Muslim denied spot with Florida county Republican Party

[RandomGuy]

Interesting bit. I am sure the event will be seen through whatever colored glasses one prefers.



MIAMI — Islam and tea party activism clashed at a raucous meeting Monday night when a group of Broward County Republicans blocked a Muslim activist as a member of the party's executive committee.

Republicans, who changed their rules to publicly vet Nezar Hamze and then vote on his application by secret ballot, said they didn't oppose him because he was a Muslim - but because he is associated with the Center for American-Islamic Relations, whose Washington-area affiliate was an unindicted co-conspirator in a federal terrorism indictment.

Hamze, CAIR's South Florida director, said his local group had nothing to do with the suspect activities in Washington. He said CAIR advocates for civil rights for Muslims, who have been unfairly targeted ever since 9/11.

"I'm aligned with Republican values. And I want to serve the party," Hamze said, who earlier told a reporter that any effort to block him was the result of anti-Islamic "bigotry."

At times, when he addressed the packed room at the Sheraton Suites in Fort Lauderdale, a few members shouted out among the crowd of about 300.

"Terrorist!" said one man.

"Let him speak!" said another.

Members of Broward's Republican Party said Hamze was making a mockery of their rules and was trying to become a member as a publicity stunt.

"I don't have a positive impression of Mr. Hamze. I don't think he will be an asset to our party," said Scott Spages, who is involved in programs concerning radical Islam at his church, Calvary Chapel Fort Lauderdale.

In the end, the Broward Republican Executive Committee voted 11-158 to block him from committee membership. He can still attend meetings, but as a general member of the public.

"Wow," he said afterward. "If I had realized it would be like that, I wish they had just sent me a letter saying I was denied."

One Broward Republican member, blogger Javier Manjarres, objected to the process. "They singled him out," Manjarres said. "It was a set up."

Aside from questioning his motives, there was also a dispute about how long he had been a Republican. Party Vice Chair Collen Stolberg said Hamze became a registered Republican only since August and that before then he was registered with no party affiliation.

Hamze said that wasn't true. He said he changed his address in August, but has been a registered Republican for about a decade.

Of the 11 applicants for the party, only Hamze was rejected - the first time anyone in the room could recall that happening in a county where Republicans complain about how outnumbered they are by Democrats.

Prior to deciding the new-member applications, a Republican successfully moved to change party rules and require that applicants say how long they've been a Republican and to take five minutes worth of questions for the crowd.

Hamze called it "The Hamze rule."

A new litmus test was then born: Do you support Rep. Allen West? The tea party Republican has repeatedly denounced Islam and clashed with Hamze. So has Joe Kaufman, chairman of the group Citizens Against Hate and the vice-chairman of the Republican Jewish Coalition of South Florida.

"Are you willing to support Congressman Allen West ... as a Republican?" Kaufman said loudly in the microphone. "Will you denounce terrorism? And your organization has been named a terrorist organization."

Hamze said he couldn't comment on the politics of CAIR because it's a nonprofit, nonpartisan group. He later said he denounces terrorism and that he's not involved in any terrorist activities.

Hamze said he was considering filing a complaint with the Republican Party of Florida because the county party's constitution says that a "vacancy shall be filled" by a qualified Republican - that is, one who is a registered Republican who lives in the county.

But the constitution also says that a vacancy "shall be filled by majority vote." And he lost that badly.


Before the meeting, a group circulated a petition bashing Hamze.

Tom Trento, executive director of a group called The United West, shook hands with Hamze and had a friendly chat with him - even though Trento thinks CAIR is involved in terrorism.

"Did CAIR tell Muslims not to cooperate with the FBI?" asked Trento.

"No," Hamze responded. "We said they should have a lawyer present, which is their constitutional right."

"What do they have to fear?" asked Trento.

"Good question," Hamze said. Trento smiled.

After the vote to deny membership, Broward Executive Committee Chairman Richard DeNapolis said simply: "Mr. Hamze, your membership has been denied."

The crowd cheered loudly.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/09/26/125344/muslim-denied-spot-with-florida.html

I will however withhold judgment. It may indeed be a publicity stunt, but the general nastiness directed at the guy says a lot to me. If the members thought it was a publicity stunt, the best route would have been to simply accept him and avoid the opportunity to paint them as intolerant jackasses.

[Yonivore]

Interesting bit. I am sure the event will be seen through whatever colored glasses one prefers.
If he were "aligned with Republican values," as he claimed; he wouldn't be the Director of CAIR's South Florida operation.

CAIR is committed to instituting Sharia law in place of the Constitution and they are an unindicted co-conspirator in a terrorism case.

[DarrinS]

If he were "aligned with Republican values," as he claimed; he wouldn't be the Director of CAIR's South Florida operation.

CAIR is committed to instituting Sharia law in place of the Constitution and they are an unindicted co-conspirator in a terrorism case.

No kidding.

[ElNono]

CAIR is committed to instituting Sharia law in place of the Constitution and they are an unindicted co-conspirator in a terrorism case.

Care to back this up?

[George Gervin's Afro]

If he were "aligned with Republican values," as he claimed; he wouldn't be the Director of CAIR's South Florida operation.

CAIR is committed to instituting Sharia law in place of the Constitution and they are an unindicted co-conspirator in a terrorism case.

so any muslim should pass the 'republican values' litmus test.. how inclusive of the GOP..:lmao

[ChumpDumper]

Care to back this up?No kidding.

[Yonivore]

so any muslim should pass the 'republican values' litmus test.. how inclusive of the GOP..:lmao
I would pretty much think you would want members of the party's executive committee to share your platform. Yes.

No one will ask him not to vote Republican next year.

[ChumpDumper]

Was he interrogated about his support of the party platform?

[RandomGuy]

If he were "aligned with Republican values," as he claimed; he wouldn't be the Director of CAIR's South Florida operation.

CAIR is committed to instituting Sharia law in place of the Constitution and they are an unindicted co-conspirator in a terrorism case.

Sure, whatever you say.

[RandomGuy]

No kidding.

:lmao

[George Gervin's Afro]

Was he interrogated about his support of the party platform?

[RandomGuy]

CAIR is committed to instituting Sharia law in place of the Constitution

Proof?

This will be a fun dance to watch. :monkey

[MaNuMaNiAc]

If he were "aligned with Republican values," as he claimed; he wouldn't be the Director of CAIR's South Florida operation.

CAIR is committed to instituting Sharia law in place of the Constitution and they are an unindicted co-conspirator in a terrorism case.


Care to back this up?

Just helping Yoni keep up with the posts is all

[George Gervin's Afro]

Yoni is still MIA....

[ElNono]

Once a muslim wins a Republican straw poll, then it's like "See? We supported muslims all along"

[boutons_deux]

"CAIR is committed to instituting Sharia law in place of the Constitution "

"Christian" dominionists: exactly the same, they want to replace US law with Ten Commandments and the Bible, and turn the US into a theocracy, with, of course, dominionists running the country and people's lives, just like other religions that dictate complete lifestyles (eg, Mohammedism)

Still waiting for the CAIR document or any reference that their objective is to install Sharia in US.

right-wing paranoids, esp law enforcement paranoids, have added Sharia-scare to their silly red-scare. A Muslim under every bed!! :lol

[RandomGuy]

y83z552NJaw


“It’s just crazy, and I’m tired of dealing with the crazies,” said Governor Christie. “It’s just unnecessary to be accusing this guy of things just because of his religious background. I’m happy that he’s willing to serve after all this baloney.”

I would give a four pack of Trois Pistoles to anyone who can find a quote from Yonivore that says that the good judge is an undercover agent ready to institue sharia law...

[Yonivore]

y83z552NJaw

I would give a four pack of Trois Pistoles to anyone who can find a quote from Yonivore that says that the good judge is an undercover agent ready to institue sharia law...
Depends, Is he talking about this judge? If so, I'll give you the quote right here.

New Jersey Judge Rules Islamic Sharia Law Trumps U.S. Law (http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2010/08/07/new-jersey-judge-rules-islamic-sharia-law-trumps-u-s-law/)

[ElNono]

Fortunately, the ruling was overturned, but it’s obvious sharia is creeping.

:rolleyes

Still waiting to backup:


CAIR is committed to instituting Sharia law in place of the Constitution

[Yonivore]

:rolleyes

Still waiting to backup:
There are quotes sourced to a 1993 Minneapolis Star-Tribune and a 2003 radio show where CAIR Co-founder and Spokesman, Ibrahim Hooper, stated as much but, I can't until I can link to the archives of both or either.

There are plenty of sources reporting the quotes but, until I can show it to you in the linked source of the quote, I don't care to engage in the debate over whether or not it was actually said.

I heard him say it on the 2003 radio program but, I'm sure you would want independent verification of that, no?

Be patient, I'll do my best.

As for CAIR being an unindicted co-conspirator in a terror case:

Islamic Groups Named in Hamas Funding Case (http://www.nysun.com/national/islamic-groups-named-in-hamas-funding-case/55778/)

[ElNono]

I heard him say it on the 2003 radio program but, I'm sure you would want independent verification of that, no?

No, I want to see direct links to "CAIR committed to instituting Sharia law in place of the Constitution"

Coincidentally, I'd like to know how you think that's even possible to achieve.

[ElNono]

As for CAIR being an unindicted co-conspirator in a terror case

You know what unindicted co-conspirator is, right?

Do you know what an allegation is? What happened with that case that dates back to 2007?

[DarrinS]

I guess this "Hamze" fellow is a recent convert to the GOP. He only just submitted his petition to join the Broward GOP executive board in August.

Same guy getting into it with "fellow conservative" Allen West, back in February.


9MZx38i6iYs

[DarrinS]

Nice thread though.

[ElNono]

No kidding

[Borat Sagyidev]

I guess this "Hamze" fellow is a recent convert to the GOP. He only just submitted his petition to join the Broward GOP executive board in August.

Same guy getting into it with "fellow conservative" Allen West, back in February.


9MZx38i6iYs


Allen West is a racist. Go fuck yourself.

[ChumpDumper]

Depends, Is he talking about this judge? If so, I'll give you the quote right here.

New Jersey Judge Rules Islamic Sharia Law Trumps U.S. Law (http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2010/08/07/new-jersey-judge-rules-islamic-sharia-law-trumps-u-s-law/)He's not talking about that judge, although it's understandable you confused the name Joseph Charles with Sohail Mohammed.

You're just that stupid.

lol creeping sharia

[DarrinS]

Allen West is a racist. Go fuck yourself.

:lol

[ElNono]

He's not talking about that judge, although it's understandable you confused the name Joseph Charles with Sohail Mohammed.

You're just that stupid.

lol creeping sharia

:lol

[Spurminator]

There are quotes sourced to a 1993 Minneapolis Star-Tribune and a 2003 radio show where CAIR Co-founder and Spokesman, Ibrahim Hooper, stated as much but, I can't until I can link to the archives of both or either.

There are plenty of sources reporting the quotes but, until I can show it to you in the linked source of the quote, I don't care to engage in the debate over whether or not it was actually said.

I heard him say it on the 2003 radio program but, I'm sure you would want independent verification of that, no?

Be patient, I'll do my best.


I can imagine how such things would be hard to find on the Internet. There is a real dearth of blogs devoted to the subject of Muslims taking over in America.

[Yonivore]

I can imagine how such things would be hard to find on the Internet. There is a real dearth of blogs devoted to the subject of Muslims taking over in America.
Yes, the quotes are everywhere but, not in a place that would be accepted by those, in here, questioning the veracity. And, since my proving the quotes are accurate would entail getting an archive from a California Newspaper that doesn't provide an online archive or contacting a radio show that doesn't provide an online archive of their shows, either.

So, until I can find a linkable source, I'll remain silent on the matter.

There's no point in posting the quotes as they appear on sites that would only be made the topic instead of the quote.

[ChumpDumper]

Yes, the quotes are everywhere but, not in a place that would be accepted by those, in here, questioning the veracity.Can you really blame us after you said Sohail Mohammed is Joseph Charles?

[Yonivore]

:lol
I didn't watch the video but, it reminded me of the story of the New Jersey judge that ruled in favor of a rapist based on the application of Shariah Law.

There are other examples of judges doing similar.

Also, six states are trying to pass legislation that will make it illegal to rely on international or religious law in domestic cases, for this very reason. CAIR is fighting these laws because they say it infringes on their religious freedom.

Where are the call for separation of church and state now?

[ChumpDumper]

I didn't watch the video but, it reminded me of the story of the New Jersey judge that ruled in favor of a rapist based on the application of Shariah Law.Because you hoped it was the guy we were talking about but actually had nothing at all to do with what we were talking about.

If you are going to comment on the content of the video, watch the fucking video, idiot.

[ElNono]

No, I want to see direct links to "CAIR committed to instituting Sharia law in place of the Constitution"

Coincidentally, I'd like to know how you think that's even possible to achieve.

[ElNono]

Because you hoped it was the guy we were talking about but actually had nothing at all to do with what we were talking about.

If you are going to comment on the content of the video, watch the fucking video, idiot.

No surprises there.

[ElNono]

Also, six states are trying to pass legislation that will make it illegal to rely on international or religious law in domestic cases, for this very reason. CAIR is fighting these laws because they say it infringes on their religious freedom.

Where are the call for separation of church and state now?

Let's see the legislation. Don't forget that the Constitution (not Sharia Law) also protects freedom of religion.

But we'll do that after you back up this statement:

"CAIR committed to instituting Sharia law in place of the Constitution"

[scott]

Typical the libtards here would fail to see the genius in Yoni's new approach to posting. He wins.

[LnGrrrR]

Didn't Reagan provide weapons to known terrorists? Does that mean all who supported Reagan are implicitly supporting terrorists as well?

[ElNono]

Didn't Reagan provide weapons to known terrorists? Does that mean all who supported Reagan are implicitly supporting terrorists as well?

"freedom fighters"

[Trainwreck2100]

Care to back this up?

Its in the article

[ElNono]

Its in the article

Uh? What article?

No Sharia Law in the OP, as far as I can read.

[RandomGuy]

Depends, Is he talking about this judge? If so, I'll give you the quote right here.

New Jersey Judge Rules Islamic Sharia Law Trumps U.S. Law (http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2010/08/07/new-jersey-judge-rules-islamic-sharia-law-trumps-u-s-law/)

Figures your response to just about any call for you to back up something with a "tit for tat", as opposed to dealing with something honestly.

Did a bit of background research into that bit. It would seem the judge was indeed being deferential to the man's religious views. He determined that the man was convinced he was not acting in a criminal manner, no mens rhea.

On appeal by the state, it was, in my opinion, rightfully overturned. Such a defense is invalid.

Is it the substitution of Sharia law for US law? No. That didn't keep this example is not cited thousands of times as an example of how, as your blog puts it, "Sharia is creeping into the US.", as if some isolated, overturned court case somehow justifies the xenophobic paranoia of you and others.

Somehow I highly doubt you would be as upset about it, had the deference been to a Jewish tenet, or to some nutball Christian sect, whose stated goal was to take over the US government.

The protections in the first amendment were meant to be fairly strong to protect religious minorities from the "tyranny of the majority".

This tyranny is something you would seem to be comfortable with, as long as it isn't your group.

I will simpy counter:


This month the Fox News website ran an article under the headline, “Advocates of Anti-Shariah Measures Alarmed by Judge’s Ruling.” It concerned a decision by a New Jersey family court judge earlier this year denying a restraining order to a woman who was sexually abused by her then husband, a Moroccan Muslim. Judge Joseph Charles ruled that her ex-husband did not have “criminal desire to or intent to sexually assault” her. Rather, he was exercising his prerogatives as the man understood them under Islamic law, or Sharia.

The article quotes only one “advocate” of anti-Sharia measures — representing a website called JihadWatch.com — but they are legion. Search “Sharia New Jersey” and you’ll find hundreds of blogs about the “Islamization” of the American judicial system, with headlines like “New Jersey: the new hotspot of Sharia” and “Sharia judge in NJ gets lifetime appointment.”

The idea that America is this close to having the Constitution replaced by the Koran used to be a fringe notion, but has inched closer to the mainstream thanks to “Islamist watchdog” bloggers like Daniel Pipes and Pamela Geller and was given a huge boost by Newt Gingrich. “The fight against shariah and the maddrassas and mosques which teach hatred and fanaticism is the heart of the enemy movement from which the terrorists spring forth,” Gingrich told the American Enterprise Institute, where he is a senior fellow. “One of the things I am going to suggest today is a federal law which says no court anywhere in the United States under any circumstance is allowed to consider shariah as a replacement for American law.”

Conservative think-tanker Frank Gaffney declares that “Americans across this country are struggling to understand the true nature of the threat we face from shariah. They are entitled to straight talk about the extent to which it is being insinuated, promoted, and legitimated not only in mosques but by banks, academic institutions, and government agencies.”

Charles’ ruling seems like the very kind of thing Gingrich and Gaffney are worried about. But there are two things worth considering here, especially if you are a member of a religious group whose special interests often collide with American jurisprudence — a group like, I don’t know, the Jews.

As David Kopel, a contributor to the conservative National Review, has pointed out, “American courts are governed by American law, but American law has long provided that parties to contracts can provide for alternative dispute resolution mechanisms (such as arbitration).”

Among those alternative mechanisms is the beit din, or rabbinic law court. Every day Jews go before batei din to arbitrate real estate deals, nasty divorces, and business disputes. In fact, according to the Beth Din of America, Jewish law does not allow a Jew to be a plaintiff in a secular court without first obtaining permission from a Jewish court.

Permitting people to settle their disputes in their own religious courts is not a “replacement” of American law, but a time-honored expression of religious freedom and accommodation.

But didn’t Judge Charles accept an unacceptable action in the name of “religious freedom”? Here’s another thing worth considering: Although you wouldn’t know it from the headline, the Fox article eventually points out that Charles’ ruling was overturned in July by New Jersey’s Appellate Court. The court ruled that the husband’s religious beliefs were irrelevant and that Judge Charles “was mistaken.”

In other words, the system worked. What’s striking about Gingrich and the other Sharia-phobes is their lack of faith in the Constitution, the American legal system, and the American people themselves.

Never mind that the Muslim world itself has hardly reached consensus on the nature of Sharia, which is less a legal code than a religious way of living. As Rabbi Alan Brill, a professor at Seton Hall University and an expert in interfaith relations, told me, it is the distinction between “Halacha,” the rabbinic law code, and “Torah,” a way of life rooted in Jewish wisdom. According to Lauren Vriens of the Council on Foreign Relations, “Many majority Muslim countries have a dual system in which the government is secular but Muslims can choose to bring familial and financial disputes to shariah courts.” Meanwhile, most Muslim countries do not enforce the traditional and often gruesome punishments prescribed in the Koran.

But let’s say there is some cohesive network or organization of Muslims intent on transforming our legal system and reducing the rest of us to second-class status. How are they going to pull it off? As Lee Smith put it in an important article in Tablet last week, “When Gingrich argues that ‘radical Islamists want to impose Shariah on all of us,’ I can’t imagine how he sees that happening, short of the largest land invasion in human history of foreign Muslim soldiers, administrators, and religious scholars with the connivance of millions of Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, and pagan American collaborators.”

Gaffney’s version, of a “soft” takeover of our banks, universities, and government agencies, is similarly preposterous. It singles out Islam as the one religion that cannot be accommodated in any of these institutions. It is based on the scare-mongering notion that once a court allows an insurance company to offer Sharia-compliant financing, it’s not long before an imam will be allowed to sentence an adulteress to death by stoning.

And it assumes, based on statements from the most radical imams (and willful ignorance of an American Muslim mainstream that rejects their extremism) that Muslim citizens are a fifth column, undermining America from within.

When did the war on global Islamist terror become a war on American Muslims? When did our faith in the American way morph into fantasies of American weakness and Muslim invincibility? And why would any Jew, whose people were once reviled in this country and pushed to the margins of its banks, academic institutions, and government agencies, buy into this bigotry?

An American patriot once said, “America counts millions of Muslims amongst our citizens, and Muslims make an incredibly valuable contribution to our country. Muslims are doctors, lawyers, law professors, members of the military, entrepreneurs, shopkeepers, moms and dads. And they need to be treated with respect. In our anger and emotion, our fellow Americans must treat each other with respect.”

That patriot was George W. Bush. He said it on Sept. 17, 2001. Now, nearly 10 years later, Newt Gingrich probably considers him a radical.

Andrew Silow-Carroll is Editor-in-Chief of the New Jersey Jewish News.

http://njjewishnews.com/article/editors-column/sharia-phobia



Do you have any such concerns about Jewish rabbitical law overturning US law?

Mormon elders' rulings?

Fair is fair, here.