Is Islam Already Illegal in the United States?

IN THE COMMENTS on the article, SIOA Mosque Manifesto: All Mosques are Not Created Equal, A Handy Guide to Fighting the Muslim Brotherhood, several people added insights into the legality of Islam.

The first to comment is Pastorius, who runs the Infidel Bloggers Alliance.

Pastorius said...

The post says: Most mosques in America are Saudi-funded and stocked with Islamic supremacist Saudi literature. Ask mosque leaders, if they aren't forthcoming about the sources of their funding, what they have to hide. Call for funding transparency. And if they admit to Saudi funding ...

The RICO Act says: Under RICO, a person who is a member of an enterprise that has committed any two of 35 crimes—27 federal crimes and 8 state crimes—within a 10-year period can be charged with racketeering. Those found guilty of racketeering can be fined up to $25,000 and sentenced to 20 years in prison per racketeering count. In addition, the racketeer must forfeit all ill-gotten gains and interest in any business gained through a pattern of "racketeering activity." RICO also permits a private individual harmed by the actions of such an enterprise to file a civil suit; if successful, the individual can collect treble damages.

Here are the crimes that are listed under RICO:

Under the law, racketeering activity means:

* Any violation of state statutes against gambling, murder, kidnapping, extortion, arson, robbery, bribery, dealing in obscene matter, or dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in the Controlled Substances Act);
* Any act of bribery, counterfeiting, theft, embezzlement, fraud, dealing in obscene matter, obstruction of justice, slavery, racketeering, gambling, money laundering, commission of murder-for-hire, and several other offenses covered under the Federal criminal code (Title 18);
* Embezzlement of union funds;
* Bankruptcy fraud or securities fraud;
* Drug trafficking; long-term and elaborate drug networks can also be prosecuted using the Continuing Criminal Enterprise Statute;
* Money laundering and related offenses;
* Bringing in, aiding or assisting aliens in illegally entering the country (if the action was for financial gain);
* Acts of terrorism.

More on RICO:

Violations of the RICO laws can be alleged civil lawsuit cases or for criminal charges. In these instances charges can be brought against individuals or corporations in retaliation for said individuals or corporations working with law enforcement. Further, charges can also be brought against individuals or corporations who have sued or filed criminal charges against a defendant.

If the Saudi-funding can be shown to consistently come through the same channels, and if money-laundering, acts of terrorism, and/or assisting aliens in illegally entering the country can be shown to be supported by that Saudi-funding, then RICO statutes would apply.

RICO statutes can be used to bring down the entire structure of a criminal organization.

Therefore, if this Saudi-funding supported a group of Mosques, and they were found to be involved in the commission these certain crimes, then RICO could bring down all the Mosques associated with that criminal activity.


Jane said...

There must be ordinances against proselytizing violence, incitement of violence on the local lawbooks. If they're reading the Koran, they're promoting violence. That is illegal in any municipality. If they're promoting Sharia, they're promoting slavery and violating usury laws and discrimination laws, also illegal.

Also a SCOTUS definition of just what a "religion" is is coming to a head. A religion cannot use that status to violate other laws. In the SCOTUS precedent cases, the definition of "religion" revolves around BELIEF, which are solely self-imposed. Islam imposes its system laws on believers and others whether they are willing or not (even killing them). This does NOT fit in with SCOTUS precedent as to what defines a "religion".

Religion is a deeply-held set of personal beliefs. Nobody has a problem with that, UNTIL it overlaps with given laws.

The Ballard case involved the conviction of organizers of the I Am movement on grounds that they defrauded people by falsely representing that their members had supernatural powers to heal people with incurable illnesses. The Supreme Court held that the jury, in determining the line between the free exercise of religion and the punishable offense of obtaining property under False Pretenses, should not decide whether the claims of the I Am members were actually true, only whether the members honestly believed them to be true, thus qualifying the group as a religion under the Supreme Court's broad definition. This did not deny them the ability to exercise their beliefs, but it did not protect them from stealing the money of others under laws governing fraud.

So by precedent, a muslim could "believe" til the cows come home he has the right to screw an 8 year old because Mo did, but if he tries it he will not be protected. Nor will Imams who "believe" in jihad in promoting it be protected from laws against incitement of violence.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Religion


Vancouver Canuck said...

Re: Pastorius's first post and definition of the RICO laws:
"dealing in obscene matter" - would not the antisemitic garbage and other hate 'literature' distributed at mosques not qualify under this definition?

Read more...

Act For America

Act for America works to change public policy to prevent the Islamization of the United States and its allies.

Find chapters in the United States.

Read more...

Focus and Motivation

How about a shot of courage and motivation? Here's an excerpt from a blog called Crush Pessimism:

IN THE MOVIE, Terminator 2 - Judgment Day, John (the kid) finds out the bad terminator is probably going to kill his mom. John wants to find her and warn her. The good terminator says, “Negative. It is not a mission priority.”

The kid starts yelling. The good terminator (Arnold) says, “This does not help our mission.”

Throughout the movie, Arnold plays a machine that has only one goal and never lets go of it, never gets distracted from it, never comes up with a new goal, and never gets discouraged by setbacks. During the whole movie, he evaluates every possible action with only that criteria: Does it help my goal or doesn’t it? If it doesn’t, he has no time for it. He doesn’t waste any time fuming about someone else’s behavior. He doesn’t waste any time thinking about what he “should have” done. He just stays on his purpose.

Good article. Read the rest: Does This Help My Goal?

Read more...

Beliefs Do Not Have Rights

The following is an excerpt from an article called How To Beat Jihad by Ali Sina, an Iranian ex-Muslim, who makes some interesting points, and because he grew up in a strict Islamic country, his insight adds a unique perspective. Reprinted with permission.

Our responsibility is to awaken the non-Muslims and warn them of the danger of Islam. The danger comes from Islam and not the Middle Eastern people. Unlike Muslims, who discriminate, violate and abuse the human rights of non-Muslims, the non-Muslims have difficulty with discrimination. However, they must understand that Islam is just a belief and beliefs do not have rights. Humans have rights, beliefs don’t.

Muslims can become feral dogs if their religion is criticized. Savagery should not be tolerated. Those Muslims who choose to defend their religion with savagery should be locked up or kicked out. Dialog should be welcomed, but there should be zero tolerance for violence.

Once dialogue begins, Islam will be discredited and Muslims will be set free. Once their source of pride becomes a source of shame, they will no longer cling to it but rather will be embarrassed of it and would want to dissociate themselves from it.

The Western culture is guilt-based. The Eastern culture is shame-based. For us Easterners, everything is about image and how others see us.

The opposite of guilt is innocence. If your ethos is guilt-based, you have an inner police that stops you from doing wrong because doing wrong makes you feel guilty.

If your ethos is shame-based, all you care is to preserve your image. The opposite of shame is honor. You can do wrong but as long as no one sees it, your image is not tarnished and you can still be seen as an honorable person. In a shame-based culture, wrong and right have no meaning. It is all about shame and honor. If the stain of shame is removed, even if it means the murder of your own daughter, honor is restored. These are two very different worldviews. Unless we understand them we will not be able to make sense of Muslims and their minds.

Shame-based cultures are primitive. All Eastern cultures are shame-based even when they are not Islamic. Japanese culture, for example, is, or it has been, a shame-based culture. Our Persian culture is also shame-based. Proverbs like “I keep my cheeks rosy with slaps,” are telltales of a shame-based culture, where image is more important than facts. This proverb says that I may be starving but my pride does not allow me to let anyone know it so I slap myself to keep my cheek rosy. Because poverty is the source of shame as long as I hide my poverty, I have preserved my honor.

Islam is a fear-based philosophy that has taken root in a shame-based milieu. This is a very dangerous combination. When you combine fear and shame moral codes, you give birth to the most insidious ethos imaginable. That is Islam. Islam is an illogical doctrine that is based on fear and is defended through honor. This makes Islam more dangerous than Nazism. Muslims are not concerned about the irrationality of Islam or about good or evil. They are mostly concerned about losing face and upholding the image of Islam.

read the rest>>

Read more...