Posted on 03/25/2005 9:24:05 AM PST by quidnunc
When Rachel Ehrenfeld, author of the book "Funding Evil: How Terrorism Is Financed and How to Stop It," opened her apartment door just before 10 p.m. on March 3, she believed she was simply receiving some legal papers from London. But this was no ordinary messenger. According to Ehrenfeld, the visitor carried a warning as well: "You had better respond. Sheik bin Mahfouz is a very important person, and you really ought to take very good care of yourself.”
"I expected to receive some legal papers, not a threat from a Saudi sheik in my own country,” Ehrenfeld told me last week.
The ease with which foreigners, like this billionaire Saudi sheik, now pursue damaging lawsuits against American writers and publications in foreign courts is astonishing. Bin Mahfouz is listed as number 210 on the new Forbes list of 620 billionaires in the world.
This is already a year in which federal prosecutors are trying to force a New York Times reporter to give up confidential sources while the Federal Election Commission warns that it intends to use the McCain-Finegold Act to question to what degree various kinds of speech are really free or constitute a campaign contribution.
"This is no ordinary legal dispute," states Daniel Korenstein, Ehrenfeld's attorney. "It is perhaps one of the most important First Amendment cases since Sullivan vs. The New York Times."
-snip-
(Excerpt) Read more at frontpagemag.com ...
Sheik Khalid Salim a bin Mahfouz is a pig-humping, blasphemous terrorist who uses copies of the Koran to wipe his butt with before he has a ham sandwich and looks at child pornography.
So sue me in a British court and see if I give a rip.
A statement is made that there should be interest in supporting Ehrenfeld's suit in New York. How can one do that?
Who is funding Ehrenfeld's defense? Is she getting pro bono representation?
Has anyone read her book?
Where does this camel suppository Sheik bin Mahfouz live, anyway?
If you are sued in a British court you could end up with an Islamic Jury.
You forgot the (PBUH)
Pigsh*t Be Upon Him
ATTABOY!>>big time ditto!
first amendment bump.
The forces that wish to destroy America have discovered that they can use our own laws and freedoms to do it. It is time to suspend those laws and freedoms, obliterate the enemy within and without, and then put the laws and freedoms back in place. Lincoln did it. Roosevelt did it.
You mean you have no Islamic citizens, or is it that Islamics arent allowed to serve on Juries?
I'll give you the benefit of doubt. I took your reference to an 'Islamic Jury' to infer that an Islamic legal system was in place in the UK. If you're simply inferring that people of a single religion could dominate the members of a jury then I suppose that may be possible. Then again the jury could be made up of farmers, or stockbrokers. Stranger things have happened.
I never meant there to be a doubt. My inference was that there are many Islamics in England now and that it is possible she could get a jury made up of principally Islamics. I expect it will get worse as time goes on.
I realise that there is no Islamic judicial system in place in England . but I believe canada has allowed one to be set up there. At least Canada recognises Sharia law. You shoudl be watchful it doesnt happen there.
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.