American Deported for Libidinous Actions; Sharia Law

[Dottie Atwater]

And yes, this does affect all of us in Panama, including Chiriqui. I didn't  have a clue what "Sharia Law" was until I looked it up. http://www.billionbibles.org/sharia/sharia-law.html

It is disturbing and disgusting and alarming because we are getting more and more Muslims in Panama.

Not long ago I was in a dollar store in Volcan. There were about a dozen Muslims in it at the time, inside and outside. The men wore "normal" clothes--T-shirts, shorts, etc. while the women were covered almost head to toe with whatever their garb is called. They and their children were loud, rude, and disruptive. One woman was sitting on the floor blocking an isle. When she finally got up, there was a puddle of water. Pee? The men all had those huge disgusting beards that looked like a big pile of black curly wire. They had a late-model expensive SUV.

I am not a racist and have never been a racist. But I think it is disturbing and disgusting that "political correctness" allows any group to establish their own laws over and above the laws of a particular country.

And I've seen a a couple of youtube videos of some radical Islam woman expounding on Sharia Law and saying Muslims should never try to "assimilate" in the US. Then why doesn't she (and they) go back to their own country?  She's evidently ignoring that under Sharia Law, if she is raped, it's perfectly legal and she is to blame--and will be punished severely, maybe to death. Why do women put up with this crap?...and even encourage it?

 

Edited October 24, 2017 by Dottie Atwater
addition

[Keith Woolford]

You may be mistaken.

Just because a Muslim woman wears a headscarf* doesn't mean she is subject to Sharia law and if anybody ever stoned her to death here in Panama I can assure you, there would be homicide charges.

* hijab, burka

Edited October 24, 2017 by Keith Woolford

[Dottie Atwater]

Well, who would know if a Muslim was stoned to death in Panama? Do you think they would advertise the fact?"

"A headscarf?" A "headscarf" is very different from covering the entire head except for the face, plus wearing black clothing that covers their entire body. Again, I question why women would put up with this crap while their "men" are wearing shorts and T-shirts.

"Homicide charges"? Get real. There have been murders of expats right here in Volcan that have never been "solved" and never will be. Plus lots of other violent acts never solved. It seems that you are mistaken, Keith.

I repeat: " I think it is disturbing and disgusting that "political correctness" allows any group to establish their own laws over and above the laws of a particular country."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Keith Woolford]

52 minutes ago, Dottie Atwater said:

I am not a racist and have never been a racist.

How about intolerant?

[Jim and Judi]

32 minutes ago, Dottie Atwater said:

it is disturbing and disgusting that "political correctness" allows any group to establish their own laws over and above the laws of a particular country?

Dottie, what country are you referring to that allows their laws to be overridden by any group?

Edited October 24, 2017 by Jim and Judi

[Jim and Judi]

Wow, I keep reading this post and it really scares me that someone admits they know nothing about Sharia law and then proceeds to "inform" themselves by watching YouTube videos. What the hell! Friggin read some books, pick up an unbiased newspaper, talk to an average Muslim. In other words... Educate yourself! And YouTube doesn't count. Jeebus?

Edited October 25, 2017 by Jim and Judi

[Siempre Soluciones]

 

 

Google:  sharia no go zone

 

And select images.

 

 

 

[Keith Woolford]

You really actually think that the City of London Police published a poster saying "Islam is for Cretins" ?

Please. Maybe you've been watching too much FOX News. Stories about "No Go Zones" were falsely spread there according to this report.

https://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/nogozones.asp

Edited October 24, 2017 by Keith Woolford

[TwoSailors]

On 10/24/2017 at 3:42 PM, Dottie Atwater said:

I am not a racist and have never been a racist.

I find this post totally shocking!!!  Your post strongly suggests otherwise. How on earth do you know they were Muslim? And if so, who cares? This post is not needed and is offensive. No religious organizations should be mentioned like this. 

Dottie, I used to like your post but you just stepped over the line. Bud, We respectfully request all religious references post be removed and not allowed. 

[TwoSailors]

2 hours ago, Dottie Atwater said:

t is disturbing and disgusting and alarming because we are getting more and more Muslims in Panama.

That is just outrageous!!  You need to be banned from this site!

[JudyS]

Dottie, how would you feel if I said it was disturbing and disgusting that we are getting more and more evangelical Christians, or Jews, or Hindus, or Wiccans in Panama? Your comment is nothing but extreme and irrational prejudice against all members of the Muslim religion. It has no place on this forum.

[Siempre Soluciones]

On 10/24/2017 at 5:47 PM, Keith Woolford said:

You really actually think that the City of London Police published a poster saying "Islam is for Cretins" ?

Please. Maybe you've been watching too much FOX News. Stories about "No Go Zones" were falsely spread there according to this report.

https://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/nogozones.asp

 

Keith,

 

I have friends who have personally experienced these no go zones in Paris and London.  I was curios and performed some internet searches.  I received 146,000+ hits on no go zones.  As for Snopes, that's a liberal owned website and for them to discount such a widely discussed real problem is disingenuous.

 

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446101/westminster-attack-khalid-masood-islamic-europe-mosques-no-go-zones

 

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10404/france-no-go-zones

[JudyS]

20 hours ago, Siempre Soluciones said:

 

Keith,

 

I have friends who have personally experienced these no go zones in Paris and London.  I was curios and performed some internet searches.  I received 146,000+ hits on no go zones.  As for Snopes, that's a liberal owned website and for them to discount such a widely discussed real problem is disingenuous.

 

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446101/westminster-attack-khalid-masood-islamic-europe-mosques-no-go-zones

 

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10404/france-no-go-zones

I did my own search, and there are no-go zones all over the world, but these are high crime areas controlled by gangs and drug traffickers, not sharia law.

[Siempre Soluciones]

11 minutes ago, JudyS said:

I did my own search, and there are no-go zones all over the world, but these are high crime areas controlled by gangs and drug traffickers, not sharia law.

 

Judy,

 

I'm sure that you're 100% correct.  However, it has been documented that the businesses in many of these "zones" are 100% Muslim owned and that the public schools do not teach the country's native language as their primary language.  In fact, many fast food restaurants namely Burger King have altered their menus to accommodate Muslims. 

 

Perform an internet search on:

 

burger king france muslim menu

 

And there are 370,000+ hits discussing Burger King's altered menu in France.  Funny thing, Snopes say it's all false.

 

It makes you wonder.

[JudyS]

16 minutes ago, JudyS said:

I did my own search, and there are no-go zones all over the world, but these are high crime areas controlled by gangs and drug traffickers, not sharia law.

Fox News issued an apology (amazing in itself) for falsely reporting that there are Muslim controlled no-go zones in Europe.

[JudyS]

4 minutes ago, Siempre Soluciones said:

 

Judy,

 

I'm sure that you're 100% correct.  However, it has been documented that the businesses in many of these "zones" are 100% Muslim owned and that the public schools do not teach the country's native language as their primary language.  In fact, many fast food restaurants namely Burger King have altered their menus to accommodate Muslims. 

 

Perform an internet search on:

 

burger king france muslim menu

 

And there are 370,000+ hits discussing Burger King's altered menu in France.  Funny thing, Snopes say it's all false.

 

It makes you wonder.

And in Hawaii McDonald's serves 2 scoops of rice with a side of Spam. Does that make them suspicious because they cater to local tastes? I guess I will now have to lie awake nights worrying about Arabic menus in France.

Edited October 25, 2017 by JudyS

[Dottie Atwater]

20 hours ago, Siempre Soluciones said:

 

Keith,

 

I have friends who have personally experienced these no go zones in Paris and London.  I was curios and performed some internet searches.  I received 146,000+ hits on no go zones.  As for Snopes, that's a liberal owned website and for them to discount such a widely discussed real problem is disingenuous.

 

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446101/westminster-attack-khalid-masood-islamic-europe-mosques-no-go-zones

 

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10404/france-no-go-zones

 Evangelical Christians, or Jews, or Hindus, or Wiccans do not as a rule commit acts of violence. Sorry to have upset many of you. My comments were not intended to be about any "religion" but about acts of violence committed in the name of a particular religion. Yes, there are non-violent Muslims but no one knows which ones are "radicalized" and that is my concern and should be a concern of any thinking person. Many, many acts of violence have been and continue to be committed by Muslims.  Yes, there are acts of violence committed by people other than Muslims, but as a group their violent acts multiply thousandfold...9/11 for example, committed by Islamic terrorists.

Anyone who doesn't think Sharia Law is "disturbing and disgusting" apparently did not read the link I sent that explains it. The use of Sharia Law is spreading. One link, Sharia Law in Ameria: http://www.billionbibles.org/sharia/america-sharia-law.html  Just one quote from that page: "In the landmark 2010 pro-Sharia ruling on S.D. v. M.J.R., Judge Joseph Charles Jr. of New Jersey concluded that the Muslim ex-husband repeatedly had raped (see Taharrush) his Muslim ex-wife. After testimony from the Muslim man's imam, the judge denied the ex-wife's request for a permanent restraining order against her ex-husband, citing the Muslim man's "belief."

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/5-facts-you-need-to-know-about-sharia-law_us_5788f567e4b03fc3ee507c01 - My comments were meant to be like that of Newt Gringrich, but evidently I said it badly. 

"If you are a practicing Muslim and you believe deeply in your faith, but you’re also loyal to the United States and you believe in the Constitution, you should have your rights totally completely protected within the Constitution.”

He added that his comments weren’t “about targeting a particular religion,” but about “looking for certain characteristics that we have learned painfully time after time involve killing people.

But the articles goes on to state, among other things, "The truth is, Gingrich would be hard pressed to find an American Muslim who isn’t influenced by Sharia in one way or another. That’s because Sharia law is an essential guide to Islamic life that encompasses a whole range of behaviors and faith practices ― from praying five times daily to abstaining from pork and alcohol."

Again, my comments were not to be construed against Muslims in general, but the fact that no one knows which ones have been "radicalized." I find that disturbing.

Just like I am against the violence committed by thugs and criminals in Panama doesn't mean that I am against all Panamanians.

Also, just like during the Crusades, Christians tortured and killed thousands in the name of "religion." I also find those acts disgusting. Anyone disagree with that?

[Siempre Soluciones]

19 hours ago, JudyS said:

And in Hawaii McDonald's serves 2 scoops of rice with a side of Spam. Does that make them suspicious because they cater to local tastes?

 

Judy,

 

But taking bacon off the menu..... bring on WW3 !!!!!

[JudyS]

19 hours ago, Dottie Atwater said:

 Evangelical Christians, or Jews, or Hindus, or Wiccans do not as a rule commit acts of violence. Sorry to have upset many of you. My comments were not intended to be about any "religion" but about acts of violence committed in the name of a particular religion. Yes, there are non-violent Muslims but no one knows which ones are "radicalized" and that is my concern and should be a concern of any thinking person. Many, many acts of violence have been and continue to be committed by Muslims.  Yes, there are acts of violence committed by people other than Muslims, but as a group their violent acts multiply thousandfold...9/11 for example, committed by Islamic terrorists.

Anyone who doesn't think Sharia Law is "disturbing and disgusting" apparently did not read the link I sent that explains it. The use of Sharia Law is spreading. One link, Sharia Law in Ameria: http://www.billionbibles.org/sharia/america-sharia-law.html  Just one quote from that page: "In the landmark 2010 pro-Sharia ruling on S.D. v. M.J.R., Judge Joseph Charles Jr. of New Jersey concluded that the Muslim ex-husband repeatedly had raped (see Taharrush) his Muslim ex-wife. After testimony from the Muslim man's imam, the judge denied the ex-wife's request for a permanent restraining order against her ex-husband, citing the Muslim man's "belief."

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/5-facts-you-need-to-know-about-sharia-law_us_5788f567e4b03fc3ee507c01 - My comments were meant to be like that of Newt Gringrich, but evidently I said it badly. 

"If you are a practicing Muslim and you believe deeply in your faith, but you’re also loyal to the United States and you believe in the Constitution, you should have your rights totally completely protected within the Constitution.”

He added that his comments weren’t “about targeting a particular religion,” but about “looking for certain characteristics that we have learned painfully time after time involve killing people.

But the articles goes on to state, among other things, "The truth is, Gingrich would be hard pressed to find an American Muslim who isn’t influenced by Sharia in one way or another. That’s because Sharia law is an essential guide to Islamic life that encompasses a whole range of behaviors and faith practices ― from praying five times daily to abstaining from pork and alcohol."

Again, my comments were not to be construed against Muslims in general, but the fact that no one knows which ones have been "radicalized." I find that disturbing.

Just like I am against the violence committed by thugs and criminals in Panama doesn't mean that I am against all Panamanians.

Also, just like during the Crusades, Christians tortured and killed thousands in the name of "religion." I also find those acts disgusting. Anyone disagree with that?

I guess we're done here, because I would never click on a website called billionbibles.org.

[Siempre Soluciones]

 

"I guess we're done here, because I would never click on a website called billionbibles.org. "

 

Ouch!

[Dottie Atwater]

2 minutes ago, JudyS said:

I guess we're done here, because I would never click on a website called billionbibles.org.

Your comment sounds like a slam on Bible believers as a group. So please don't condemn me (and my misconstrued comments) when you yourself just demonstrated intolerance. That particular web site was one of the first I clicked on when I did a search for "Sharia Law in America," not one that I "follow" and have never seen before. There are many other web sites if you care to do a search on "Sharia Law in America."

And for those of you who demand that I be banned from this site for expressing concern about violence committed by a particular group? That itself is intolerance. Do you not express "intolerance" for the thugs in Panama? When you do, no one is demanding that you be banned for attacks against all Panamanians. Just give it some thought...

Peace.

[Bonnie]

20 hours ago, Siempre Soluciones said:

 

Keith,

 

I have friends who have personally experienced these no go zones in Paris and London.  I was curios and performed some internet searches.  I received 146,000+ hits on no go zones.  As for Snopes, that's a liberal owned website and for them to discount such a widely discussed real problem is disingenuous.

 

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446101/westminster-attack-khalid-masood-islamic-europe-mosques-no-go-zones

 

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10404/france-no-go-zones

I got a good laugh out of the accusation that Snopes is a liberal website while citing the the National Review and, even worse, The Gatestone Institute as reliable sources.

 

"National Review (NR) is an American semi-monthly conservative editorial magazine focusing on news and commentary pieces on political, social, and cultural affairs."--Wikipedia
 

"The Gatestone Institute is a right-wing think tank that publishes articles, particularly pertaining to Islam and the Middle East. The organization has attracted attention for publishing false articles."--Wikipedia

 

"In 2012, FactCheck.org reviewed a sample of Snopes' responses to political rumors regarding George W. Bush, Sarah Palin, and Barack Obama, and found them to be free from bias in all cases. In 2012, The Florida Times-Union [a conservative newspaper, I would point out] reported that About.com's urban legends researcher found a 'consistent effort to provide even-handed analyses' and that Snopes' cited sources and numerous reputable analyses of its content confirm its accuracy."--Wikipedia

 

As to snopes.com, I also offer the following: http://www.factcheck.org/2009/04/snopescom/

 

But now I suppose you will accuse both Wikipedia and Factcheck of being tools of liberalism.

[BlueBird]

12 hours ago, TwoSailors said:

That is just outrageous!!  You need to be banned from this site!

Bud,    Get this religious garbage off this site!  And ban anyone who continues this discussion.

[Siempre Soluciones]

19 hours ago, Bonnie said:

I got a good laugh out of the accusation that Snopes is a liberal website while citing the the National Review and, even worse, The Gatestone Institute as reliable sources.

 

"National Review (NR) is an American semi-monthly conservative editorial magazine focusing on news and commentary pieces on political, social, and cultural affairs."--Wikepedia
 

"The Gatestone Institute is a right-wing think tank that publishes articles, particularly pertaining to Islam and the Middle East. The organization has attracted attention for publishing false articles." Wikipedia

 

As to snopes.com, I offer the following: http://www.factcheck.org/2009/04/snopescom/

 

But now I suppose you will accuse both Wikipedia and Factcheck of being tools of liberalism.

 

Bonnie,

 

With all due respect, please don't put words in my mouth.  The fact is that the two owners of Snopes are far left liberals.  That's a fact.  Whether or not their site is bias, you decide.

 

As for Factcheck, they're always leaning left.  Wikipedia's content is via membership, any of us can contribute to the content to our desire.

[Jim and Judi]

48 minutes ago, Dottie Atwater said:

Evangelical Christians, or Jews, or Hindus, or Wiccans do not as a rule commit acts of violence

Ha ha ha ha ha, lol lol lol. Yeah, right.