Posted on 02/24/2012 1:03:09 PM PST by neverdem
Unbelievable. Yes, this happened HERE.
People who are concerned about the spread of Muslim sharia law into American jurisprudence used to be dismissed as alarmists. That won’t happen again for a while, thanks to a Pennsylvania judge who just dismissed assault charges against a Muslim who was videotaped attacking a man dressed as “Zombie Muhammad” during a Halloween parade.
The judge, who is a Muslim, didn’t even care to see the videotape, because the assault was entirely justified under sharia law, so the First Amendment doesn’t apply. In fact, the beaten Zombie Muhammad should just be thankful he wasn’t killed, because that’s what would have happened in a Muslim country.
The astonishing details, from Opposing Views:
The Pennsylvania State Director of American Atheists, Inc., Mr. Ernest Perce V., was assaulted by a Muslim while participating in a Halloween parade. Along with a Zombie Pope, Ernest was costumed as Zombie Muhammad. The assault was caught on video, the Muslim man admitted to his crime and charges were filed in what should have been an open-and-shut case. That’s not what happened, though.
The defendant is an immigrant and claims he did not know his actions were illegal, or that it was legal in this country to represent Muhammad in any form. To add insult to injury, he also testified that his 9 year old son was present, and the man said he felt he needed to show his young son that he was willing to fight for his Prophet.
Muslim judge Mark Martin ruled in favor of the assailant… and insulted the defendant for good measure.
Martin offered the court a little lesson in Islamic theology, which he believes transcends that silly First Amendment free-speech stuff in the U.S. Constitution:
Having had the benefit of having spent over 2 and a half years in predominantly Muslim countries I think I know a little bit about the faith of Islam. In fact I have a copy of the Koran here and I challenge you sir to show me where it says in the Koran that Mohammad arose and walked among the dead. I think you misinterpreted things. Before you start mocking someone else’s religion you may want to find out a little bit more about it it makes you look like a dufus and Mr. (Defendant) is correct. In many Arabic speaking countries something like this is definitely against the law there. In their society in fact it can be punishable by death and it frequently is in their society.
Islam is not just a religion, it’s their culture, their culture. It’s their very essence their very being. They pray five times a day towards Mecca to be a good Muslim, before you die you have to make a pilgrimage to Mecca unless you are otherwise told you can not because you are too ill too elderly, whatever but you must make the attempt. Their greetings wa-laikum as-Salâm (is answered by voice) may god be with you. Whenever, it’s very common when speaking to each other it’s very common for them to say uh this will happen it’s it they are so immersed in it.
Since Islam is, therefore, at the very center of a Muslim’s being, speech they find objectionable – such as depicting the Prophet in any form, much less as an extra from The Walking Dead – “trashes their essence, their being,” and violence is justified, especially from a recent immigrant accustomed to living in countries properly governed by sharia law.
As Al Stefanelli notes at Opposing Views, the judge didn’t even pretend to understand what the First Amendment means, never mind pondering the laws against physical harassment:
The Judge neglected to address the fact that the ignorance of the law does not justify an assault and that it was the responsibility of the defendant to familiarize himself with our laws. This is to say nothing of the judge counseling the defendant that it is also not acceptable for him to teach his children that it is acceptable to use violence in the defense of religious beliefs. Instead, the judge gives Mr. Perce a lesson in Sharia law and drones on about the Muslim faith, inform everyone in the court room how strongly he embraces Islam, that the first amendment does not allow anyone ”to piss off other people and other cultures” and he was also insulted by Mr. Perce’s portrayal of Mohammed and the sign he carried.
Martin went on to call the plaintiff a “doofus.”
In other news, enraged Catholics reacted to the sight of an atheist parading around as the Zombie Pope by stifling yawns.
John Hayward is a staff writer for HUMAN EVENTS, and author of the recently published Doctor Zero: Year One. Follow him on Twitter: Doc_0. Contact him by email at jhayward@eaglepub.com.
... or President.
MUST READ
Practicing islam should be against the law? WE need a 3rd Party. NEWT/PALIN in 2012.
BUMP and keep it on top.
MUST READ
Practicing islam should be against the law? WE need a 3rd Party. NEWT/PALIN in 2012.
BUMP and keep it on top.
MUST READ
Practicing islam should be against the law? WE need a 3rd Party. NEWT/PALIN in 2012.
BUMP and keep it on top.
BTTT
The enemy within. This is what happens when Muslims are allowed to infiltrate, subvert and sabotage our institutions. Islam is worse than cancer to our society. YouTube audio of court hearing: here you can hear the judge performing dawa from the bench which devolves to chastising Ernie, the defendant. Full text below the fold!
It looks like he was on the wrong end of an IED.....
Funny how Christians and Jews are forced to allow insults to their religions, huh ?
:)
As you know, I view Christianity as a natural development of Judaism.
I guess that development came with the same natural enemies.
Too bad more of my fellow Christians do not realize how our faiths and fates are inexorably linked.
Too bad some of my fellow Jews can’t see that, either.
For once I agree with an atheist. Do the judges remarks to the plaintiffs (calling him a moron, among other things) constitute judicial misconduct? Can complaints be filed with the PA Bar?
So be it.
The US has decided its course.
The way I heard it, (AM 710 in KC) the moose-limb was the one who called the cops because he thought it was against the law to denigrate his Profit Mo-ham-ad.
IIRC, in the early Colonies, an atheist wasn’t allowed to sit on juries because he had no fear of God, and couldn’t be relied on to judge righteously.
They hide their genocidal jealousy (the real reason of their feeling offended) behind attacks on jokes ill taken...
It’s like those who believe in South Africa that raping children clears one of AIDS. Those poor muslim dikes have such a sensitive “immune system”, we must let them practice pedophilia on pure virgin children as the prophet exhorted (sarc off)
Muslims cannot digest anything well, even a well intentioned brotherly joke, let alone themselves. The self loathing is terminal, and their liberal friends feel for them.
Thanks...too bad they can’t see everyone but mooselimbs thinks Mo hamm is a fake, pervert prophet..
Yes, a sane Judge would consider the Muslim’s confession as exactly that - a confession to a criminal act.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.