Anti-Israel Muslim Student Activist Appointed To UC Berkeley Board

The University of California at Berkeley (UCB) is having a similar share of controversy as Florida Atlantic University (FAU).  FAU recently bestowed a prestigious award upon anti-Semite, pro-Palestinian activist Noor Fawzy, now UCB is getting flak for appointing 21-year-old Sadia Saifuddin to the governing board as a student member for a one year term beginning in 2014. Like Fawzy, Sadia has been active in anti-Israel campaigns. She will be the first Muslim to serve as a student member, but there are some who are not very happy with this decision- not so much because she is a Muslim, but rather because of her polarizing activities.

Jewish groups including the prominent Simon Wiesenthal Center strongly objected to her nomination, citing her involvement in a campaign to divest university funds from companies with business connections to the Israeli military.

They also objected to her sponsoring a student senate resolution that condemned a lecturer at the system’s Santa Cruz campus for what the resolution said was Islamophobic rhetoric. The groups said it was Saifuddin who showed an intolerance toward opposing viewpoints.

“In a year where campus climate issues have been the dominant theme of the UC system, a vote to appoint somebody who has served to polarize thousands and thousands of people in the campus community and beyond is shocking,” said Rabbi Aron Hierof the Wiesenthal Center, which petitioned the regents to deny Saifuddin a seat on the board.

“An appropriate Muslim candidate could have ably served in this position. We don’t believe Sadia is that appropriate candidate,” he added.

Despite the opposition, 25 university regents voted on Wednesday to confirm her appointment with one member, Richard Blum, abstaining from the vote. He cited concerns about Saifuddin’s divestment efforts.

But not all Jews objected to her selection. Regent Bonnie Reiss, the chair of the student regent selection committee, said:

“Sadia is a remarkable young woman. She is committed to supporting all of UC students, and to this university and this country which she loves."

Reiss does not believe Sadia is anti-Semitic in spite of her divestment efforts.

Of course Ibrahim Hooper, of Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), had to pipe in calling the critics Islamophobes.

“Anytime an American Muslim rises to a prominent position, or starts to rise to prominence, that tiny minority of ‘Islamophobes’ in our society goes into action and seeks to marginalize and disenfranchise that individual,” Hooper said.

Typical.

Source: Al Arabiya

Kansas Says No To Any Foreign Law (Including Shariah/Islamic Law)

As of July 1, Kansas will be Shariah-free, at least for the time being. Governor Sam Brownback, in spite of fierce opposition from the likes of CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) and other Muslim groups, signed Bill H Sub SB 79 which will effectively ban the use of any foreign law in Kansas government agencies or court system. The sponsors of the bill were very careful to not single out Shariah (Islamic) Law. Instead, the law says:

...courts, administrative agencies or state tribunals can't base rulings on any foreign law or legal system that would not grant the parties the same rights guaranteed by state and U.S. constitutions.

"This bill should provide protection for Kansas citizens from the application of foreign laws," said Stephen Gele, spokesman for the American Public Policy Alliance, a Michigan group promoting model legislation similar to the new Kansas law. "The bill does not read, in any way, to be discriminatory against any religion."

In a statement, also meant to reassure people of the new law's non-discriminatory nature, Brownback's spokesperson, Sherriene Jones-Sontag, stated that it

"makes it clear that Kansas courts will rely exclusively on the laws of our state and our nation when deciding cases and will not consider the laws of foreign jurisdictions."

Even though it applies to any foreign law, Muslim groups believe it is they alone who are being targeted, and will continue to challenge it. Of Brownback, CAIR's Ibrahim Hooper said,

"If he claims it has nothing to do with Shariah or Islamic law or Muslims, then he wasn't paying attention."

Arizona, Louisiana and Tennessee have similar laws, and 20 other states are considering it as well. In 2010 Oklahoma tried, and even though 70 percent of Oklahoma voters approved the amendment, it was overturned by a Federal Appeals Court last year. Their mistake was to specify Shariah, twice, in the language.
Gele says the law was put in to place to protect non-Muslim Americans from being sued, for say libel, by someone from a foreign country that does not recognize freedom of speech rights. Even though it wasn't Sharia per se, a Pennsylvania judge (Mark Martin) dismissed assault charges against  a Muslim immigrant who attacked an Atheist for wearing a Halloween outfit he deemed offensive, because of his Shariah sympathies .

And it wasn't just Republicans who supported the bill, Jones-Sontag said,

"This disturbing recent trend of activist judges relying upon the laws of other nations has been rejected by overwhelming bipartisan majorities in both the Kansas House and Senate."

Hooper claims that passing laws like this is simply "..demonizing Islam and marginalizing American Muslims"

No, Mr. Hooper, it means we want American laws for America.

Constitutionally speaking, Shariah Law (or any other foreign or religious law) has absolutely no place in our court system. Our court's should not be basing judgements on anything but U.S. law. We should not be divvying up property in a divorce suit as per Shariah Law, as in a pending case in Kansas.  Allowing Shariah in a few cases here and there will only set a terrible precedent, and soon it will become an adjunct to our U.S. laws.

Source: Huffington Post