SQ 755: A yes vote bans sharia law in Oklahoma!

Update 11/02/10 8:41 PM CT:   70% voted yes to ban sharia & International law

Liberals in Oklahoma and their Islamist partners, like CAIR Oklahoma,  often call those of us who are in favor of SQ 755, which is an amendment to ban sharia and international law from being considered in our states courts, Intolerant, ignorant, bigots, fear-mongers, paranoid schizophrenics, "born-again" bigots, intolerant, hateful, anti-Islamic, McCarthy-like, xenophobics, Islamophobics and, of course,  anti-Muslim. Their verbal smear tactics are nothing but red flags waving widely in our faces.  Do you feel all that hot air trying to seal your mouth shut?  Let's fact it, being able to explain one's objections against this measure in an intelligent, logical and meaningful ways without casting dispersions on others is the right way to defend a position.  I'm thinking when Oklahomans are called these names over SQ 755, it will increase the votes for it.

 

Here is the question in its entirety:

SQ 755:

STATE QUESTION NO. 755 LEGISLATIVE REFERENDUM NO. 355

This measure amends the State Constitution. It changes a section that deals with the courts of this state. It

would amend Article 7, Section 1. It makes courts rely on federal and state law when deciding cases. It forbids courts from considering or using international law. It forbids courts from considering or using Sharia Law.

International law is also known as the law of nations. It deals with the conduct of international organizations and independent nations, such as countries, states and tribes. It deals with their relationship with each other. It also deals with some of their relationships with persons. The law of nations is formed by the general assent of civilized nations. Sources of international law also include international agreements, as well as treaties.

Sharia Law is Islamic law. It is based on two principal sources, the Koran and the teaching of Mohammed.

SHALL THE PROPOSAL BE APPROVED? FOR THE PROPOSAL — YES

AGAINST THE PROPOSAL — NO

Is Sharia law in Oklahoma a potential problem down the road?  Well, isn't Sharia law expanding worldwide?   Isn't the struggle and wars of our lifetime to protect our democracy and freedoms from Islamism (political Islam) which is aided by their global terrorist minions who make the highest sacrifice for their religion on a daily basis?  Well, isn't it?  The ultimate goal of these religious jerks is Islamic supremacy.  Islamists are in America.  They are in Oklahoma.  They want the same religious supremacy end as terrorists do but differ dramatically in their tactics.  This struggle will likely continue through our lifetime and our children's and possibly their children's if we don't get a handle on this and start dealing in some reality here and not languish in the stupid PC correctness of the left.  Most importantly, we don't know how this struggle will end, do we?   Considering all this, SQ 755 is a reasonable safeguard.

It's good to hear more from secular Muslims who want to simply practice their religion privately and quietly who actually honor and value our laws and constitution. Some of them are out-spoken activists against Islamism, too, like the American Islamic Forum for Democracy and a loosely formed-coalition called the American Islamic Leadership Coalition of like-minded Muslim organizations.  I admire them all. 

Unfortunately, in Oklahoma, most of the larger mosques have hooked up with CAIR, an outgrowth of the Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas infrastructure in America, and other organizations named unindicted co-conspirators in the largest Hamas terror funding trial in U.S. history.  They recently formed the Islamic Council of Oklahoma, which is dominated by CAIR Oklahoma board members.  The principal of the Islamic school in Tulsa said in the local newspaper not too long ago Muslims want Sharia law in America for their domestic issues which is nothing but religious separatism and the first step.

I want to point out the grit and thoughtful foresight shown by the American Muslim Association of Oklahoma whose members purchased an ad in the Aug. 23rd edition of The Oklahoman calling for the Ground Zero mosque to be moved.  They are not linked to CAIR that I can tell.  The Oklahoma mosques linked to CAIR want the GZM built.

Islamist generally have no use for these Muslims. Many will claim secular Muslims are not religious. But, I say If you only view the world and events through the myopic lenses of ANY religious text 24/7 that's kinda problematic. 

We also have the largest Islamist organization in the world, the Saudi based and backed OIC, whose own fatwa council declared martyrdom a LEGITIMATE Islamic act and NOT terrorism. The OIC is now working their way into the U.S. with the goals to mobilize, influence and partner with American Muslims. Through the U.N. they are trying to secure a legally binding resolution to ban criticism of Islam, (i.e., impose sharia law on non-Muslims).  They want to bring the U.S. under the U.N. where their influence is growing.

Under Obama, who gave his first public TV interview after becoming president to a Saudi-owned TV station, Islamists and their supporters are more open.  Hizb-ut-Tahrir came out of the shadows within weeks of his inauguration. They openly call for Sharia law here. Obama's Muslim advisor, Dalia Mogahed went on their show via phone in Britain!  Oklahoma Assistant Attorney General William F. O'Brien started writing his pro-CAIR, pro Islam articles. Islamonline, headed by terror-supporter Yusef Qaradawi, opened an office in D.C..  Recently, a Pakistani minister, Ayatullah Durrani, called for Barack Obama to be caliph of all Muslims! The Presidential Council of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnership recommendations mentions Christians only once in their report while Muslims were mentioned 21 times. The White House issued a statement about the death of Egyptian Shiekh Mohammed Sayyed Tantawi who had approved of martyrdom against Israel. Obama's OIC envoy, Rashad Hussain, had written a paper claiming Islam is the answer and this is what we should emphasize with Muslim countries and NOT our democracy. More information about all this can be found in the categories President Barack H. Obama, Hizb ut Tahrir, OIC and Islamism and so on.  Here you can find a database of information with sources categorized for easy reference. You can also enter a word or term in the search window near the bottom right.  My opinions are based on information collected and studied for the past four years.

Vote Yes for SQ 755 on November 2nd!

Update 10/20/10: Group Launches Media Blitz in Oklahoma for Anti-Shariah Ballot Initiative

Update 10/28/10:  Ban Sharia law: Oklahoma ballot measure reflects wisdom

Update 10/29/10:  CAIR Oklahoma board member Kamran Alam: SQ 755 author creating fear/Islamobhobia

Court cases where sharia law was argued as a right in America

 Irfan Aleem v. Farah Aleem  Maryland 2007 (cites other cases in this Court of Appeals decision, I think)

Michigan Appeal Court dismisses Sharia Law use in lower court

New Jersey Sharia Law Case

Texas Islamic court reference  appeals court ruled to uphold agreement made at the Texas Islamic Court

In The Matter of Sonia Ramadan and Samer Ramadan  New Hampshire

IN THE MATTER OF SONIA RAMADAN AND SAMER RAMADAN. Argued: January 11, 2006. Opinion Issued: February 14, 2006.

-----

Also see:

***Review All the Oklahoma State Questions on the November 2nd ballot***

Islam in Oklahoma - Mixed Signals

 part 1 (1980s to 2009), part 2  (Jan 2010 to present)

Related:

Controversies Over Mosques and Islamic Centers Across the U.S.

Islam: Governing Under Sharia - Council on Foreign Relations  

Sharia, or Islamic law, is increasingly in the spotlight as its political and economic role expands in the Muslim world and even in the West.

No False Tolerance: 'Sharia law has no place in Germany'

RT -

There can be no compromise between the German rule of law and Sharia law, which has no place in Germany -- a German politician told RT.

Did you know Anwar Awlaki's led prayer in 2001 before Congressional staffers in D.C.?  Remember he is the Imam a spokewoman for the Islamic Society of Tulsa stood up for and against the FBI in a speech before a Tulsa Truther group.  Notice in this story he Islamic supremacist mindset was present in the 90s.

CAIR, the Muslim Brotherhood and more... 

Remember:  Islam is a religion and also a state as history has shown.

Note: There are many fine Muslims in America who simply want to practice their religion quietly, privately and go about their business. They reject Islamism - the pursuit of power to gain a stronghold for Islamic rule. They reject Islamic activism.  They openly oppose the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) its affiliate Hamas, their affilates and supporters in the U.S., Hizb ut Tahrir, and others such Islamic supremacist organizations.  But, when a Muslim or any Islamic organization uses community service and interfaith efforts in cities and towns all across America to gain acceptance but then calls critics of Islamic supremacist movements bigots, fear-mongers, islamophics, or anti-Muslim while they openly or covertly support these& Islamic supremacist movements, it's disturbing, two-faced and deceptive. 

Please, never use violence or hateful words to solve this problem.  NEVER.  Instead study Islamism and develop good questions that hone in on it so you know what to ask our Muslim neighbors and leaders.  Circle the wagons with questions and nevert get thrown off by the predictible name-calling or non-answers.  Use education to its fullest!  This is how we will make the greatest impact.

If you believe I've made a mistake, please send me an e-mail to ztruth@ymail.com and include a credible proof source to help show me where I messed up.  Upon confirmation, I will gladly make any and all the corrections.  So far no one has do so.  Why???

Comments

[Brian Altenhofel]

While I agree that Sharia Law and other cultural defenses should not be allowed in our courts, SQ755 limits the ability of Oklahoma courts to protect Oklahomans in situation where international law should be referenced such as contracts and judgments.

The responsible thing to do would be to wait and revisit this issue on the next ballot with a much better worded constitutional amendment. As the wording of SQ755 stands right now, Oklahoma businesses doing business internationally would effectively be judgment-proof, and that will make Oklahoma a very unattractive place to do business.

[Keith]

I would hope our state courts would not consider international law when deciding cases. The globalists of the world want this and we have to set limits.

I'm voting yes for SQ 755

[Beth in Tulsa]

I am voting yes, too.

[Brian Altenhofel]

@Keith: For one fairly recent case where the Oklahoma Supreme Court had to reference foreign law (specifically, the laws of Brazil) to enforce a contract, see Panama Processes, S.A. v. Cities Service Co., 1990 OK 66, 796 P.2d 276.

Additionally, we currently have statutes in place (12 O.S. § 718.1 - 12 O.S. § 729.16) that deal with enforcing judgments brought against Oklahoma businesses and enforcing international contracts with Oklahoma businesses involved. SQ755 would render these statutes unconstitutional, and therefore Oklahoma would be a very poor choice for a business that wishes to derive part of its income internationally.

For example, a common misconception is that America outsources everywhere, but many professional services are actually outsourced to America by Europeans. In the case of professional services, America is not really the "top of the food chain".

Keep in mind that Oklahoma has foreign trade zones and ocean-going ports on the Arkansas River. These would be negatively affected by SQ755.

Last time I checked, Oklahoma exports were worth approximately $4 billion. Is SQ755 really worth that much to you? Perhaps we would be much better off to wait for a much better written version.

[Brandi]

No business or business group has raised this as an issue, that I am aware. The one case Brian cited was about a pick-up truck and a tractor/trailer vehicle accident in Achille, Oklahoma and a personal injury lawsuit. This was not an international law case. So, Brian, your argument doesn't fly.

We cannot ignore globalists, including some liberal judges who want the U.S. to become more accountable to international law.

I will be voting for SQ 755 and encourage others to do so.

[Brian Altenhofel]

Brandi, that is blatant misinformation and you would know it if you had actually looked at the case that I referenced.

Nowhere will you find a reference to an auto accident in Achille, Oklahoma resulting in personal injury.

If you can't understand what you are reading, then don't post a lie about it to mislead your readers.

[Brandi]

Blantant misinformation?

For example in

DEVERY IMPLEMENT COMPANY, an Oklahoma general partnership,
Plaintiff-Appellant and Cross-Appellee,
v.
J.I. CASE COMPANY, a Delaware corporation, Steiger Tractor,
Inc., a Delaware corporation, Defendants-Appellees

and Cross-Appellants,
Tenneco Inc., a Delaware corporation, Defendant.

"...Under the rationale set forth in Panama Processes, "the parties' intent, gleaned from the contract as a whole, requires" that we apply Oklahoma law. 796 P.2d at 288.We come to this conclusion for the simple reason that the parties contracted for the primary purpose of selling and servicing Steiger tractors in Devery's "trade area" which was centered in Oklahoma, not North Dakota.

Oklahoma law! Got it Brian?

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:VMUJcaAEdugJ:ftp.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F2/944/944.F2d.724.90-6155.90-6140.html+Panama+Processes,+S.A.+v.+Cities+Service+Co.,+796+P.2d+276+(Okla.+Sup.+Ct.+1990&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

The personal injury case I found referenced Panama Processes:

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ok-supreme-court/1186031.html

Footnote 11 references Panama Processes, S.A. v. Cities Service Co., 1990 OK 66, 796 P.2d 276.

For more information about Panama Processes, S.A. v. Cities Services read "Three legal traps for small businesses engaged in international commerce"

http://www.allbusiness.com/legal/international-law/454908-1.html

[Brian Altenhofel]

You said that the Panama Processes case was a personal injury lawsuit, which was inaccurate.

Panama Processes was a resolution to a dispute centered around a 1965 Letter of Agreement. Brazilian law applied to that Letter of Agreement, and a Brazilian court issued the judgment.

It was then up to the Oklahoma Supreme Court to recognize the judgment. In order to recognize the Brazilian judgment, the Oklahoma Supreme Court had to reference the original Brazilian judgment to determine if it was subject to enforcement under the Uniform Foreign Money Judgment Act pursuant to the Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws.

In fact, in paragraph 27 of Panama Processes, the Court said that "...it is clear that the contract was to be performed in major part in Brazil. We thus conclude that the parties' intent, gleaned from the contract as a whole, requires application of Brazilian law on questions of the contract's validity and enforceability."

[Brandi]

Brain, Panama Processes is a faily recent case? LOL!

I though you mean a recent case where it was referenced in the last few years which was the personal injury case and the other one I referred above.

Also, it's relevant to point out that the UN's Vienna Convention was an attempt to codify some international laws that was adopted in 1969. The U.S. Senate has never signed off on decades later. There appears to be a reason why the U.S. is NOT going to sign off on a U.N. drafted international law agreement.