JWers:

This will be posted on multiple threads and periodically for the next few days, so I apologize in advance for the repetition.

Susan B and I are compiling a list of e-mail addresses for JWers/DWers who might wish to contact each other personally. Once your name is on the list, if someone wants to contact you, you will first be contacted by Susan who will obtain your authorization before giving out your e-mail address to the individual who requests it. So far we've had a pretty good response to our previous posts but there are a lot of familiar names missing! If you'd like to join our contact list, send your info (be sure to include your JW screenname so we know who you are) to susan_b356@yahoo.com.

CGW

Posted by: CGW at September 24, 2004 12:19 PM

Damra must report to prison Nov. 22, after the Muslim holy month of Ramadan

Why is this??!?! If he were JEWISH would they let him wait until Yom Kipper was over before they put him in jail?!?! I doubt it. PC with criminals as long as they're muslims.

Posted by: yahudimrevenge at September 24, 2004 12:26 PM

Today, taken from MEMRI, an interview with the bastard Abu Mus'ab Al-Zarqawi:

"...how will we be able to bring about coups d'etat in neighboring countries [if we don't take over Iraq]? How can we rescue Jerusalem when we have no base from which to set out? Rescuing Jerusalem and the neighboring countries will come only after the rise of an Islamic state from which the youth will set out to liberate the neighboring areas."

So that's why he's in Iraq. He wants a BASE from which to kill others. He feels he need to own a country to he can have a base of operations. He leaves absolutely no doubt as to why he is in Iraq. Looks like he plans to STAY and take over. Time to level Fallujah once and for all? No notice, no advance warning - just turn it into glass.

Then further he says, regarding the beheadings he himself conducts every time he gets a chance to get bloody:

Al-Zarqawi is convinced that his operations are permitted by Shari'a [Islamic law], and that the hostages "are not truly hostages. There is a difference between a hostage and a spy or a captive. The sentence for spies is death." According to the source, Al-Zarqawi "accepts comments" from ulema [Muslim religious leaders] regarding whether his killing operations are permitted or forbidden according to Islam

Alright, where are the ulema who will actually ADVISE him to stop? Let me know when you find even one.

Posted by: yahudimrevenge at September 24, 2004 12:45 PM

I have to admit, KeithJoy is forcing me to learn.

Elsewhere in another thread, I noted that it makes NO difference which president appointed the judge. They may choose people who seem to fit their criteria, but in the long run the judges Own views / interpretations, do shape what they decide.

Judge Gwin was appointed by Clinton.

One of the judges who let one of these bastards get away, was appointed by Bush '41, if I remember correctly.

I'll be interested to check up on other judges *heads for google*

Posted by: Gary at September 24, 2004 1:04 PM

I would however say it is Gwin's liberal outlook that this guy is allowed to be free until after Ramadan.

Posted by: Gary at September 24, 2004 1:16 PM

US Attorney White says, "The main thing for us from the beginning was to get this individual out of the country. He doesn't deserve to be a U.S. citizen."

Correct, nor does any Muslim who supports the 'ideological enemy' that seeks to destroy the United States by any means, including the use Weapons of Mass Destruction on population centers: Islamic Jihadists.

And, that 'enemy', Islamic Jihadists, supported by a massive Islamic collective engaged in that same 'Jihad' in various ways, is already committed to acquiring and delivering those weapons.

In the cold war the Soviet Union NEVER committed to the delivery of WMD; both sides came close a couple of times, but that level was never reached. In this conflict, one side has already made that committment.

We must face this conflict for what it is: a hot WMD war with guerilla forces inside our nation aiding and abetting the enemy in various deceptive forms.

Anyone, who holds in common the ideology of this enemy should come under examination. Given that this enemy seeks to use our Courts and Constitutional provisions for due process against us, we must make legislative adjustments, decide on principles of examination and expulsion, and take the offensive.

Posted by: JTF at September 24, 2004 1:27 PM

That few people realize that one can remain in this country after having been stripped of citizenship is indeed deplorable. And after enough people become aware of this, they should be further instructed to realize that there is no god-given right either to enter this country (Cat Stevens seems to think he has such a right, and appears quite indignant that anyone should question that right), nor to receive a green card, nor to be here as a permanent resident, nor to be naturalized, nor to be free of having citizenship taken away under all sorts of conditions that can be set by Congress working with the Executive and the Judiciary. It is bizarre to think that, for example, an oath of allegiance to support the Constitution, which cannot possibly be meant by anyone who is a Muslim, and takes Islamic tenets seriously, means nothing. Perjury in the taking of the oath should be grounds for stripping citizenship. Nor does being born a citizen necessarily render one immune from having that citizenship removed, and then that non-citizen removed.

There seems to be widespread misapprehension as to what instruments of self-defense are available to Infidel peoples and polities. The real answer is: anything they choose. But first they must understand precisely the nature of JIhad, the isntruments by which it is pursued, and the certain consequences, for Infidels, should Jihad conquest, by qital (combat), by a combination of qital and the economic weapon and the propaganda weapon and the demographic weapon, employed in various and ways, and at different times depending on circumstances and the likelihood of success, be triumphant, and deal with Infidels as they have, over 1350 years, always been dealt with.

Posted by: Hugh at September 24, 2004 1:47 PM

Hugh:
Nor does being born a citizen necessarily render one immune from having that citizenship removed, and then that non-citizen removed.

I have said the same over many years. It arose was a consequence of David Blunket's proposals for an identity card for all British residents.
In this day and age, when large numbers of Muslims born in Britain have little or no allegiance to Britain, indeed an antipathy to it, it is absurd to allow citizenship purely on grounds of place of birth.

A more rational approch would be that for those born and brought up in Britain, citizenship and an identity card to be given at age 18, after an oath of allegiance to the Crown. This then allows the person to take part in the affairs of the nation. Immigrants also become citizens after showing competance in English and respect and awareness of Britains culture, and declaring an oath of allegiance.

Any acts that are deemed hostile to the Crown, allow the Crown to remove the protection that it grants to its subjects. That means withdrawal of citizenship.

Posted by: DP111 at September 24, 2004 4:57 PM

So do all the Muslims in jail get released
for Ramadan with the promise they'll come back?

If true Muslims had cleansed themselves at the last Ramadan,they wouldn't be going to jail for
criminal activity or breaking laws.
Allah might forgive Muslims but the rules here on Earth must be enforced and those failing to agree with them must make atonement to the State.

NO CAIR - KNOW FREEDOM

Posted by: ala-sux at September 24, 2004 5:05 PM

I noted that it makes NO difference which president appointed the judge. They may choose people who seem to fit their criteria, but in the long run the judges Own views / interpretations, do shape what they decide.

Posted by: Gary at September 24, 2004 01:04 PM

the key phrase is: "the judges Own views / interpretations, do shape what they decide".

Judges are supposed to uphold the law, not make it according to their opinions. Their job is to make sure justice is served, and the laws upheld.

This is whats wrong with our courts. They aren't doing their job as it was intended.

Posted by: Abu_Bin_Boobie at September 25, 2004 4:31 AM

Special treatment again for muslims!!!
Is there any wonder everyone is sick to death of these bastards???

Posted by: Rikki at September 25, 2004 6:12 AM