

By the way, to those who think Japan might be a sanctuary: google Islam in Japan. Those Japanese women need a cold shower. Recently in Uganda I saw a Japanese convert to Islam, all in black. Now I have a South Korean lodger, so I have googled Muslims in South Korea. You guessed it...South Koreans who go to work in the Middle East are returning home converted; Saudi Arabia is building mosques. South Koreans generally think it's cool to be Christian; let's hope it stays that way.

"In many Arabic speaking countries something like this is definitely against the law there. In their society in fact it can be punishable by death and it frequently is in their society." -- Judge Martin

Wow!, I guess if the judge could have things his way, then the plaintiff would be put to death? Certainly seems that way ...

And I wonder if the plaintiff's attorney can file charges against this judge for making that insane statement; or if he can perhaps file charges against this judge for his outrageous ruling? Lets hope so ..

Judge Martin, I don't care if you respect Islam. I don't care if you respect Mohammed. But I do not respect Islam or Mohammed. How can I respect a man who says I will burn in a fire simply because I do not believe what he says? You cannot make me respect Mohammed even if the stinking Sharia orders me dead. I detest Mohammed. I spit on his crapulous creed. Let Mohammed burn in the fire.

From the video a gentlemen states that muslims in America need to "get over their sensitivity"? ...

WHAT? ...being too sensitive is not the issue; they need to obey the law and stop being violent by attacking people!

I would like to know a *lot* more about this Judge 'Mark Martin'.

Is he a born-Mohammedan - American-born, or immigrant - who has adopted a western name so as to slither under the radar, so to speak?

(In Australia, there was one Mohammedan criminal, named Hassan, who usually went by the name 'Sam', and another, named Mohammed, who was commonly referred to as 'Mick').

Or is he a *convert to Islam* like Adam Gadahn, David Hicks, etc, who chose to keep on being known by their non-Muslim birth name rather than generally use their nom-de-shahada?

If he's a convert, then I would like to know exactly when and where he converted.

In either case - born-Mohammedan, or adult recruit-to-the-Mob - I would dearly like to know what MOSQUE he attends...

This is a shoutout to any journalist covering this case who has even a modicum of natural curiosity.

Find out about his mosque! Find out who he hangs round with!

'The attacker supposedly got off because he "is an immigrant and claims he did not know his actions were illegal, or that it was legal in this country to represent Muhammad in any form.'

And now that he has gotten off, no other immigrants will know that these actions were illegal. Very useful.

An example of circular logic, as we begin to spiral down the drain.

Stunning. The district judge should be impeached and removed from office and the defense attorney, like the judge, has betrayed the Constitution. Both are utter disgraces. Both sicken me.

No matter how livid you and others here become, you (2nd person plural) never seem to draw any rational conclusions about what we should do about all the shit my comment rests upon -- you know the shit Muslims are saying and doing as documented by Jihad Watch below me, extending downwards as you scroll in article after article, report after report, from this day, this week, this month, then deeper down into the core of this evil volcano in the archives.

So many here may be "stunned" and "livid", but BFD, as long as your wrists remain relatively limp about practical measures.

This case is unbelievable! Unbelievable.Though I'm speechless, I'm not surprised.
This is Islam: Threatening the victim, praising/encouraging the offender!

The cop says that the attacker grabbed Perce's sign and (fake) beard. Even if this is true, he didn't even physically touch Perce. What would the appropriate penalty be had a non-Muslim judge presided over the case? Would a non-Muslim judge have given the attacker a year in jail for grabbing Perce's sign and beard?
Let's say you are at a Halloween party and a guy with a fake beard insults your wife by calling her a whore, and you respond by grabbing his fake beard and yelling at him. What would you expect your punishment to be? A year in jail? Or would you expect the judge to throw out such a stupid case.

An American judge violating the first amendment, disregarding the right of a fellow citizen. The world is topsy-turvy, Allahu f**kbar!

@dave742

A stupid case is someone -especially a taqiyya abiding person- that thinks assault/public disorder/battery and curtailing free expression... etc is a stupid, laughable or dismissible matter.

Judge Martin and lots of other schmoes in robes need to be watched, and reported to state agencies that monitor judicial abuse.

I will also add my voice to those calling for the impeachment of such people. It probably should be done more often.

@dave742

You seriously have no idea what you're talking about. You know, It's better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt. The law of the U.S. is not the law of the jungle, maybe in your country, but not in my country and certainly not in the U.S.. You're just defending the undefendable and justifying the unjustifiable, that's not gonna get you anywhere except ad hominemville.

@champ

Dave742 is a taqiyya name like Mark Martin, what do you expect? really.

Well, another idea. The schadenfreude is kicking in here.

I've spent my life watching the worshipers of Mother Nature, "Science", the state, their own bellies, etc. (aka "atheists")pretending to be high-minded defenders of liberty when they're out to censor people like me. They love parading their blasphemies against all that I consider holy. Most recently, they have adopted the anti-Islamophobia mantle and made Muslims their allies as yet more convenient sticks with which to rhetorically beat people like me.

And now the Muslims they helped to promote in the legal estabalishment and elsewhere are starting to sock it to them over blasphemy. It's effective, too, as the case of Comedy Central shows. First, lousy entertainment media; next, the courts.

Further, I'll bet that a judge sharing Ernest Perce's own ideology might well have handed down a similar decision--just to prove that he's "liberal".

Best wishes to anyone in Pennsylavania who wants to see His Didshonor Mark Martin impeached, removed, and disbarred.

Someone point to me where the petition is starting?

Many readers here are saying that Judge Martin should be removed from the bench. But a question should be asked: What is he doing on the bench anyway? Who appointed him? That would be interesting to learn. Probably another dhimmi politician, such Christie of New Jersey. Well, someone might say: There are Catholic judges, and Lutherans, and Presbyterians, and so on. But their job is to adjudicate secular law -- that's right, folks, SECULAR law -- and not Sharia, nor to lecture anyone in court on the alleged glories of Islam. "It's their culture"??? You can say that again -- and look at it.

"This judge needs to be removed and sent to a sharia paradise which he so clearly longs for."

The same for R. Mark Thomas, the piece-of-human-waste attacker's piece-of-human-waste attorney. "Scum" doesn't even begin to define them.

Islam: where freedom ends and slavery begins.

WELLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!! I know what I'm going to be for Halloween in 2012! :)

In addition to contacting the muslim judge's office, I'd also suggest that we contact the Pennsylvania travel & tourism board. Their website is www.visitpa.com/ and you can contact the board at:
Pennsylvania Tourism Office
Department of Community and Economic Development
Commonwealth Keystone Building
400 North Street, 4th Floor
Harrisburg, PA 17120-0225 USA

You might also consider dropping letters to PA bed & breakfasts, major hotel chains in PA, major tourist attractions, etc. While many people are in favor of dashing off an email, when businesses start getting piles of letters or postcards stating that potential tourists are afraid to visit (or simply refuse to visit) a state in which sharia law is imposed rather than US constitutional law, the business community will also start raising a ruckus.

People underestimate the value of tourism when it is applied to social issues. I had planned on attending the American Quilt Society's 2012 show (since they bailed out of Knoxville). Admission to this multi-day event ranges from $8/day up to $30 for multi-day. Classes run around $75-$90 per day. Add to that the cost of hotel room for 5 days at somewhere around $110 dollars or more per night, 3 meals per day plus tips, and the fact that I can easily spend $500 or more at the various vendors booths. I planned to spend $1500+ during the trip. And that's not counting the money that our men will spend eating and entertaining themselves while the we are at the quilt show!

In 2011, 15587 people attended this 3-day show in Lancaster, PA. This would mean a potential $23,380,500 changing hands at this one show. It could generate almost $1,500,000 in sales tax alone. While not everyone will spend the amount of money that I had planned, even if they only spent 1/3 as much it would still amount to a staggering $7,793,500 in taxable sales!

Congratulations, Pennsylvania.....I will not attend this quilt show because of this judge's misconduct. Because islam is so unrelentingly hostile to women, I will also be contacting the American Quilt Society and requesting that they locate the show in another state until Judge Martin and anyone else like him is removed from office.

... or as a Moderate Muslim.

Lorem

you wrote - "DDA, make that [persons protesting against this gross injustice by taking part in Hallowe'en parades dressed as Zombie Mohammeds or as Zombie Judge Martins] a whole phalanx of zombie District Court Moslem judges. Being lead by an un-dead Mo. Toss in a blooded up little Aisha for maximum First Amendment advantage. Have David Yerushalmi on speed dial when busted by the PC PoPo."

Excellent. I'm in Australia, where Hallowe'en isn't the big deal it is in the USA, but I can just see this taking off.

I do urge all US and Canadian jihadwatchers - whether posting or lurking here - to start planning their Halloween protest action and costumes NOW.

Further thought - why not add a Zombie Theo Van Gogh, complete with fake knife stuck in chest, hand in hand with a Zombie Abu Afak (elderly Jewish poet who was killed by Mohammed's assassins as punishment for criticising Mohammed and the Muslims) and a Zombie Asma Bint Marwan, also killed by Mohammed's hit-men because she wrote poems mocking Mo, Muslims and Islam (think a 'Princess Yasmin' costume as worn in Disney's Aladdin) knife ALSO stuck in chest, and holding up signs saying on the front 'Muslim Mobsters Killed Us For Criticising Mohammed' and on the back 'Defend Your Freedom of Speech! The dead rising from the grave to testify and warn...

Let the side-stepping begin.

You can call Judge "Mark Martin's" office directly here:

717-766-4575

(like Dumbledore's Army, I wonder what his Muslim name is)

I left a very polite but very concerned message—I'm not being overly fastidious here; I believe this is important to make an impact.

The "phone tree" message also directs you to a live operator. I spoke with her briefly, and reiterated my concerns.

I believe this is important in case Martin just erases all his messages.

I indicated that I was calling from California, but emphasized what a terrible mark this ruling and the judge's pushing of Shari'ah norms leaves on the state of Pennsylvania.

I hope they receive an *avalanche* of calls, emails, and letters. Be sure and add your voice—*especially* if you live in Pennsylvania. On the other hand, hearing from all over the country—and, indeed from all over the world—has a power of its own.

By the way, this vile judge was *elected*, and his term does not expire until 2018. I know little of his platform, except that he filed to run on both the Democratic and Republican ticket—which means, ludicrously, that he probably ran as some sort of palatable, middle-of-the-road "moderate". He ran unopposed, and received over 95% of the vote.

Those unfamiliar with the US system should not necessarily despair over those figures—many judges run unopposed, and just waltz back into office year after year—and often do not bother to campaign at all. Often it is difficult to find *any* information on a judge's record—I know; I've tried with judges in my own district.

But if a judge becomes known for miscarriages of justice and abuse of his power it is a very different matter.

I hope this appalling ruling makes Judge Mark Martin notorious indeed.

Low-level judges such as Magistrates are NOT required to be attorneys. A bachelor's degree and work experience usually constitute the minimum requirements for judges and magistrates, but most workers have law degrees and some are elected [link].

In the State of Pennsylvania, Magistrate Judges have certain rules to follow and Mark Martin either is unfamiliar with these rules or blatantly ignored them as demonstrated below with Rules 2, 4, 8 & 9.

Rules Governing Standards of Conduct of Magisterial District Judges
RULE 2: Impropriety and Appearance of Impropriety to be Avoided; Voluntary Appearance as Character Witness Prohibited
A. Magisterial district judges shall respect and comply with the law and shall conduct themselves at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary. Magisterial district judges shall not allow their family, social or other relationships to influence their judicial conduct or judgment. They shall not lend the prestige of their office to advance the private interest of others, nor shall they convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the judge.

B. Magisterial district judges shall not testify voluntarily as character witnesses.

Note

This rule is derived from Canon 2, American Bar Association Code of Judicial Conduct, and Pa.R.J.A. No. 1701. Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by irresponsible or improper conduct by members of the judiciary. Magisterial district judges must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. They must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny. They must therefore accept restrictions on their conduct that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen and should do so freely and willingly.

The testimony of magisterial district judges as character witnesses injects the prestige of their office into the proceeding in which they testify and may be misunderstood to be an official testimonial. Rule 2B, however, does not afford them a privilege against testifying as character witnesses in response to a subpoena the issuance of which has been specifically allowed by the Supreme Court under Pa.R.J.A. No. 1701.

Former Rule 2, relating to public office and political activity, revoked Feb. 1, 1973

New Rule 2 adopted effective Feb. 1, 1973

Amended June 30, 1982, effective 30 days after July 17, 1982; Jan. 6, 2005, effective Jan. 29, 2005;

amended November 21, 2005.

*****
RULE 4: Adjudicative Responsibilities

A. Magisterial district judges shall be faithful to the law and maintain competence in it. They shall be unswayed by partisan interests, public clamor or fear of criticism.

B. Magisterial district judges shall maintain order and decorum in the proceedings before them. They shall wear judicial robes while conducting hearings and trials.

C. Magisterial district judges shall be patient, dignified and courteous to litigants, witnesses, lawyers and others with whom they deal in their official capacity, and shall require similar conduct of lawyers, of their staff and others subject to their direction and control.

D. Magisterial district judges shall accord to every person who is legally interested in a proceeding, or their lawyer, full right to be heard according to law and, except as authorized by law, neither initiate nor consider ex parte or other communications concerning a pending or impending proceeding. Magisterial district judges, however, may obtain the advice of a disinterested expert on the law applicable to a proceeding before them if they give notice to the parties of the person consulted and the substance of the advice and afford the parties reasonable opportunities to respond.

Note

This rule is derived in part from Canon 3A(1)-(4) of the American Bar Association and Pennsylvania Supreme Court Code of Judicial Conduct. Magisterial district judges are to be provided with the judicial robes required by subdivision B as part of the expense of operating their offices (see Rule 101(3)). The proscription against communications in subdivision D includes communications from lawyers, law teachers and other persons who are not participants in the proceeding, except to the limited extent permitted. It does not preclude magisterial district judges from consulting with other members of the judiciary or with court personnel whose function it is to aid the judiciary in carrying out adjudicative responsibilities.

Former Rule 4, relating to incompatible practices revoked Feb. 1, 1973

New Rule 4 adopted effective Feb. 1, 1973

Amended June 30, 1982, effective 30 days after July 17, 1982; Jan. 6, 2005, effective Jan. 29, 2005;

Amended November 21, 2005.

*****

RULE 8: Disqualification

A. Magisterial district judges shall disqualify themselves in a proceeding in which their impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to instances where:

(1) they have a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding;

(2) they served as a lawyer in the matter in controversy, or a lawyer with whom they previously practiced law served during such association as a lawyer concerning the matter, or the magisterial district judge or such lawyer has been a material witness concerning it;

(3) they know that they, individually or as a fiduciary, or their spouse or a minor child residing in their household has a financial interest in the subject matter in controversy or is a party to the proceeding or any other interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding;

(4) they or their spouse, or a person within the third degree of relationship to either of them, or the spouse of such a person:

(a) is a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director or trustee of a party;

(b) is acting as a lawyer in the proceeding;

(c) is known by the magisterial district judge to have an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding;

(d) is to the knowledge of the magisterial district judge likely to be a material witness in the proceeding.

B. Magisterial district judges shall inform themselves about their personal and fiduciary financial interests and make a reasonable effort to inform themselves about the personal financial interests of their spouse and minor children residing in their household.

Note

This rule is derived from Canon 3C, American Bar Association Code of Judicial Conduct. For the purpose of this rule, "fiduciary" includes such relationships as executor, administrator, trustee and guardian, and "financial interest" means ownership of a legal or equitable interest, however small, or a relationship as director, advisor or other active participant in the affairs of a party, except that: (1) ownership in mutual or common investment fund that holds securities is not a "financial interest" in such securities unless the magisterial district judge participates in the management of the fund; (2) an office in an educational, religious, charitable, fraternal or civic organization is not a "financial interest" in securities held by the organization; (3) the proprietary interest of a policy holder in a mutual insurance company, of a depositor in a mutual savings association or a similar proprietary interest is a "financial interest" in the organization only if the outcome of the proceeding could substantially affect the value of the interest; and (4) ownership of government securities is a "financial interest" in the issuer only if the outcome of the proceeding could substantially affect the value of the securities. "Degree of relationship" is calculated according to the civil law system. Thus, the third degree of relationship test would, for example, disqualify the magisterial district judge if they or their spouse's parents, grandparents, uncles or aunts, siblings, or nieces or nephews or their spouses were a party or a lawyer in the proceeding, but would not disqualify them if a cousin were a party or lawyer in the proceeding.

A lawyer in a governmental agency does not necessarily have an association with other lawyers employed by that agency within the meaning of subdivision A(2). Magisterial district judges formerly employed by a governmental agency, however, should disqualify themselves in a proceeding if their impartiality might reasonably be questioned because of such association.

The fact that a lawyer in a proceeding is affiliated with a law firm with which a lawyer-relative of the magisterial district judge is affiliated does not of itself disqualify the magisterial district judge. Under appropriate circumstances, the fact that "their impartiality might reasonably be questioned" under subdivision A, or that the lawyer-relative is known by the magisterial district judge to have an interest in the law firm that could be "substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding" under subdivision A(4)(c) may require their disqualification.

Adopted effective Feb. 1, 1973

Amended June 30, 1982, effective 30 days after July 17, 1982

Amended Jan. 6, 2005, effective Jan. 29, 2005;

Amended November 21, 2005.

RULE 9: Remittal of Disqualification; Minimizing Disqualification

A. Magisterial district judges disqualified by Rule 8A(3) or (4) may, instead of withdrawing from the proceeding, disclose the basis of their disqualification. If, based on such disclosure, the parties and lawyers, independently of the participation of the magisterial district judges all agree in writing that the relationship of the magisterial district judges is immaterial or that their financial interest is insubstantial, the magisterial district judges are no longer disqualified and may participate in the proceeding. The agreement signed by all parties and lawyers, shall be attached to the record copy of the complaint form.

B. Magisterial district judge shall manage their investments and other financial interests to minimize the number of cases in which they are disqualified. As soon as they can do so without serious financial detriment, they shall divest themselves of investments and other financial interests that might require frequent disqualification.

Note

Subdivision A is derived from Canon 3D, American Bar Association Code of Judicial Conduct. The procedure in this subdivision is designed to minimize the chance that a party or lawyer will feel coerced into an agreement. When a party is not immediately available, the magisterial district judges may proceed on the written assurance of the lawyers that their parties' consent will be subsequently filed.

Subdivision B is derived from Canon 5C(3), American Bar Association Code of Judicial Conduct.

Adopted effective Feb. 1, 1973

Amended June 30, 1982, effective 30 days after July 17, 1982; Jan. 6, 2005, effective Jan. 29, 2005;

Amended November 21, 2005.

The reason this Muslim judge chose to disbelieve the plaintiff and why he also chose to ignore the video record and why he disregarded the evidence of the police officer, is because in a dispute between a Muslim (in this case, the man who attacked Perce) and a non-Muslim (Perce), under sharia, the word of the non-Muslim counts for absolutely nothing.

Whatever a *Muslim* says about a non-Muslim or about an incident involving himself and a non-Muslim is automatically assumed to be the truth, and the non-Muslim is a priori assumed to be in the wrong. Dhimmi evidence always counted for less than the evidence of Mohammedans, just as their *lives* were considered to be of less value, in the calculation of blood money.

The same deal - that same inequality - applies when it is the word of a Mohammedan male against the word of a Mohammedan female. In cases of sexual misconduct, such as rape, the testimony of women - and that includes the testimony of the female victim and of any females that might have witnessed the attack - is not admitted. So if a Muslim male rapes a woman in front of her daughters or her sisters, all he has to do is say, 'them dirty hussies is LYING', to get off scot-free...while his victim, if she gets pregnant, say, is assumed to have committed zina, and will be honor murdered, or stoned to death (the rapist, for extra fun and thrills, can help stone his own victim to death), or if she's really lucky, locked up in jail, like happens in Pakistan.

PS

When dave742 above, who is either a full-on dhimmi or else a malevolent Mohammedan in a mask (possibly Persian), and who just **loves** sharia and thinks it's a perfectly wonderful system, squeals with rage to discover that posters here are (quite rationally, in light of the well-documented existence of a formal *endorsement* of LYING [especially to non-Muslims] in Mohammedan 'sacred' texts) suspicious of *Mohammedan* testimony, he is projecting onto us a pattern that is **routine** - indeed, enshrined in LAW - in Mohammedan lands. That is: *Mohammedans* do. not. admit. or. trust. KAFFIR testimony. They automatically discount it. Liars themselves, they believe or (projecting like mad) claim US to be habitual liars and treat us accordingly.

I am not a lawyer, but it seems to me that the decision of Judge Martin has now set a legal precedent that allows muslims to attack anyone who they feel has offended them.
If this is true, then American justice is in big trouble.
Hopefully sanity will prevail, and this Judge's decision will be overturned in a higher court, and the doofus Judge overturned along with it.

I wonder what this judge would have said or done, had the Muslim bashed Mr Perce up, or shot him, or stabbed him, severely wounding or in fact killing him, as sharia permits and prescribes?

I wonder what technicalities he would have attempted to use, to get the Mohammedan off the hook?

Furthermore: what if, in future, he comes to judge a case of, for example, a Mohammedan who has 'honor' murdered wife or female relative/s [daughter/s, sister/s, niece/s, cousin/s, aunt/s] or attempted to do so; or who has murdered (or tried to murder) an ex-Muslim, or who has beaten and raped his wife (both of which are perfectly halal under sharia), or who has raped an under-age non-Muslim girl after kidnapping her off the street?

None of these things is forbidden by sharia.

Where is the on-the-ball journalist who will confront this Mohammedan-convert Judge and describe the hypothetical cases I have just described, one by one, and then ask him, point blank, would he regard the Muslim perp in each case as deserving of punishment..or not?

For even more fun: ask him, point blank, if he approves and applauds the murder of Theo Van Gogh, yes or no?

awake wrote:

The "practical measures", (a mass cessation of Muslim immigration and mass forced deportation of Muslims from western countries), that Hesperado has espoused regularly, but never actualized in a tangibly realistic format, still remains unsaid.

One can't espouse something while leaving that something unsaid. At least one who, like me, hasn't had the privilege of learning sign language for the deaf (and as for getting through the thick skulls of the deaf, dumb and blind on the issue of the problem of Islam, I'm afraid no language seems to exist yet to learn).

"But remember, acording to Hesperado, that's not his job."

What's not my job is implementing what I'm espousing, since what I'm espousing is a massive project that would require government decision and action on a mass scale in the context of Western democracies. I can't see how that could possibly be my job.

"That is the job of elected government officials, other commenters here at this site and more specifically, an open written profession by Robert Spencer himself here and JW."

No; implementation in this regard is only the job of government officials. However, helping to galvanize public opinion (an important part of the general process of democratic action in Western democracies) in this regard (viz., the desideratum of deportation of Muslims from the West) is something others outside of government can do and, in my estimation, should do. And the more influential they are, the better the potential of their efforts -- and the worse the potential of their dereliction should they choose to do nothing in this regard or even effectively work against it.

"Hesperado's constant lamentation for recognition from who he deems as a requisite "holistic" commenter on Islam, regular JW'ers aside, for he cares little to none for you at all collectively, is the constant call to words and action by Robert Spencer and JW."

The only action, in this regard, I would call for from people like Robert Spencer is his main forte -- the action of words. I'm not calling on Spencer to pilot the ships or planes that will transport the Muslims, or to do any of the other innumerable concrete parts and steps of the massive project of deportation, from the decision-making/policy-making beginning phase to the more overtly pragmatic phase of all the various physical tasks that will be necessary to carry it out. In Western democraries, massive projects (whether of defense or public works, etc.) can and often do begin with a groundswell of public opinion which may take a long time to develop momentum. In that part of the process, ideas and public persuasion matter; they are like the fuel that can become part of the force to move objects (i.e., to actually get things done; i.e., to implement policy -- the job of our servants in government).

"At this point, I believe Hesperado knows that will NEVER happen."

If I thought that, it would mean I would have given up hope on the West. Though luckily, the defense of the West does not hinge on one person, Robert Spencer, since it does seem highly unlikely he will ever change his mind in this regard. Nevertheless, I do have hope that over time sufficient individuals in various parts of the West will continue to coalesce on this matter and become the groundswell for extricating a population whose members support deadly sedition -- and ironically, an important part of that groundswell will no doubt be the cognitive absorption of the multifarious data about the horrible and deadly words and deeds of Muslims around the world which Spencer has been marshalling and relaying to the public. The only question is how long this will take, and how many of us will have to die at the hands of Muslims in various parts of the West and the world (by "us" I mean Westerners and supporters of the West around the world) before we wake up in sufficient numbers.

Finally, awake asked me:

"Are there any "holistic" critics of Islam, besides yourself, that exist on this living sphere?"

In centuries past in the West, probably thousands, if not millions. Currently, however, I can think of only a handful of "civilians" -- ordinary people who, to my knowledge, have not published anything nor are famous like Spencer. One of them is the co-owner and administrator of the "1389-Counterjihad" blog, who goes by the name "1389"; another is a person who comments here a lot and on my blog. On my blog, he goes by the name, ironically enough, of "Nobody". Here, he uses another name which I will not reveal to respect his privacy. It should be noted, however, that "holistic" is not a static position, but rather a posture of unwillingness to be PC MC with regard to the problem of Muslims. As such, I regard certain quasi-"non-civilians" as hopefully on their way to becoming holistic -- such as for example Diana West, Andrew Bostom, Hugh Fitzgerald, Bill Warner, and Debbie Schlussel (the aforementioned "Nobody" claims that Schlussel is holistic, but I haven't seen her advocate the total deportation of Muslims yet, and until I do, I cannot consider her holistic, as that is one sine qua non for being such). I have hope that people (such as these) can rationally change their mind, given reappraisals of the data they know, as well as learning new data (though by now, a strong case can be made that we have all the data we need to know about Muslims to deem their continued presence in the West too high a risk to continue to indulge -- unless one has been living in a cave taking a Rip Van Winkle nap this past decade).

WhupTdue and gravenimage, thanks so much for the contact and other information because starting tomorrow morning this is one atheist who is going to be all over that little muslim sorry-ass excuse for a judge like ugly on an ape. He needs to be impeached, disbarred, and hell, it's too bad tarring and feathering has gone out of fashion.

And kudos to the 99.9% of this comments page for understanding that the constitution of this country applies to everyone -- even us.

I even don't count DefenderOfIslam in the .1% (e.g., imam dave742) because his brain has been eaten away by superstition and the desperate need to believe that the galactic nihilism at the heart of Islam is somehow going to reward him with an eternity of decadent partying in paradise. Don't you dare open your mouth to tell atheists, Christians, or anyone else in this country what we should do, you pathetic little would-be scimitar-wielding executioner.

Perhaps the judge is not aware that if this was a muslim country he would be under threat of death if he did not hand down the decision he did.

We are ruled by a constitution, not by random psychotic lunatics. As a judge his ONLY responsibility was to prevent rule by thuggery and he intentionally chose to decide a case based upon illegal thuggery that would be commited in another country.

The increadible amount of comments this story has inspired in so short a time indicates something. One thing it indicates is that the general public will be of the exact same mind as JW readers.

Attempting to get this judge removed would get in the news and generate desireable opinions in the general public.

Someone with experience in the law should take steps to get this man removed from the bench. Even if the attempt fails the publicity will be positive and show people that anti jihadists stance is in line with the general public and not extreme (being a classical libral willing to make an effort to defend normal ideals is not and never has been extreme).

He is using the freedom he enjoys to assault the freedom of others.

The judge seems to have completely ignored a bit of common sense.

If some thug beat up a guy in a muslim country for this IT WOULD STILL BE ASSAULT AND WOULD STILL BE AN ARRESTABLE OFFENCE! Weather the police would break the law and not arrest him and weather he would found guilty and/or sentanced is irrelevant. THE ASSAULT WOULD STILL BE AN ARRESTABLE OFFENCE.

So the judge used his extremely fanciful imagination when making this decision based upon what he so condescendingly imagines is done in other (lesser to his mind) countries.

Would this judge allow Hutus to attack Tutsies in America because that's what was happening in Rwanda?

awake asked me his question again; but since I already answered, I'm not sure what to do, for I have a profound aversion to repeating myself when the first time was excruciatingly adequate. Thank Allah for copy-paste.

He asked me if in my estimation there exist any people who have a holistic view of the problem of Islam, and now I paste what I already told him:

"Currently... I can think of only a handful of "civilians"..."

Meaning, of course (it goes without saying) that the "civilians" I can think of, I consider holistic. I wouldn't mention that "I can think of" them in that context, if it had to do with anything other than answering his question -- again, obviously, in the affirmative. I.e., in that precise context, I wouldn't suddenly bring up that "I can think of" some people who happen to like peanut butter and jelly sandwiches only with coffee, and not with milk. Obviously, the individuals, the mere handful (unfortunately), about whom I told "awake" in response to his question I can think of, relate directly and pertinently to said question, and not to anything else. And obviously I wasn't thinking of people whom I don't consider holistic; that would be, at that juncture, a silly and almost syntactically incorrect locution -- and certainly needlessly misleading (not to mention a waste of typing time). I mean, all this is so obvious one wonders seriously about the cerebral health of "awake" and would be concerned to recommend he see a specialist for a check-up.

This country is going absolutely f-ing insane. "We've got Predator Prosecutors and Judges trying twelve year old children as adults for murder. (See Angela Corey) Fathers by the millions are having their children stolen from them and subjected to economic genocide (Read "Taken Into Custody") If they're boys they're being turned into girls. (Read “The War Against Boys”) The Better Homes and Gardens Gestapo in the forms of deviants Code Enforcement Nazi Bobby Bowen and Fascist Judge David Dugan put a man Robert Biel in Prison for some broken down pickup trucks in his back forty. It's no longer the Home of the Free. It's “Are You In Compliance?” (Read “One Nation Under Arrest”)This current government is begrudging the Jews one sliver of land in a burning haystack of Arab hate. (Read “The Haj” by Leon Uris) Apparently this Muslim Judge has totally forgotten the words “God Bless America”. That's if he ever knew them. I'd dearly love for him to hear one word from me; “Gitarope”.

Wait a flipping minute. I read a transcript on another site (and in this article after careful re reading) that the judge said he was muslim.

"And what you've done is you've completey trashed their essence, their being. They find it very, very, very offensive. I am a Muslim. I find it very offensive"

That is a clear conflict of interest in this case and especially as the judge admitted that he had a such a strong personal opinion about this very minor incident.

I would VERY MUCH like to know the process by which this particular judge got this particular case. It was absolutely NOT by chance. I would bet a mazillion bippies that either he requested it, a sympathiser to the cause assigned him or some low level officer of the court fiddled the paperwork at some stage of the process to put him in this position.

And since when did science create a method by which the wholly subjective experience of being offended could be objectively observed and recorded? Who cares if that judge is offended? It can't be proven and is not relevant. Such talk does not belong in a court of law.

Call KOS and ask him.

What would a Catholic judge have done, do you think?

“American Taliban,” huh?

Unfair to take an exceptional event as typical?

OK, it was a rare event, I’ll certainly grant you.

But Muslim judges are rare, too.

Making this not so rare, at all, for Muslim judges.

So, again, go ask KOS.

"Travesty upon travesty. It should be noted that no Catholics were reported to have assaulted the atheists over "Zombie Pope"."

I can't answer for the Catholics, but I can speak as a Christian living in America. Assertivness is exceptable in America. Assaulting someone is not acceptable.

In America it is legal to burn a book as long as it is your book. But it is illegal to kill someone for burning a book. Even if you disagree with them you can not kill them or assault them.

In America we are free to worship any religion we chose. In Islam you are forced to worship as you are told. If you don't you will be killed.

The problem I have with the latter is if you are doing it because you are forced to, how is that living by Gods Will, if you are forced to do it by mankind?

Again I say, will the man without sin step forward, and to that man I say, you are a liar. If you want to see a sinner look in a mirror. Taqiyya may work on men, but it will not work on God. Be very careful whom you are lieing to or tricking.

America is not perfect, we may burn a book or two that we shouldn't have burned. But at least we have principles, rules, and laws that apply to, and protect everyone equally, and doesn't make martyers out of murderers and brainwashed killers.

So help us God.

Re: Double J and suing a judge

The law protects judges from lawsuits for the rulings made on the bench. But there are other means of redress as some have mentioned here.

Double J applies if the charge was "harassment" and the charge of harassment were made again for the same incident. However, if assault and/if Penn law has a statute on the books for battery, were not part of the original charges, then these could be brought w/o Double J applying. Also, Mr. Perce could take his case to civil court and sue for damages. He might also find an attorney who would file in Federal Court for a 'hate' crime charge as it seems clear that the muslim man attacked out of hatred rather than acting in self defense. And since the muslim admitted to the action, the civil case should be easy to win.

Judge Mark Martin. Where is my magnifying glass Watson ?

Doesn't "the fifth" realize that what he is doing is offensive to some people? Yes, he has every right to do it, but he also should know what to expect. I have a Hezbollah t-shirt. When I wear it in public, I realize that some poeple might find it offensive, and may confront me because of it. I EXPECT that. If someone does confront me in the manner that the Muslim man did in this thread, I would respond to whatever the person had to say. I wouldn't go running to the court system like a baby, but I am not a "fifth", so maybe that's the difference. If I don't want to be confronted, I don't wear the t-shirt.
Yes, if someone assaults me, then I may press charges, depending on the specifics. But again, there is no evidence of assault here. Actually, I didn't even realize until now that the charge was not even assault, but harrassment. The "fifth" does someone that he knows will offend people, but the when someone reacts, he runs to the court crying harrassment. What a nitwit.

Mail complaints to:

The Court of Judicial Discipline of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Judicial Conduct Board
601 Commonwealth Ave
Suite 3500
PO Box 62525
Harrisburg, PA 17106-2525

and according to the Answering Muslims comment section, you can contact the Judge here:

Mark W Martin
507 N. York St.
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055
Ph: 717.766.4575
Fx: 717.766.2238

Office Hours:
Monday – Tuesday, Thursday – Friday: 8:30 am – 4:30 pm
Wednesday: 8:30 am – 6:00 pm

David,

Until I see a person writing or hear a person saying that they support total deportation of all Muslims from the West -- while they are otherwise obviously not shy or tongue-tied at all about regularly expressing many other sundry thoughts on the matter -- it is entirely reasonable for me to assume they oppose total deportation of all Muslims from the West.

And that position which I think should be supported I also think rationally flows from this ever-growing mountain of alarming, grotesque, ghoulish, deadly data upon which our comments rest near this week's peak of Mt. Jihad Watch which, unfortunately and grimly, continues to mount ever higher because of fresh oozing and spurts of the evil lava of the Islam Muslims around the world continue to enable and aid and abet -- when they are not with demonic fervor putting it into bloody practice.

Indeed, we're not just talking about a growing mountain to help lead one to a conclusion which Second Person Plural for the most part continue to fail to arrive at, even as otherwise they schizophrenically demonstrate their "livid" reactions and their "stunned" dismay; but a metastasizing mountain. Its peak upon which we stand this week, with the years of hardened, multifarious evil documented below us, is getting so high, we are running out of air, and out of time.

And as we already see yesterday and today, the peak is still mounting ever higher above our heads, with fresh stories about ever more Muslims here, there and anywhere around the world (and within the West) demonstrating their propensity in their many-splendored diversity for deadly sedition and fanatical supremacism. The crest of the peak, which we can still see, for we stand near it now on February 24, 2012, will soon -- again, as it always does -- extend too high to see, as Muslims continue to supply us with ever more data; and just as surely as they will, so too will Jihad Watchers continue to be "livid" and "outraged" and "stunned" and otherwise dismayed and shaking their fists -- meanwhile refusing even to consider the only reasonable option pertinently related to the nature of the problem: extricating the entire population of Muslims from the West. It's not that it can't be done, technically, or pragmatically. It's that Second Person Plural (Y'all here at Jihad Watch and elsewhere in the anti-Islam movement), and Third Person Plural (Them Liberals Out There) don't want to -- with both these pluralities painfully ironic bedfellows in this one agreement.

I'm sure what you're doing in your offline life is productive; but productive of what -- the half-assed measures of "limiting" immigration to only Muslims about whom we already know they are "extremist", and only monitoring Muslims and mosques about whom we already know they are "extremist", etc.? Such measures are pertinent for individuals and groups about whom our Western virtue of innocent until proven guilty reasonably applies; but not for a group that we have, again, a burgeoning mountain of data to indicate represent a metastasizing, internationally networking, deadly fanatical intent to commit mass violence anywhere at random in places and at times we will not often be able to predict -- a mass-murderous intent based upon a 1,400-year-old and still going strong (indeed, getting worse) doctrine of sedition.

Now, if we could winnow out the dangerous "extremists" from the masses of supposedly harmless non-"extremists" when considering the total population of All Muslims, then half-assed measures would be reasonable. But since we can't, they aren't.

Why all the shock horror ? The judge acted quite correctly according to article 48:29 of the Constitution. 'Muhammad is the messenger of God and those who are with him are vehement against the infidels and compassionate to each other."

So, let me get this straight. This dave742 is a 9/11 Truther and sometimes wears a Hezbollah t-shirt. Well, it would theoretically be possible to be a more confused human being than dave742, but not much more confused. Ole dave742 is confused enough.

Sometimes, I'm inclined to think that the previous species to Homo sapiens, Homo erectus, actually did make it through the evolutionary time warp and is here and there still around, like dave742. But perhaps I sully Homo erectus too much here and the dave742s out there are from a Hominid previous to erectus, perhaps one of the Australopithecines, but then I may be insulting the Australopithecines and I really don't want to do that. Ah, it's a puzzlement.

I would like to comment on something else. Everybody has been assaulted by these scumbags in their loud “Boomer Cars”. And it is an assault. As much as if someone were to come up and spit in your face or slap you in the head. It's beyond obnoxious behavior. If there were ever a poster boy or description for “Disturbing the Peace” this would be it. Where did acceptance for this rudeness come from. To me this is just another symptom of the disease that is destroying this country. I commented on a web site in response to a Muslim judge who had dropped the charges against a muslim man who assaulted somebody wearing a “zombie muhommed” costume. The judges excuse, and I wouldn't stoop to calling it an explanation, was that that's the way the accused would have acted in his own country. Even chiding the victim telling him he would have been killed, (justifiably in the judges mind) in the muslim mans home country. My comment was that this country is going insane. Would this kind of behavior, and I'm talking about the noise now, been tolerated in my Dad's time? These guys would have been hauled out of their cars, had the shit kicked out of them and the cops would have come along and shaken their hands. Today, if I were to mete out the justice some asshole deserved for literally pounding me insensable with their noise I would be the one going to jail. In a word; It's Insane. When I went to the City of Rialto here in Ca to complain about this problem the city and the cops turned and ganged up on me. For reals. After complaining at a city council meeting I found myself surrounded and threatened by two Captains and three other cops. The answer to why these scumbags are allowed to run rampant and destroy your quality of life, pound the walls of your house and rattle your windows while you try to live in peace and quiet in the privacy of your own home, ( Which isn't really yours. It belongs to the governt. See “Robert Biel”), is as I said the fault of our so-called leaders and those sworn to “Keep the Peace”. Well, you can kiss that little dream goodbye thanks also to “representatives” like Darrell Issa. Republican Congressman from Cal. Who, as the chairman of the powerful Consumenr Electronics Association, used it's financial muscle to lobby against local ordinances protecting peace and quiet.

So while you're fighting against Sharia and Islam what we like to call “the fabric” of our society, our whole way of life is literally being torn to shreads. And that's not all. You may say I'm just whining. But there's a lot to be said for reading books. For example I preach to people like I'm handing out religious flyers Leon Uris' book “The Haj”. Because I don't think there's a better book that will explain Israels history and the sham that is the so-called Palestinian “Right of Return”.

In the same way I suggest a book that explains one of the reasons one parent households are becoming a way of life in this country and the Family Unit is becoming a thing of the past: “Taken Into Custody” I beg people to at least Google this book and read the Introduction. Please, please believe me when I tell you that you have no idea just how out of control our government is. You only think you're knowledgable about what really threatens this country. I'm here to tell you that you have no idea. I also recommend the “Preface” in Christina Hoff Sommers “The War Against Boys”, if you want to know who's to blame for our boys being turned into girls in our public schools. Sharia Indoctrination via CAIR is just one of the problems.

We as a people have got to “Man Up”. Even at the local level we are in the grips of a Police State where our country's motto is no longer “Don't Tread On Me”. It's “Are You In Compliance?” The Better Homes and Gardens Gestapo, better known as Code Enforcement has the last word when it comes to what used to by your private property. Of course, like Martin Niemoeller who said “First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out”. It hasn't “affected” you yet. Or you are fatally ignorant of what's going on. And I wonder about people who have never been to a city or county meeting. Never seen the smug contempt coming from a local politician while he's looking at a citizen exercizing his or her right to “Public Comment”. Almost reading their mind as they're thinking how you're wasting their precious time.

Slowly but surely we are self-destructing. You've heard it before; “The Home of the Free” is being replaced with “Home of the Fee”. People, these aren't just cutsy, humorous, amusing sayings anymore. Like my “Noise” issue, slowly but surely our way of life is disappearing. The government is becoming More. And we are becoming Less.

Stupid me. I was also going to suggest one of my favorite novels by Vince flynn "Term Limits".

Dave-o, if I were saying it, that's just the way I'd say it. No hits, no runs, no errors and nobody left on base...

Wow this is a fascinating topic!
If there's one thing we can all agree on it is that if you have two conflicting belief systems at some point your going to have to make a choice. This judge cannot represent our legal system in the U.S. His beliefs are in conflict with what he expected to uphold.
There is enough sh*#ttiness and hypocracy to go around. Islam, Judeism- sorry my spelling is terrible, and Christianity all come from the same geographic area( the "Holy Land"), and they are all cut from the same cloth (i.e. there is only one God but- insert your God here). They cannot coexist. The problem for Americans is how to hold the high ground without your rights taken away or getting blown up. It is not American to torture people, but torture might have prevented us from being attacked- it also cost us the high ground. We talk about how Islam is evil, and a threat to our society, and yet just about every guy in the middle east we have supported has been a godamned tyrant who treated his citizens like crap. In Iran we helped depose a lawful ELECTED leader and installed the Shaw- brutal dictator who oppessed is people. Man, I just don't understand why the Iranians hate us so much! Or how about this- Congradulations Mr. Mubarik (spl?) on winning your 70th election by a landslide. Sharia cannot be allowed in our country, but neither can our the lies and manipulations continue. Think that Sharia style BS is exclusive to Islam. There are evangelicals here in the U.S. that believe we must start a war in the middle east to bring about the rapture. Idiots. Ever watch the movie "Jesus Camp"? We Americans have this after image of ourselves as this humble G.I. kicking open the gates to the concentration camp and freeing the prisoners. We are master tacticians, we game our relationships for advantage. I believe most Muslims are angry about who our government supported, about how we conducted ourselves. People don't really get extreme when they are being treated fairly, and have a reasonable shot at opportunity and happiness. They are however very easily fomented by inequity. If I was already living a hardscrabble existance and you showed up and mowed down my olive trees, and bulldozed my home... You better have a good military and lots of foreign aid pouring in. It would be wonderful if simply deporting all Muslims would make a difference. I think if is really what you think is best you should move to a small island by yourself and make it easier-logistically for everybody else. That judge business is pretty cut and dry. It is this deeper reality which is so murky. None of us wants to take any ownership of our little piece of this screwed up world.

Thanks champ, I wish you the same to you and yours. Just to let you know, I signed that petition for the Christian pastor in Iran. Thanks for alerting us to that.

Update: the judge (Martin) in a letter says he is a Lutheran.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/02/why-we-need-anti-sharia-laws-muslim-judge-enforces-sharia-in-case-of-muslim-attacker-on-mocker-of-mu.html#comment-860735

Just read this interesting quote from Supreme court Justice Antonin Scalia that sums up the foolishness of the PA, (or any sharia rellated decision) very nicely.

The Supreme court case "Emplyment Division vs Smith" concerned two workers who wanted to collect unemployment, after being fired for smoking Peyote mushrooms. In their defense, they claimed smoking the mushrooms was part of a religous ritual (Now substitue almost any controversial Islamic teaching...)

The justices said the First Amendment’s protections do not mean individuals are free to violate valid laws simply by claiming a sincere religious objection. To “make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land” would have the anarchic effect of permitting “every citizen to become a law unto himself,” Justice Scalia wrote.

We should seriously consider disbarment proceedings against that PA judge.

Regarding Spencer's and Pamela Geller’s reference to this story:

While I agree the ruling was idiotic, and the judge could and perhaps should be disbarred for his moronic Multi-Cultural sensitivity training mode comments, he is NOT a Muslim, as is the claim making the rounds in the media.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/291963/be-or-not-be-muslim-andrew-c-mccarthy

Next, while the ruling for dismissal was offensive to many observers, and it’s true there seems to be some double standard in that the mockery on that same night was against the Pope as well (the Catholics elicited a mere yawn) the problem here is that as Ed Brayton and others point out, there have been only TWO actual cases of the attempt to pay homage to Sharia Law. Both were tossed at the appellate level upon appeal.

The most serious threat from any theoretical Sharia, as Ed Brayton points out, is in family law--not most civil law.

Ordinarily, Sharia would be no different from the arbitration methods used by private and religious organizations like the Church, as when they can barter between employees and nullify marriages, etc. This is actually very common in American and Britannic law inheritance called “common law”, as legal experts point out.
But in any case, however idiotic the judge for trying to lecture on Islam and waving a Koran (so alleged, though not proven) eh is NOT Muslim, but Lutheran, He was making a larger point from a third party point of view when you view the whole context of the “what if” scenario about “I’m a Muslim.”

This is just implementation of the worst kind on the old standby of “fighting words” and other kinds of rare types of “provocation” taking precedence over an absolutist interpretation of the First Amendment (which conservative Christians would not like either).

Hardly “Creeping Sharia.”

Dumb legal ruling, perhaps, but not Sharia. Just dumbassery in regards to misapplication to the old edict of “fighting words”, etc.

However, the judge has a retort to all this, including the illegality and inadvisability of recording any court proceeding without authorization (which can be Contempt of Court, as the tapes can and were altered and snipped and spliced to prove just about anything), and from this you’ll find the whole context of his decision.

http://volokh.com/2012/02/25/zombie-mohammed-judge-responds/#comments

http://www.loonwatch.com/2012/02/pennsylvania-sharia-court-loons-jump-the-gun-again-on-ginned-up-legal-jihad/