This could be your daughter! 

Coming soon Sharia in America if you dont vote 

for Leah Lax. 

Visit www.LeahLax.com and donate. By donating allows Leah Lax to fight and stop Sharia (Islamic Law) and Islamic thugs in the USA!

Christian girl, 12, kidnapped, beaten and raped for eight months until she converted to Islam

• Asian Human Rights Commission claim girl was lured on shopping trip by friend before she was kidnapped.
• Abductors drove her 120 miles before raping her, then forced her to sign marriage papers
• Victim managed to escape eight months later, but police refuse to prosecute rapists because they are tied to militant Islam group

By Wil Longbottom
Last updated at 8:11 AM on 13th October 2011

 

A 12-year-old Christian girl was kidnapped and repeatedly raped for eight months in Pakistan by a man who then falsified marriage documents with her, it was claimed today.
The girl was lured on a shopping trip in Lahore by a friend, before she was driven 120 miles to Tandianwalla and raped by the friend's uncle in January this year.
Two days later, she was forced to sign papers consenting to marriage with the man and beaten for refusing to convert from Christianity to Islam.

Attack: A 12-year-old Christian girl was kidnapped, beaten until she converted to Islam and repeatedly raped for eight months in Lahore, Pakistan (pictured), according to a human rights organisation

She was then held against her will for eight months, before managing to escape and contact her family.
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has said the rapists have not been arrested because of their affiliation with a militant Muslim organisation - the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba.
It claims the police have refused to order a medical check-up on the girl, and have warned her parents that it would be better for them to hand over the girl to her 'legal' husband or a criminal case would be filed against them.

An investigation into the kidnapping found the girl's father reported her disappearance in January and made complaints against her abductors, but police took no action for eight months.
Last month, the girl - who has not been named for legal reasons - called her family from Tandianwalla and told them she had been abducted, but had escaped and was hiding at a bus stop.

Militant ties: The Asian Human Rights Commission claims Pakistani police have refused to investigate the kidnapping because the perpetrators are tied to an extremist group (file picture)

The girl's parents travelled to the town and rescued her, before taking her to a local magistrate to give a statement.
The rapists then contacted the police through their religious group and produced a marriage certificate that claimed to show one of them was married to the 12-year-old.
As a result of their complaint, the Christian family has gone into hiding as members of Lashkar-e-Tayyaba are searching for them.
The group claims the girl is pregnant, but her mother has denied this is true.
The AHRC said that police never asked the religious group how a 12-year-old could be married. The legal age for marriage in Pakistan in 16.
It claims the Punjab provincial government is patronising banned militant organisations.
The British Pakistani Christian Association has launched a petition calling on the Pakistani government to investigate the attack.
For more information, visit http://britishpakistanichristian.blogspot.com.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2048261/Christian-girl-12-kidnapped-raped-beaten-converted-Islam.html#ixzz1ag3bTuIF

Shocker! Avi Lipkin says OBAMA Plans to Legalize 50 Million Muslim Immigrants to America!

Shocker! Avi Lipkin says OBAMA Plans to Legalize 50 Million Muslim Immigrants to America!

Don’t Fear Islamic Law in America

By ELIYAHU STERN

Published: September 2, 2011 

New Haven

Related

• Times Topic: Shariah (Islamic Law)

MORE than a dozen American states are considering outlawing aspects of Shariah law. Some of these efforts would curtail Muslims from settling disputes over dietary laws and marriage through religious arbitration, while others would go even further in stigmatizing Islamic life: a bill recently passed by the Tennessee General Assembly equates Shariah with a set of rules that promote “the destruction of the national existence of the United States.”
Supporters of these bills contend that such measures are needed to protect the country against homegrown terrorism and safeguard its Judeo-Christian values. The Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich has said that “Shariah is a mortal threat to the survival of freedom in the United States and in the world as we know it.”
This is exactly wrong. The crusade against Shariah undermines American democracy, ignores our country’s successful history of religious tolerance and assimilation, and creates a dangerous divide between America and its fastest-growing religious minority.
The suggestion that Shariah threatens American security is disturbingly reminiscent of the accusation, in 19th-century Europe, that Jewish religious law was seditious. In 1807, Napoleon convened an assembly of rabbinic authorities to address the question of whether Jewish law prevented Jews from being loyal citizens of the republic. (They said that it did not.)
Fear that Jewish law bred disloyalty was not limited to political elites; leading European philosophers also entertained the idea. Kant argued that the particularistic nature of “Jewish legislation” made Jews “hostile to all other peoples.” And Hegel contended that Jewish dietary rules and other Mosaic laws barred Jews from identifying with their fellow Prussians and called into question their ability to be civil servants.
The German philosopher Bruno Bauer offered Jews a bargain: renounce Jewish law and be granted full legal rights. He insisted that, otherwise, laws prohibiting work on the Sabbath made it impossible for Jews to be true citizens. (Bauer conveniently ignored the fact that many fully observant Jews violated the Sabbath to fight in the Prussian wars against Napoleon.)
During that era, Christianity was seen as either a universally valid basis of the state or a faith that harmoniously coexisted with the secular law of the land. Conversely, Judaism was seen as a competing legal system — making Jews at best an unassimilable minority, at worst a fifth column. It was not until the late 19th century that all Jews were granted full citizenship in Western Europe (and even then it was short lived).
Most Americans today would be appalled if Muslims suffered from legally sanctioned discrimination as Jews once did in Europe. Still, there are signs that many Americans view Muslims in this country as disloyal. A recent Gallup poll found that only 56 percent of Protestants think that Muslims are loyal Americans.
This suspicion and mistrust is no doubt fueled by the notion that American Muslims are akin to certain extreme Muslim groups in the Middle East and in Europe. But American Muslims are a different story. They are natural candidates for assimilation. They are demographically the youngest religious group in America, and most of their parents don’t even come from the Middle East (the majority have roots in Southeast Asia). A recent Pew Research Center poll found that Muslim Americans exhibit the highest level of integration among major American religious groups, expressing greater degrees of tolerance toward people of other faiths than do Protestants, Catholics or Jews.
Given time, American Muslims, like all other religious minorities before them, will adjust their legal and theological traditions, if necessary, to accord with American values.
America’s exceptionalism has always been its ability to transform itself — economically, culturally and religiously. In the 20th century, we thrived by promoting a Judeo-Christian ethic, respecting differences and accentuating commonalities among Jews, Catholics and Protestants. Today, we need an Abrahamic ethic that welcomes Islam into the religious tapestry of American life.
Anti-Shariah legislation fosters a hostile environment that will stymie the growth of America’s tolerant strand of Islam. The continuation of America’s pluralistic religious tradition depends on the ability to distinguish between punishing groups that support terror and blaming terrorist activities on a faith that represents roughly a quarter of the world’s population.

Eliyahu Stern, an assistant professor of religious studies and history at Yale, is the author of the forthcoming “The Genius: Elijah of Vilna and the Making of Modern Judaism.”

Palin

Palin's Speech Seen as Hit on Perry 'Career Politician'

Saturday, 03 Sep 2011 08:14 PM

By Dave Eberhart

A crowd of 2,000 in Indianola, Iowa, braved torrential rain to hear former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin blast “corporate crony capitalism” and the “permanent political class” in her speech to the Tea Party of America.

It was no mystery that the barbs were aimed at Texas Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican presidential candidate who has spent most of his career in office and who is perennially dogged by charges of rewarding his financial supporters.

Perry is considered the latest frontrunner for the GOP nomination.

“You know that it’s not enough to just change up the uniform,” Palin shouted out. “If we don’t change the team and the game plan, we won’t save our country.”

Recently, Palin aides have been debunking rumors that she was ready to climb on Perry’s rumbling bandwagon and endorse him. In Indianola, she hammered home her camp’s message, telling the crowd that it was not good enough to replace Obama with any business-as-usual Republican administration.

“You must vet a candidate’s record,” Palin said. “You must know their ability to successfully reform and actually fix problems that they are going to claim that they inherited.”

Even as she got into the meat of her own proposals for creating jobs, including the elimination of all federal corporate income taxes, she seemed to take a sideswipe at Perry, demanding that the cozy relationship between political contributions and government favors must be brought to light and eliminated.

Later on the rope line while signing T-shirts and hats and smiling at chants from the crowd to “Run, Sarah, run,” Palin said, “We need to make sure all our GOP candidates are fighting corporate capitalism and aren’t participating in it. We have a great opportunity to finally knock it down.”

Steadfast, Palin would not answer shouted questions as to whether she was directing her remarks at Perry.

“I want all of our GOP candidates to take the opportunity to kill corporate capitalism that is leading to this cronyism that is killing our economy,” Palin retorted at one point. “They all have an opportunity to speak out against it. That’s what I want them to do.”

One recent poll concluded that 74 percent of voters think Palin should not run, while 71 percent of GOP voters think the same, but the stalwart Palin was having none of it when confronted with the numbers.

"Polls? Nah . . . They’re for strippers and cross country skiers," Palin shot back.

Next on the Palin agenda: taking her “One Nation Bus Tour” on to New Hampshire, the venue of the kick-off presidential primary election.


Read more on Newsmax.com: Palin's Speech Seen as Hit on Perry 'Career Politician'
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

John Fund: Why Sarah Palin Is Not Running

Friday, 02 Sep 2011 08:45 AM

By John Fund

Sarah Palin will swoop into Iowa and New Hampshire to speak at tea party rallies this Labor Day weekend, whipping up talk she will announce her candidacy for president. After all, Sept. 3 marked the third anniversary of her acceptance speech for vice president at the Republican National Convention — a speech that established her as both a conservative icon and a magnet for criticism.

Her supporters certainly are encouraging talk she will be a 2012 candidate. Peter Singleton, her Iowa political organizer, told National Review’s Robert Costa last month: “I believe she will run. Labor Day will kick off the Republican campaign for the nomination. She is going to make a major, major speech.”

But Team Palin is extremely sensitive about anyone else who speculates about what she’s up to. Karl Rove, President George W. Bush’s political strategist, told Fox News last month that he thought Palin’s schedule in Iowa meant she would announce her candidacy this weekend.

That prompted this riposte from Team Palin on the website of her PAC: “Any professional pundit claiming to have ‘inside information’ regarding Governor Palin’s personal decision is not only wrong but their comments are specifically intended to mislead the American public.”

At the risk of being accused of misleading people, let me state that Sarah Palin isn’t running for president.

No, I don’t have “inside information,” other than that Sarah Palin has had the time of her life playing the media and political class like a fiddle by making them respond to her every Twitter twitch. She has gotten a platform for her views at places ranging from Iowa to the World Economic Forum in South Korea next month. The consternation she’s caused is sweet revenge or someone who will use her tea party speeches this weekend to express her disdain for how the media and the political class have let this country down.

But her ability to make reporters and pundits dance to her tune is ending. She clearly isn’t prepared to announce this weekend. When asked recently in Iowa if she would be ready to join the race by Labor Day, Palin said, "I doubt it."

Even in an era of social media and online organizing, Palin hasn’t assembled an organization likely to secure her the nomination. “She seems to lack the ability to trust folks to delegate responsibility and as such we've seen a long series of scheduling SNAFUs," notes Politico's Ken Vogel. While most of the confusion wasn’t her fault, witness the on-again, off-again stories about whether she would indeed speak at the Iowa Tea Party rally this weekend.

Her delay in deciding about running also has caused some of her supporters to drift away. She polls only 8 percent among Republicans in the latest Fox News poll. Surely, her support would climb if she actually entered the race but she faces another obstacle. Many Republicans just don't believe she is qualified to be president or think she is damaged goods in a general election. The Fox poll found a full 71 percent of Republicans and 66 percent of tea party supporters don’t want her to run.

Sarah Palin is only 47 years old, a full 15 years younger than Hillary Clinton was when she ran in 2008 and more than two decades younger than Ronald Reagan was when he mounted his successful campaign for president. She knows she has small children to raise and that her own mistakes and relentless media hostility have damaged her brand as a presidential candidate. But she also knows that attention spans are short, America is full of political careers that have been resurrected and she has lots of time to outwait her critics.

Let’s also take Sarah Palin at her word. Last year, she told Greta van Susteren of Fox News that the major reason she might run would be “if nobody else were to step up with the solutions that are needed” to set the country right. “But I also know that anybody — anybody — can make a huge difference in this country, without a title, without an office, just being out there as an advocate for solutions that can work to get the country on the right track. And that’s where I am now.”

Doesn’t that pretty much describe what Sarah Palin has been doing the past year, fueled with celebrity-infused brio?

So if Sarah Palin isn’t running for president, what will she do in 2012? Even as a non-candidate, she has the potential to shake up the GOP race. In a recent slickly produced video producer by Team Palin that chronicles her bus tour of Iowa, Palin shakes hands with a girl in an “Americans for Rick Perry” T-shirt and then poses for a photo with the girl and her fellow Perry supporters.

“Given the elaborate editing that went into this production, is it likely that Palin would have approved a visual nod to Perry as a mere coincidence?” asks blogger Robert Stacy McCain, a keen-eyed Palin watcher. “I don’t think so.”

Indeed, Republican governors tell me that Palin and Perry clearly bonded when they attended meetings as fellow governors from 2007 to 2009. “As executives of the two biggest energy-producing states in the country they had a lot in common and were simpatico on issues,” one governor told me last week. “You could also say they are both larger-than-life personalities who no doubt learned from each other in the publicity department.”

Rick Perry already has vaulted — at least temporarily — to the front of the GOP presidential pack, leading Mitt Romney by 29- 22 percent in the latest Fox News poll that has Palin at 8 percent. If Sarah Palin decides that 2012 isn’t her year to run, as I firmly believe is the case, what sweeter revenge could she have on her media adversaries than to give early backing to a kindred conservative spirit who then went on to win the GOP nomination and indeed the presidency?

That’s why I believe Sarah Palin isn’t running, and why she ultimately will endorse Rick Perry. And if her bet pays off and Perry becomes president, don’t be surprised if the next secretary of Energy is a certain former Alaska governor who has an aggressive agenda to open up America’s energy resources. Such a platform also would be an effective launching pad for her to start refurbishing her political and policy image.

Sarah Palin may yet have the last political laugh over her doubters.

John Fund is a contributing editor to the American Spectator.



Read more on Newsmax.com: John Fund: Why Sarah Palin Is Not Running
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

Wheels on Obama's bus go round and round on taxpayers money

Executive Branch

Obama Traveling in $1.1M Secret Service Bus

Published August 15, 2011

| Associated Press

WASHINGTON -- President Obama is traveling the Midwest on a new $1.1 million bus purchased by the Secret Service, an impenetrable-looking conveyance the size of a cross-country Greyhound, painted all in black, with dark tinted windows and flashing red and blue lights.

Secret Service spokesman Ed Donovan emphasized that the bus wasn't purchased solely for the president and would be used for other dignitaries in the future. He said the agency has not previously had buses in its fleet and was overdue to get some since it's had to protect politicians traveling by bus for decades.

In the past, the service has had to lease buses and retrofit them for that purpose.

Donovan said two buses were purchased and one is being used by Obama as he travels through Minnesota, Iowa and Illinois. Both will be used by other officeholders and candidates.

Donovan declined to comment on the buses' design or capability.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08/15/obama-traveling-in-11m-secret-service-bus/#ixzz1VA0Au400

Bill 444

Tell your State Senators NO to 444. 

This will allow Shariah Law into the State.

 SAY NO

South Carolina General Assembly

119th Session, 2011-2012

S. 444

STATUS INFORMATION

General Bill

Sponsors: Senators Fair, Campsen, Verdin, Grooms, O'Dell, Bright, Rose and Thomas

Document Path: l:\council\bills\agm\18441ahb11.docx

Companion/Similar bill(s): 3490

Introduced in the Senate on January 26, 2011

Currently residing in the Senate Committee on Judiciary

Summary: Enforcement of foreign law

HISTORY OF LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS

      Date      Body   Action Description with journal page number                                                  

1/26/2011   Senate  Introduced and read first time (Senate Journal‑page 10)

1/26/2011   Senate  Referred to Committee on Judiciary (Senate Journal‑page 10)

2/23/2011   Senate  Referred to Subcommittee: L.Martin (ch), Rankin, Hutto, Bright, Davis

View the latest legislative information at the LPITS web site

VERSIONS OF THIS BILL

1/26/2011

A BILL

TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 14‑1‑240 SO AS TO PREVENT A COURT OR OTHER ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY FROM ENFORCING FOREIGN LAW IN THIS STATE FROM A FORUM OUTSIDE OF THE UNITED STATES OR ITS TERRITORIES UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina:

SECTION  1. The General Assembly finds that it is necessary to protect the citizens of the State from the application of foreign law from a forum outside of the United States or its territories when that application will result in the violation of a constitutionally guaranteed right including, but not limited to, the right to due process, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, or any right of privacy or marriage as specifically delineated in the constitution of this State or of the United States.

SECTION  2. Chapter 1, Title 14 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:

    “Section 14‑1‑240.      (A)  As used in this section, the term ‘foreign law’ means any law, rule, or legal code or system established and used or applied in or by another jurisdiction outside of the United States or its territories. 

    (B)  A court, arbitrator, administrative agency, or other adjudicative, mediation, or enforcement authority may not enforce a foreign law if it would violate a constitutionally guaranteed right of this State or of the United States.  The provisions of this section apply only to actual or foreseeable violations of the constitutional rights of a person caused by the application of the foreign law.

    (C)  Notwithstanding another provision of law, if any contractual provision or agreement:

       (1)   provides for the choice of a foreign law to govern its interpretation or the resolution of a dispute between the parties and the enforcement or interpretation of the contractual provision or agreement would result in a violation of the constitutional rights of a person, the contractual provision or agreement must be modified or amended to the extent necessary to preserve the constitutional rights of the parties;

       (2)   provides for the choice of venue or forum outside of the United States or its territories and the enforcement or interpretation of the contractual provision or agreement applying the choice of venue or forum would result in a violation of the constitutional rights of a person, the contractual provision or agreement must be interpreted to preserve the constitutional rights of the person against whom enforcement is sought.  In addition, if a natural person subject to personal jurisdiction in this State seeks to maintain litigation, arbitration, agency, or similarly binding proceedings in this State, and a court of this State finds that granting a claim of forum non conveniens or a related claim violates or would likely lead to the violation of the constitutional rights of a nonclaimant in the foreign forum with respect to the matter in dispute, the claim must be denied;

       (3)   is incapable of modification or amendment to preserve the constitutional rights of the parties pursuant to the provisions of this section, the offending provision is null and void.”

SECTION  3. The repeal or amendment by this act of any law, whether temporary or permanent or civil or criminal, does not affect pending actions, rights, duties, or liabilities founded thereon, or alter, discharge, release or extinguish any penalty, forfeiture, or liability incurred under the repealed or amended law, unless the repealed or amended provision shall so expressly provide.  After the effective date of this act, all laws repealed or amended by this act must be taken and treated as remaining in full force and effect for the purpose of sustaining any pending or vested right, civil action, special proceeding, criminal prosecution, or appeal existing as of the effective date of this act, and for the enforcement of rights, duties, penalties, forfeitures, and liabilities as they stood under the repealed or amended laws.

SECTION  4. If any section, subsection, paragraph, subparagraph, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this act is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such holding shall not affect the constitutionality or validity of the remaining portions of this act, the General Assembly hereby declaring that it would have passed this act, and each and every section, subsection, paragraph, subparagraph, sentence, clause, phrase, and word thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, subsections, paragraphs, subparagraphs, sentences, clauses, phrases, or words hereof may be declared to be unconstitutional, invalid, or otherwise ineffective.

SECTION  5. This act takes effect upon approval by the Governor.

‑‑‑‑XX‑‑‑‑