| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Good news, "for now," in an update on this story. "Egyptian Christian escapes deportation" from WorldNetDaily:
An Egyptian Christian will remain in the United States for now, because even though he may have no such right, "he most assuredly has a right not to be tortured," a federal court ruled.
The decision came in the case of Sameh Khouzam, 38, who has been in the U.S. for about nine years, according to spokesman Sam Grace of Coptic News.
His supporters feared he would face sure torture under Egypt's Islamic law, and U.S. District Judge Thomas Vanaskie agreed that was possible.
"Judge Vanaskie found that there was a compelling case for the argument that deportation would cause irreparable harm and that the record bore out that if Sameh was returned to Egypt, he probably would face torture," Grace told WND.
"Protection against torture is an essential component of the rule of law and a democratic society," the judge concluded. "While Khouzam may have no right to be in the United States, he most assuredly has a right not to be tortured."
Grace said the judge appeared to distrust assurances from the State Department that Egypt had promised Khouzam would not be punished if he would return to the land he fled while under threat of violence unless he and his family converted to Islam.
"Khouzam has presented a claim that his removal will violate the [Convention Against Torture.] In this regard, no showing has been made by [the government] that removal based upon diplomatic assurances by a country known to have engaged in torture is consistent with the CAT," the judge wrote.
He added: "The protection against torture on which the principle of non-return rests is a fundamental right that is important to the rule of law and essential to a democratic society."
The record indicates, the judge said, "a probability of torture upon Khouzam's return to Egypt. The Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit found it more likely than not that Khouzam will be tortured, and the record before this court does not show otherwise."
Read it all.
Posted by Marisol at July 12, 2007 12:08 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Can you imagine the mentality of a government who would send a Cristian to die by torture by the techniques of a invert savage? ? ? Having trouble realizing what kind of horrific trouble we are in? Well! Just follow along and soon we will be on the same page: Repeat after me: Diana was going to marry a Muslim. Diana was going to marry a Muslim. Diana was going to marry a Muslim. Diana was going to marry a Muslim. Diana was going to marry a Muslim. Diana was going to marry a Muslim. OK, now we are together!
Posted by: tom![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at July 12, 2007 12:39 AM
Is it amazing or not - that the State Department considers the condition - conversion to Islam to avoid torture - as an acceptable arrangement under which Mr Khouzam can be deported? Also, how did the judge in question not tell State that that isn't an acceptable pre-condition?
I'm not exactly a fan of Pat Robertson, but he once had it right when he called for the State Department to be blown up. Alternatively, given this story, every employee of the State Department should be promised a rendezvous vacation to a surprise location, and dropped in Mecca. I'm sure they'll appreciate the hospitality of the local Muslims, and let's see whether the Saudis are generous enough to spare them should they recite the Shehada.
Posted by: Infidel Pride at July 12, 2007 12:39 AM
Ha! Infidel Pride! Pat Roberson is fuddy duddy compared to this guy! Click on this link and watch the video and realize that the Muslims have at last been defined perfectly and see the end of Religious Correctiveness !!! http://hallindsey.org/
Posted by: tom at July 12, 2007 12:52 AM
excuse me ! I meant to say "RELIGIOUS CORRECTNESS" THE VERY THING THAT IS DESTROYING THE WORLD.
Posted by: tom at July 12, 2007 1:02 AM
The idiots at the INS have been giving sanctuary to jihaddis for years, on the grounds that there are warrents outstanding against them in various middle-eastern countries.
It's nice to think that an innocent is being protected for a change.
So far as I'm concerned, if we want to import middle-easterners why don't we just lock out the mohammedans and import all the Christians from those countries?
It would improve matters in all sorts of ways.
Posted by: joeblough at July 12, 2007 2:45 AM
I think that there is only one Muslim country that has signed the UN Universal declaration of Human Rights in I think in 1948 and If my memory serves me correctly that was Saudi Arabia. Universal is a bit like very elastic condom one size fits all. This should give us all some form of protection against torture and mistreatment. Muslim of cause all know that there is no law higher than Sharia law that being the word of God couldn't and wouldn't accept this declaration so in there wisdom they all signed an Muslim declaration of Human right I think in Egypt somewhere around 1990. I am certain Hugh or one of the more learned readers of this Blogg will correct me if I am wrong but I think I have got most of my fact right. You don't have to read the muslim declaration very deeply before you realize that all forms of arbitration or decisions will be made using Sharia law. It is obvious to most of us here that the health and wellbeing of this gentleman would be at risk. A good decision by the judge.
Posted by: Holger Dansker at July 12, 2007 4:11 AM
Why on earth did this even have to go to court?
Posted by: payingattention at July 12, 2007 4:21 AM
This is surely good news for Mr. Kouzmam. Having said that, the US State Department continues to ignore the implications of blasphemy and apostasy laws in "Islamic" countries and treats Christians as inconvenient statistics as they struggle to survive with their Muslim neighbors. Don't think for a minute that Mr. Kouzman's case with be forgotten. If any relative of his dares to apply to a visitor's visa to visit him in the US, the application will almost surely be denied. The State Dept. doesn't like to be crossed, even by the US Court system. Most Islamic countries, including Egypt, have the front desks of their embassies and consulate offices filled by hostile Muslims who deliberately cause fear and intimidation to Christians doing business there. Many Americans in those offices seem to 'go native' and support the prevailing Muslim attitudes of superiority and the Jim Crow laws of those countries. In the meantime, as Mr. Kouzman struggles to pay his lawyer and court fees for the literally the fight of his life, the US Embassy in Saudi Arabia is busily stamping as many student visas as possible for the huge increase in Saudi students to US universities. I wonder if that task has anything to do with Secretary Cheroff's 'gut feeling' about another attack??
Posted by: maryrose at July 12, 2007 5:55 AM
...lets start deportations for all those Muslims here on student visas, those who have never attended one class or even reported to the school....lets deport all those Muslims who have been convicted of domestic violence, vandalism, car theft, assaults, robberys, rapes, and general civil disobedience....lets deport all those Muslims who fail to register or answer any immigration department inquiries....lets deport all those Muslims who march down the street shouting support for terrorists and terrorist organizations...lets deport all those Muslims who are caught lying on job applications, identification applications, or applications for loans....
....deportations are in order, lets deport the right people....
Posted by: exsgtbrown at July 12, 2007 7:06 AM
OK, am I paranoid for suspecting that there's a clue in this story as to how the PTB will respond if these THINGS start rampaging in the streets of the cities of the US, eg, Start threatening women with acid in the face if they don't wear head scarves-pieces of "minor" viciousness which are starting to occur in some EUropean cities, and which
historically are often the prelude to mob violence to force mass conversions, once the things feel they are a large enough % of the population ?
If the PTB think it's OK to force this man to return to Egypt because after all, all he has to do to be safe is convert to the garbage "religion", then why wouldn't they just tell us , "Well, wear the headscarf. Don't be seen carrying alcohol. Keep your dogs indoors. Don't offend multicultural norms". Rather the way some EUropean officials seem more intent on protecting the feelings of these things, rather than in protecting the lives and well being of the native EUropean peoples.
Many have stated that in the event of a large scale attack, the second amendment will be used to protect us and prevent further outrages. I am inclined to agree with the pessimists who believe that another 9/11 will be used as an excuse to cordon off the mosques from the "rednecks", possibly as an excuse to repeal the second amendment or to hurry through such restrictions on it as to render it a dead letter, and perhaps even be used as an excuse for the US-MX-CA merging' that appears to be in the works (with 'enhancement of anti terrorist cooperation' being the reason given for why this merging is needed).
Be that as it may, it is obvious that the state department is not only utterly worthless and incompetent-it may be a positive detriment to the USA. It needs a thorough housecleaning-and abolishing it wouldn't hurt my feelings. The attitude of the SD is an outrage.
Posted by: labrat at July 12, 2007 8:47 AM
Exsgtbrown has a good idea. The problem is a lot of those who need to be exiled (rather than deported) always manage to disappear. If we could be rid of such rabble then we'd have some room to take in true refugees-people persecuted by Islamania because of their beliefs.
Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at July 12, 2007 8:48 AM
If however he had claimed that he was a Muslim facing torture in a Muslim nation, because of his Islamic views, he would have been granted permission to stay without a moments hesitation. In Britain, he would have been given citizenship.
In Britain, Labour has granted over a million British passports in its ten years in office. Just handing them out like confetti, even to convicted terrorists.
Posted by: DP111 at July 12, 2007 9:10 AM
Shouldn't they be deporting the 12-20 illegal aliens, who have no such worries about being sent back to their countries, first?
This guy's case should have come up after all of those illegals were ejected.
By then, he would have been long retired.
Posted by: profitsbeard at July 12, 2007 9:28 AM
"I think that there is only one Muslim country that has signed the UN Universal declaration of Human Rights in I think in 1948...Saudi Arabia..."
-- from a posting above
No, not Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia would never sign, even with its fingers crossed, the "Universal Declaration of Human Rights."
It was Iran that did so -- Iran under the Shah. And it was an aspirational signing, not one which could be full accepted -- but the Shah was at least trying. The Islamic Republic of Iran, of course, changed -- ended -- even that.
at July 12, 2007 9:45 AM
Opps... should have read "...12-20 MILLION illegal aliens..."
(If only it were just 12-20!)
Posted by: profitsbeard at July 12, 2007 10:55 AM
Once again, Look! Do you need to get hit over the head with it? Sharia is inevitable in England! Repeat after me until it sinks in! The Queens son loves the Muslims, and Diana was going to marry a Muslim. What else, after refusing to get an abortion? Muslims don't like abortions even though they do not consider the baby as human (so they can kill pregnant women when it seems good to them). ONCE AGAIN, " Diana was going to marry a Muslim." Diana was going to marry a Muslim. "Diana was going to marry a Muslim."
Posted by: tom at July 12, 2007 6:09 PM
But Tom, Diana was popular for her style (short tight dresses!) and hairdos. So, if she converted she would have completely lost her popular appeal. If she converted but kept western style, perhaps she would have brought muslimas into this millenium?
Posted by: Lili at July 12, 2007 8:20 PM
This is a head banger isn't it?
All day long we hear how islam is peace,yet here we have a man that can't go back to his homeland because he fears torture and forced conversion.JUDGES agree that he would more than likely be tortured?
which is it? Islam is peaceful or islam is a torturing scourage?
It makes no sense.
Islamic hellholes are grand enough to allow them to visit or immigrate here, but the hellholes are too lunatical and evil to deport the unwelcomed back to thier homeland.
If this guy is truly a christian then keep him and send back an unwanted muslim in his place.
Hows that for sanity?
Posted by: Dar al-harb at July 12, 2007 11:42 PM
lili ! You just might be correct ! Then, perhaps, it was the Muslims that killed her (they certainly have the money - and the motivation). And they are certainly taken by all the "princess and prince" stuff - and their history is full of famous well bred converts (largely bogus of course). They certainly have demonstrated their ability to buy off the western media big time - why not? A Moslem baby out of Princess Diana (if a boy) would be worshipped right off by at least 25% of the Billion followers of that bomber's manual called the KORAN
Posted by: tom at July 13, 2007 12:14 AM
LOL, so that would be bad or good for islamists? Bad for them, if romantically-inclined muslimas had started admiring Diana and she'd encouraged them to seek freedom.
Good for them, if she'd just submitted, covered up in a sack and shut up.
But hey, surely her death was a zionist plot? Isn't everything???
Posted by: Lili at July 13, 2007 12:44 AM
Lili ! Could very well be ! The Jews, trying to retard England's rapid slide into Eurabia, took out charismatic Diana, to the disappointment of the Powerful English Muslims and their Dhimmie allies who's dreams of an ordered and controlled world seemed so possible to them! Say that they wined and dined Diana and her Romantic Sheik of Arabia - spending millions. The Jews, seeing this via their incomparable secret police, knew that without England Israel was even more alone, set adrift on the Muslim Ocean full of pirates - so, Diana had to be sacrificed. This theory would account for Prince Charles loving the Arab Culture so much: Just an eighty year old heartbeat away from total Dhimmitude for England!
Well, you can certainly see why they would be so very desperate! I certainly can understand it! It makes me nervous as hell! imagine, having that twin nightmare of Charles and Diana about to happen at the same time! God, what a sight!
at July 13, 2007 1:36 AM
"I think that there is only one Muslim country that has signed the UN Universal declaration of Human Rights in I think in 1948...Saudi Arabia..."
-- from a posting above
No, not Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia would never sign, even with its fingers crossed, the "Universal Declaration of Human Rights."
It was Iran that did so -- Iran under the Shah. And it was an aspirational signing, not one which could be full accepted -- but the Shah was at least trying. The Islamic Republic of Iran, of course, changed -- ended -- even that.
Thank you Hugh I was in a hurry to get out of the house and I didn't have time to check the facts.
Hugh why don't you do a short article about how the Muslim declaration of Human right abrogated the Universal declaration of Human right. I am certain it would be very enlightening to the readers. I apologies once again for my sloppiness
Posted by: Holger Dansker at July 13, 2007 4:27 AM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)