Those accused of defamation would be crazy to settle for this. One party accuses another of having defamed it by bringing certain charges.. Truth is, however, a defense, and such a suit gives the parties accused of such defamation a chance to offer, in court, the evidenc ethat led to those charges. And since what the accusters of the mosque deal seek is, among other things, maximum publicity so certain facts about this transaction, and those involved in it, may get out, then they should not accept this "mediation" offer. That's nonsense. Keep going. And if the Boston Mosque people drop their lawsuit, that does not mean that any counter-suit, for making false charges that themselves represent "defamation," should be dropped.

Tort Law is not the only place which can be used to enter into evidence all kinds of things. Agreements, treaties, contracts, where one party is Muslim and the other Infidel, may for the Muslim side be regarded as akin to the model of all such agreements, that of Al-Hudaibiyya, signed in 628 A.D. by Muhammad with the Meccans. The basis for such agreements is the clear understanding that one side -- the Muslim side, is not merely permitted, but is almost required, to breach such agreements if and when it feels strong enough to do so without any fear of the consequences.

One doubts if those American law schoools that have been tricked into hiring teachers of "Islamic law" (which is essentially theology, and really has little place in a law school curriculum, but is one of the vehicles by which Muslims are now slipping onto law-school faculties, as plausibly-presented "Islamic scholars" who will add that "extra dimension" - an extra dimension of taqiyya-and-tu-quoque, an extra dimension of ignorance of Islam being replaced not by knowledge, but by sly apologetics and therefore even greater miscomprehension of Islam. Does anyone think that the lawstudents of Khaled Abou el Fadl, can learn from him, in his classes, like the truth about Islam that, for example, an encounter with one or two of the scholars he pre-emptively bans (see his List of Books Not to Read, so carefully composed, along with his List of Books to Read -- all at www.scholarofthehouse.com) scholars of Islam tell us, that no agreement signed by Muslims with Infidels will be permanently obeyed by the Muslim side, then there's a whole lot of anticipatory repudiation going around. And not only with those "agreements" signed with Israel.

Thank God Yale had the good sense not to hire him. How unfortunate that a few years ago, at a time of much greater ignorance of Islam (not to mention much less wariness about taqiyya, and not nearly enough understood about what constitutes "Islamic law"), he was hired by another law school, and managed to become, as his own fan club's website tells us, "one of the world's great authorities" on Islamic law.

Posted by: Hugh at March 3, 2006 3:11 PM

"We are far more interested in peace and harmony than in winning a lawsuit," said the letter from Yousef Abou-Allaban, chairman of the society's board of directors.

Yeah. Sure they are. I'd love to see their victims turn the table on them, as appears to be the case, and get awarded the building from which they are spreading their poison.

Remember how the "Aryan Nations" lost their Idaho compound in the case against them lodged by Morris Deese of the Southern Poverty Center?

Keep up the fight!

Posted by: DesertDawgN29 at March 3, 2006 3:20 PM

losing -- or fearing that they will have things drug out of the closet that won't lose them the defamation suit, but that they'd just as soon folks didn't know, like the particulars of how they managed to acquire the land at such a discounted rate.

Posted by: waterdragon52 at March 3, 2006 3:39 PM

they just do not want their dirty laundry shown in public! l say fight them to the end!

Posted by: Lulu at March 3, 2006 3:52 PM

They might be scared of losing or bigger yet, they might be scared of the evidence that will come out.

Don't mediate this case, continue, or counter sue.

Posted by: alaskan1000 at March 3, 2006 4:08 PM

"Besides media organizations, the suit named several individuals and community groups who questioned the society's ties..." (from the original article). I say don't let the scumbags at the islamic society of Boston do this to you. Keep up the good fight, win, lose, or draw, but get them into court and get the answers you want answered. The more media presense during the trial, the better (as long as the media reports the truth).

Posted by: CelticCoyote at March 3, 2006 4:12 PM

We are far more interested in peace and harmony than in winning a lawsuit...

Posted by: Beagle at March 3, 2006 4:20 PM

May I quibble about the way in which the AP is reprting this case?

The article says the Muslims made an offer to "plaintiff's attorneys" to go to mediation.

If the Muslims sued (started the lawsuit) because they thought they were being libeled, then that makes the Muslims the "plaintiffs".

If I understand what is being reported, it would appear that the Muslims (plaintiffs) are asking the "Defendants" (newspaper et al) to join them in mediation with the "plaintiffs" agreeing to drop the lawsuit. How very gracious of the muslims.

Unless I'm mistaken, truth of the accusation is an absolute defense to the charge of libel. Meaning the muslims already know (or recently learned) the newspaper can prove the accusations made in the paper. Which means the Muslims will be exposed in due course if the lawsuit proceeds further.

This is the true reason the muslims are no longer interested in "winning their libel lawsuit" against the newspaper. The muslims know they will get clobbered in court with the truth.

I hope the newspaper declines the invitation to mediate the dispute. Go to court. Put the muslims under oath. Let the muslims go on record. Let the muslims commit perjury time and time again in court under oath or during depositions while sworn under oath. I would not be surprised to see the newspaper decline further litigation but only because these days doesn't appear to be many courageous newspaper publishers left.

The muslims opened a can of worms and now regret starting this lawsuit. Hold the muslims to the fire. Make them think twice before embarking down this road again.

(I can hear the muslims now defending against charges of perjury: They will defend on their right to commit taqiyya in accordance with their First Amendment right to practice their religion unfettered pursuant to the dicates of Big Mo.)

Posted by: omvi at March 3, 2006 4:35 PM

"(I can hear the muslims now defending against charges of perjury: They will defend on their right to commit taqiyya in accordance with their First Amendment right to practice their religion unfettered pursuant to the dicates of Big Mo.)"

Of course. If you allow them to swear their oath of truthful testimony upon the koran, you invite them to deceive the infidel.

Posted by: Infidel33 at March 3, 2006 5:40 PM

GasBag -

Shutup! Your post is 4x longer than the article commented on ...

Posted by: 00Buck at March 3, 2006 5:40 PM

Buck-
No one is going to gouge your eyes out if you don't read the comments. Oh wait, do you live in saudi arabia or iran?

Posted by: mustang65 at March 3, 2006 6:30 PM

Illinois Gov will hire Islamics; then if any questions arise "I don't know nutting -- I just work here..."

http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/local_story_062150418.html

Hate Crimes Appointee A Dilemma For Blagojevich

(AP) SPRINGFIELD, Ill. It started as a routine gubernatorial appointment to a feel-good commission -- so routine that even the governor says he didn't know the details.

But naming a Nation of Islam official to a commission that fights discrimination has exploded into a major election-year dilemma for Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, putting him in the middle of a conflict between blacks, Jews and gays.

Even if Blagojevich makes his way through the racial and religious minefield this issue presents, his claim of ignorance about the appointment could reinforce his image of a detached, uninformed governor.

Posted by: witness at March 3, 2006 6:36 PM

To read about what is happening in France, here is a new blog in English:

http://hexagonews.blogspot.com/

Americans, get informed about what is happening in the most Muslim-populated country in Europe = France. It might help you avoid the same in the US.

God bless you all.

Posted by: joiesauvage at March 3, 2006 6:43 PM

To read about what is happening in France, here is a new blog in English:

http://hexagonews.blogspot.com/

Americans, get informed about what is happening in the most Muslim-populated country in Europe = France. It might help you avoid the same in the US.

God bless you all.

Posted by: joiesauvage at March 3, 2006 6:44 PM

I for one would LOVE to review the legal documents associated with this case. I would LOVE to have an online legal reviewing organization like 'Groklaw' start to keep track and organize a positive defense list of documents and actions.

The effect of Groklaw in the defense of Free Open Source Software has had a monumental effect in combating intellectual property terrorism around the world.

We need an online Groklaw community to reveal and expose Islam in a legal light. Groklaw also works as a conservatory of information and legal arguments that our community lacks.

Where is the Pamela Jones of Islamic Jihad?

CD 'Bar' Baric

Posted by: blazar-jet at March 3, 2006 7:24 PM

re: above posting re: Farrakhan aide appointment causing problems in Ohio.
Say what you will about the evil rhetoric that spews from the mouth of the right reverend Farrakhan, he at least has some degree of morality in his personal life. You look at the other self proclaimed leaders of the black community. They were raised by mothers in a single parent household and or were born out of wedlock and had fathers that were non-existent, beat their mothers, or were notorious adulterors. Those black leaders grew up and repeated the cycle by fathering children out of wedlock or were adulterors themselves.
Farrakhan is the only one of the bunch that has been able to break that cycle.

The black community tends to have respect for Farrakhan. It is akin to the way that Hamas was able to step into power. Their other leaders were so immoral and corrupt that no matter how evil Hamas is they looked good by commarison.

Posted by: GrimReaperxxx at March 3, 2006 7:36 PM

GrimRea;exxx who is black and respect this nutbar Farrakhan? l know l heard a lot of black people who were disgusted with his latest comments.. you know about the mother ship where his leader is and told him that Bush blew up the levees?? come on a very small vocal cabal group loves this madman.. but most do not respect him..

Posted by: Lulu at March 3, 2006 7:59 PM

Dear criminal racist Huge the Moslim didnot break the treaty with Mecca. The people of Mecca broke the
treaty by attacking one of the pagan tride that where allied to the moslim thereby voiding the treaty in effect, really historal scholar not criminal racist like you know the realy fact.

To one of the person who state you can give the court any evident you want is dead wrong. The evident must be revantly to the case at hand not something that happen more 1400 years ago, judge willnot allow it enter into court as evident.

Posted by: DefenderofIslam at March 4, 2006 12:22 AM

The poster just above is attempting to express the belief that Muhammad was perfectly willing to abide by the treaty, but it was those Meccans who, by attacking a tribe allied to Muhammad, breached first. Nonsense. Muhammad later explains that he had known what he was doing all along. Muslim commentators celebrate the cleverness of Muhammad -- a cleverness which would not be there to praise, if the only thing he had done was to respond to an attack by the Meccans. When Muslims celebrate Muhammad's victory throught that treaty, they are celebrating, obviously, his guile.

They are celebrating the example he offers in his own practice of what he preaches: "War is deception." Muslim commentators never say that Muhammad was sorry to attack, was reluctant to attack. They stress his delight in finding a flimsy pretext upon which to attack.

When any Muslim group offers to Infidels what is reported so incorrectly as "peace," what is really being offered is a hudna, a temporary truce, that is not to last longer than the Treaty of al-Hudaibiyya, or about 10 years, though it may be renewed if the enemy remains too strong. At the first sign that the Muslims are strong enough to attack, or the enemy has been weakened, that duty to attack cannot be delayed.

That is why the only thing keeping the peace between Israel and the circumambient Muslims is not any hope of some non-existent and certainly, from the Muslim point of view, completely unacceptable result if the Infidel state should remain, whatever its size, is the doctrine of Darura, necessity. Only this -- the "necessity" of not attacking an overwhelmingly powreful enemy -- can keep the peace, by offering Arab and Muslim rulers justification for failure to attack that their ruled masses can understand and accept. Nothing to do with "two-state solutions" and similar nonsense.

Posted by: Hugh at March 4, 2006 12:33 AM

Hugh you are forgetting that Muhammad was than prophet of God than he have limit abilities to look into the future. When Macca attack the moslim allied tribe they thought Muhammad was weak and they where stong. Due to they breaking the treathy the way they did all of the allied left then to join Muhammad Army. It the pagon of Mecca didnot try to break the treathy as they did it would have being renew or make permant.

In a tort case above this isnot revant to the case at all than a honest judge willnot allow it in as evident at all. And Hugh you arenot able to change america back into a Christian nation again. It is than multculture societry now with many different religion now. Japon report that over half of the 30 plus year old woman of the second bady boon generation never have a child at all. Japon populateion is decline faster than reported before than it will drop even more than before. Those foreign you are alway rageing against is keep the america birth rate at 2.06 replacement rate is 2.1, it we keep foreign out our birth rate will drop to European level really fast.

Posted by: DefenderofIslam at March 4, 2006 1:57 AM

DefenderOfIslam, one of the things which are required in order to argue persuasively with anyone is a little education. Such as being able to spell. Unconvincing excuses for your so-called Prophet are bad enough, but, when done in grammar that would get an eight-year-old thrown out of class, they become grotesque. Get a few years' schooling, then come back and try again. We may then just chortle, instead of laughing out loud.

Posted by: Paolo at March 4, 2006 4:39 AM

In the store today I picked up a can of wafers with the word "Dansk" in the name. They were made in Indonesia for a NY company.

Oh well...............

Posted by: 000000001 at March 4, 2006 4:40 AM