OK. Understand.
N.
On 14/03/2013 5:11 PM, Ray Harrell wrote:
I wasn't being literal about Sharia in Oklahoma. It's the state's
Anglos that are using Sharia, which has no chance of being used in
Oklahoma, as a stalking horse to go after the Native courts. Perhaps
the list members are not aware that Sharia law was banned in
Oklahoma. The particulars are unimportant, it's the politics that
counts. That is why two idiot Oklahoma Senators have so much power.
They are sophisticated politically even though they are idiots.
REH
*From:*[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *D & N
*Sent:* Thursday, March 14, 2013 2:01 PM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [Futurework] Wanted for immediate placement: Swordsmen
But Sharia courts would only pertain to two parties who are both
Muslim, is my understanding. Which would not bode well for Muslim
women in most cases since Muslim women have few laws that protect
them. The introduction of Sharia courts to Great Britain are a step
backwards, not only for Muslim women and their families, but for
civilized justice and national law enforcement overall.
I see your point about the rest.
Natalia
On 14/03/2013 9:53 AM, Ray Harrell wrote:
It's called the "Law of Blood" amongst the Cherokee and was the
law enforced by the seven clans which ruled the nation. But
that was all changed when the English insisted their way was
better and shattered our culture in a grand Diaspora. As the
social contract in the US breaks down around class, these ancient
legal systems are arising again because our people can't get
recompense from the English law. When the English thought that
it was safe, they once again allowed our language and the religion
to emerge, in 1978, feeling that they were not subject to
either. The Sharia law that Oklahoma Anglos are afraid of is in
reality the sovereignty of the Native Peoples in the old Indian
Territory and the emergence of traditional legal systems. Not
the Hollywood variety. The Cherokee Nation had a Supreme Court,
the building still stands in Tahlequah, and Cherokee lawyers were
the first "State" lawyers when the English changed "Indian
Territory" to the "State" of Oklahoma. The Oklahoma Anglos are
now afraid of that and Sharia is a stand in for their fear of
Native Courts. That's why the Violence Against Women Act was
held up in Congress. They didn't like Anglos being subject to
"Sharia" (Stand in for Indian National Courts) when they raped an
Indian woman as defined in the VAWA. "Oh what dark and entangled
webs we weave."
REH
*From:*[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
[mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *D & N
*Sent:* Wednesday, March 13, 2013 1:07 PM
*To:* [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [Futurework] Wanted for immediate placement: Swordsmen
On the surface, settlement between the two parties sounds like a
workable solution which could spare many lives.
If the victimized party is pressured by community or authorities
to arrive at leniency, justice may not necessarily prevail.
Especially for women.
I never would have guessed that this method of settlement existed
in today's Saudi Arabia, and it seems worthy of study and
consideration.
Natalia
On 12/03/2013 5:17 PM, de Bivort Lawrence wrote:
This was reported a couple of days ago in the Saudi press, eg
ARAB NEWS. the committee referred to only found that death by
firing squad was permissible. Neither this committee nor the
Saudi government decide the matter: each regional government
decides policy on this. As of a few days ago, at least one
prisoner on "death row" had requested a firing squad.
The discussion on this in Saudi Arabia is quite similar to
that in the US, ranging from the death penalty itself, to the
method itself. Ironic, in my view, that the issue of cruelty
is raised in the context capital punishment.
In Saudi Arabia, unlike the US, the perpetrator and the victim
(or the victim's family) can negotiate a voluntary settlement
or restitution that then supersedes and voids governmental
action and punishment. Many crimes, including murder, get
resolved this way.
Cheers,
Lawry
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 12, 2013, at 2:18 PM, Arthur Cordell
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
RIYADH, Saudi Arabia --- A Saudi newspaper says a
ministerial committee is looking into formally dropping
public beheadings as a method of execution in the oil-rich
kingdom because it can't find enough swordsmen.
Saudi Arabia is the only country in the world where a
death sentence results in beheading in a public square.
A government committee argues that a change to execution
by firing squad would be fine under the laws of Islam, the
Saudi daily newspaper al-Youm reports.
"This solution seems practical, especially in light of
shortages in official swordsmen or their belated arrival
to execution yards in some incidents," the committee said
in a statement.
http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/03/12/lack-of-swordsmen-leads-saudi-arabia-to-consider-dropping-public-beheadings-as-method-of-execution/
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
