(sonsoflibertymedia.com) - Irving, Texas Mayor Beth Van Duyne came under fire in March as the Irving City Council put forth a resolution that sought to ban foreign law from being a part of Texas. Ultimately, this would do away with Islamic Sharia and the Islamic tribunal that was erected in Dallas. She warned Islamists that she would not be bullied shortly after the firestorm. On Thursday, Van Duyne penned an op-ed in the Dallas Morning News calling all of the controversy that had been generated by the resolution to ban foreign law in Texas “baffling,” and warned that she will not be deterred in standing against foreign law in Texas.

     “My repeated commitment to uphold the primacy of American law and constitutional protections for Texans, including and especially immigrant women, has been characterized as something like a hate campaign,” wrote Van Duyne.

     From the outset of her postings on Facebook, she was clear that the resolution was to protect the people’s rights and ensure that they were not violated by upholding constitutional law. However, the outrage from the Muslim community had her perplexed.

     “It is baffling to comprehend the amount of controversy generated by my support as mayor of Irving for a state law that simply asks family law judges to uphold American fundamental constitutional rights when deciding a case that involves a conflicting foreign law,” she wrote. “Most often the victims of unjust foreign law are women and from immigrant communities. How can defending these newcomers to America be considered disrespectful or hateful?”

     She then pointed out the recent establishment of the Islamic tribunal, which had its own share of problems as it used taqiyyah to push the propaganda that those involved were attorneys when the reality was they were not.

     The Irving Mayor also pointed out that though these tribunals claim to be “non-binding,” they are anything but that.

     “Currently, Texas courts allow parties to subject themselves to foreign laws rather than state laws in family law matters (see the case Jabri vs. Qaddura from 2003). It states, ‘Once the party establishes the claim within the arbitration agreement, the trial court must compel arbitration and stay its own proceedings,'” she pointed out. “In other words, as much as we have heard that these tribunals are ‘nonbinding,’ the fact is they are enforceable in Texas courts even when foreign law is the foundation. Also of note, Texas has the third most Shariah law cases in the country.”

     Van Duyne then pointed to a 40-page report, which is a British study of England’s nearly 85 Shariah courts. She found that most disturbing thing in that report to be the mistreatment of women under those tribunals.

     “Americans should learn the errors of the British system and take prudent, measured actions to both educate, inform and secure the rights of women in our nation,” the Mayor warned.

     According to Mayor Van Duyne, many women have contacted her and been appreciative of her courage to tackle this issue, stand her ground and be a voice for them. Then she leveled a warning to those who seek to attack her.

     “Those who have worked to demean my intent and demonize my actions may not care about protecting these women, but that will not deter me from standing for them and their rights on American soil.”

     So far, HB562, which would protect marriages and parent-child relationships from loss of constitutional rights to foreign laws, and HB670, which would reinforce the state’s civil code by preventing courts, arbitrators or administrative judges from basing any ruling ‘on a foreign law if the application of that law would violate’ a constitutional right, are both pending in committees.

http://sonsoflibertymedia.com/2015/04/texas-mayor-blasts-islamists-sharia-law-controversy-i-will-not-be-deterred

     (aim.org) - In Impromptus today, Jay deals with the curious case of the missing fatwa. That would, of course, be the purported fatwa (or Islamic sharia law edict) issued by Iran’s “Supreme Leader,” Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, which is said to prohibit Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

     The fatwa does not exist. Yet, with a dearth of tire-kicking that is remarkable even by the lowly standards of our nObama-friendly media, it has repeatedly been cited by top administration officials, including the president, Secretary of State Hanoi Kerry and former Secretary of State Clinton, in an effort to give Americans comfort regarding the administration’s negotiations – whatever comfort you can derive from people who tell you that Khamenei’s “Death to America” pronouncements are not to be taken seriously but the “fatwa” can be taken to the bank; from people who see the Constitution and statutory American law as no obstacle to any of their own designs but would have you believe a fatwa is so sacrosanct the mullahs would be conclusively stymied by it.

     As Jay aptly points out, the existence vel non of the fatwa should not be a left-right matter: Either there is one or there isn’t.

     There isn’t . . . as the MEMRI research Jay cites convincingly demonstrates. It is important to grasp that in a sharia state, where Islamic scripture is the law, a fatwa by the ruler is the rough equivalent of a conclusive pronouncement by the U.S. Supreme Court on the meaning and required application of a constitutional principle or provision. That is why, to be authoritative, fatwas have to be published and accessible. Not only has the purported fatwa never been published despite copious, easily accessible collections of Khamenei’s fatwas; he also, as recently as 2012, refused to answer when directly questioned about the purported fatwa in a Facebook forum.

     It is necessary to go further, though – much further. The issue is not just that the fatwa does not exist; it is that (a) the notion that Islamic law bans nuclear weapons is absurd on its face; (b) empirically, the Iranian regime has taken concrete steps (often at great cost to itself) that make its determination to acquire nuclear weapons inescapable; and (c) even if there were a fatwa, Iran has a history of ignoring or reversing fatwas when they prove inconvenient – which underscores an inconvenience for the nObama administration: fatwas are not enforceable by the United States in any event.

I addressed these points recently in a post at PJMedia. To reiterate:

     The notion that Khamenei actually believes nuclear weapons violate Islamic law and would issue a credible fatwa to that effect should be seen as absurd on its face. Put aside that Pakistan, which incorporates sharia in its law, has long had nuclear weapons. For over two decades, al-Qaeda has been trying to acquire nuclear weapons and has enjoyed essential support from the regime in Tehran.

     Oil-rich Iran has no need to develop nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. It has explicitly threatened to wipe Israel off the map. It has been busily been developing weapons systems capable of delivering nuclear bombs in conjunction with its uranium enrichment. It could not be more obvious that Khamenei’s regime, far from rejecting nuclear weapons as anti-Islamic, seeks to acquire them in order to promote the imposition of its Islamic-supremacist ideology.

     Moreover, as MEMRI further documents, there is a published fatwa on the subject of nuclear weapons from credible Shiite sharia scholars. In 2006, it was reported that jurists in Qom had issued a fatwa explicitly stating that “sharia does not forbid the use of nuclear weapons.”

     Although the date seems to shift, Iranian officials began claiming in about 2005 that Khamenei had promulgated an anti-nuke fatwa. The disingenuous suggestion was made in connection with Iran’s shrewd conclusion that the best route to developing nuclear weapons internally was to pretend that its nuclear program was peaceful.

     nObama administration officials, who are desperate to strike a deal with Iran and to convince themselves that Iran might become an American ally in the Middle East, understand that the mullahs will never allow the kind of rigorous inspection system that would make an agreement trustworthy. They are thus emphasizing the phantom fatwa as a rationale for making an unacceptable deal: You are supposed to say to yourself, “We needn’t worry about the inability to verify that the Iranians are not constructing nukes because the Islamic ruler has solemnly forbidden it.”

     But even if you were inclined to such self-delusion, the fact is: Khamenei has not forbidden nuclear weapons.

     As Breitbart’s Joel Pollak has observed, Kenneth Pollack, a serious national security expert who is particularly influential among Democrats, discussed the purported Khamenei fatwa in his book Unthinkable: Iran, the Bomb, and American Strategy. Pollack notes not only that the fatwa has never been formally issued but also that Iran disregards fatwas when they prove inconvenient to perceived national interests. Thus did the founder of the Iranian jihadist state, Ayatollah Khomeini, ignore his own fatwa against weapons of mass destruction during the long war with Iraq in the 1980s.

     It would be lunacy, in a matter crucial to American national security, to rely on a fatwa from the head of a jihadist-terror state even if such a fatwa actually existed. But it doesn’t.

http://www.aim.org/guest-column/the-khamenei-fatwa-hoax-is-absurd-on-its-face/?utm_source=AIM+-+Daily+Email&utm_campaign=email041715&utm_medium=email

The lynch mob came for the elderly florist Barronelle Stutzman.

     The lynch mob came for Eastern Michigan University counseling student Julea Ward.

     The lynch mob came for the African-American Fire Chief of once segregated Atlanta Kelvin Cochran.

The lynch mob came for the owners of a local pizza shop the O'Connor family.

     The lynch mob is now giddy with success and drunk on the misery and pain of its victims. It is urged on by a compliant and even gleeful media. It is reinforced in its sense of righteousness and moral superiority by the “beautiful people” and the intellectual class. It has been joined by the big corporations who perceive their economic interests to be in joining up with the mandarins of cultural power. It owns one political party and has intimidated the leaders of the other into supine and humiliating obeisance.

     And so, who if anyone will courageously stand up to the mob? Who will resist? Who will speak truth to its raw and frightening power? Who will refuse to be bullied into submission or intimidated into silence?

     I'm not asking, which leaders? Though that, too, would be good to know. Are there political or religious leaders who will step forward? Are there intellectual or cultural leaders who will muster the courage to confront the mob?

     No, I'm asking what ordinary people will do. Are there Evangelical, Catholic, and Orthodox Christians who will refuse to be intimidated and silenced? Are there Latter-Day Saints, Orthodox and other observant (or even non-observant) Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs? Buddhists?

     Oh yes, the mob came first for the Evangelicals and the Catholics and the Latter-Day Saints; but do not be deceived: it will not stop with them. It's true that many in the mob have a particular animus against Christians, but the point of destroying the reputations and livelihoods of the initial victims is pour encourager les autres. If you believe you belong to a group that will be given a special exemption or dispensation from the enforcement of the new orthodoxy—by any means necessary—you will soon learn that you are tragically mistaken. No one who dissents will be given a pass.

     We have seen how swiftly the demands have moved from tolerance to compulsory approbation of behavior historically rejected as contrary to morality and faith by virtually all the great religious traditions of the world. And now it is not only approbation that is demanded, but active participation. And do you honestly think that we have now reached the endpoint of what will be demanded?

     Of course, some will say—indeed some are saying—that the battle is over, the cause is lost. All we can do is seek the best terms of surrender we can get, knowing that at this stage they will not be very good.

     What should we say to that? Well, it is certainly true that the political, economic, and cultural power now arrayed against people of faith and their rights and liberties is formidable. No question about it: This is David against Goliath.

But then, we know how that contest ended, don't we?

     If we refuse to surrender, we will certainly be demonized; but everything will depend on whether we refuse to be demoralized. Courage displayed in the cause of truth—and of right—is powerful. And it will depend on whether ordinary people—Protestants, Catholics, Jews, Mormons, Muslims, others—inspired by their faith to stand firm, will also be willing to stand shoulder to shoulder, and arm-in-arm, with their brothers and sisters of other traditions of faith to defy the mob.

http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2015/04/who-will-stand

 

     (.jewishworldreview.com) -British Jews are overwhelmingly rejecting Britain’s opposition Labour Party and instead intend to back the Conservatives in the upcoming general election, largely due to differences in policy over Israel and Palestine.

     Foreign policy towards Israel was a driving factor in influencing Jewish voting intentions, with a total of 73% saying it was an important issue in how they would vote in a poll conducted for UK newspaper the Jewish Chronicle.

     Jews in the UK and across Europe feel a special affiliation to Israel as their spiritual homeland and feel threatened by pro-Palestinian statements of politicians, according to Rabbi Menachem Margolin, director of the European Jewish Association.

     “Jewish people in Europe are Europeans, they belong to Europe, but at the same time, when they see Europe shaking with so many problems, they feel that the only country that will do everything possible to secure their lives is the state of Israel,” says Margolin.

     “When Jews see politicians who keep supporting the Palestinian side and don’t care about the facts - they believe the politicians are thinking more about their own interests.”

     Margolin declines to express support for a particular party in the forthcoming election but says he is unsurprised that foreign policy concerning Israel is such a big issue, since “Jewish people always dream to one day return to their homeland”.

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0415/uk_jews_change_voting_patterns.php3

 

     (freedomsback.com) - Eight months ago, President nObama put on a grand show for the troops. Surrounded by new Secretary of Veterans Affairs Bob McDonald, assorted politicians, military leaders and a bevy of TV cameras, the commander in chief signed the “Veterans Access, Choice and Accountability Act.” He’s good at inking things.

     nObama condemned the “inexcusable conduct” at VA hospitals across the country (and under his own watch).

     He vowed to “do right by all who served under our proud flag.” He promised America’s veterans new “reform,” “resources,” “timely care” and an end to the disgraceful disability backlog.

     The bill he signed, in case you’d forgotten, included $10 billion in emergency funding to pay for veterans to go outside the chronically dysfunctional VA system if they are facing long wait times or live 40 miles or more from a VA facility, plus another $6.3 billion to set up 27 new clinics and hire doctors, nurses and other medical staff.

     So, how’s it all working out? About as well as every other “success story” nObama has signed his name to: abysmally, ineffectually and incompetently.

     Take nObama’s hyped plan to expand health care access to those who live far from a VA facility. Obtuse federal bureaucrats interpreted “40 miles” in the narrowest way possible, applied an “as the crow flies” distance rule inconsistently, and excluded untold numbers of vets. It took more than a year — and concerted pressure from veterans groups and GOP lawmakers — for the administration to “clarify” its confused eligibility standards just two weeks ago.

     What about “accountability”? nObama bragged last August that “we’ve already taken the first steps to change the way the VA does business. We’ve held people accountable for misconduct. … We should have zero tolerance for that.” Looks like the VA bosses in Shreveport, La., didn’t get the memo. As Tori Richards of Watchdog.org reported last month, a mental health services worker who exposed use of a secret appointment waiting list there was ignored for a year. Instead of accountability for the wrongdoers, the VA employee who blew the whistle, Army vet Shea Wilkes, became the subject of a criminal investigation.

     And how’s that new facility construction campaign going? The VA’s atrocious complex has been a problem for decades under both Democratic and Republican administrations. Nothing’s changed under the era of hope and change.

     Here in Colorado, the new Aurora VA hospital has become another in a long line of government spending cesspools. The $600-million 184-bed facility is now estimated to cost at least $1.7 billion after a reckless parade of design changes, cost overruns and mismanagement — and may not be ready until 2017. “Accountability”? Pfffft. The head of the VA’s Office of Acquisition, Logistics and Construction responsible for the waste was allowed to resign with a full federal pension and retention of nearly $60,000 in bonuses earned during the fiasco.

     What’s next? You know the drill: more congressional hearings, more grandstanding, another “reform” campaign, more posturing in front of cameras, and more screwed-over vets.

     Throwing more money and platitudes at the VA to cover up its deadly scandals is a bipartisan Beltway recipe for failure. Recently retired Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., one of the few to object to last year’s kabuki “VA reform,” was right. “The culture is one of looking good, protecting those in the VA and not protecting our veterans,” he said at the time. “You have to have a bill that fixes that. I don’t believe this is going to do it.”

Mission not accomplished.

http://freedomsback.com/michelle-malkin/va-reform-another-obama-success-story/?utm_source=bh&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=4873034

     The security operation, conducted by the Shin Bet security agency and the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT), uncovered hidden infrared cameras, remote control security cameras and advanced communications equipment in a truck at the Israeli Karem Shalom border crossing which leads into southern Gaza. Both bodies said that there had been over 100 smuggling attempts foiled since the start of the year, an average of more than one a day.

     "The items were hidden in an Israeli truck that was carrying communications equipment to the Gaza Strip," the defense ministry said in a statement. "Security elements are continuing the investigation."

     Ron Gilran, vice-president at Tel Aviv-based geopolitical risk consultancy the Levantine Group, says that a conflict between Palestinian militants and Israel is just months away and these allegations of smuggling demonstrate that Gaza factions, such as Hamas, are building their capabilities for another confrontation.

     “Another war is inevitable. You see a lot of preparation from Hamas, in terms of rocket testing, the resumption of tunnelling efforts,” he notes. “This all goes back to the smuggling because the smuggling is something they need in order to do the preparation for the next round.”

     “It could be in the next few months, it could be until the end of the year, but the majority of the estimations I have heard for another conflict are somewhere between four months at the very least and 12 months,” Gilran adds.

     In February, three Israeli nationals were arrested over allegations that they were shipping vast amounts of scrap metal to the enclave, allegedly to be used for rocket-making by Hamas, after a truck was inspected in January and found to be holding high-tech equipment stashed among goods allowed into the enclave.

     The Shin Bet security agency claimed that $375,000 (£246,000) was paid to the Israeli men and the materials purchased were worth almost $30m (£20m) via Palestinian middlemen.

     “In this way, large amounts of materials bought in Israel and smuggled to the Gaza Strip systematically and over time made their way to Hamas’ military infrastructure,” Shin Bet said in a statement released last month.

     “In recent weeks, we uncovered a well-oiled operation by Hamas to procure and smuggle resources and materials used to develop its military capabilities in Gaza,” it continued.

     In last summer’s 50-day conflict, over 2,100 Palestinians—at least 1,585 civilians of which 530 were children—were killed, according to UN and Palestinian accounts, and 72 Israelis—all but five soldiers—were killed, according to Israeli accounts.

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0415/gaza_smugglers_foiled.php3