[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

"There’s a Word for the West’s Appeasement of Militant Islam"

"The Bondi Beach Jihad: Sharia Supremacism and Jew Hatred, Again"

"This Is How We Win a New Cold War With China"

"How Europe Fell Behind"

"The Epstein Conspiracy in Plain Sight"

Saint Nicholas The Real St. Nick

Will Atheists in China Starve Due to No Fish to Eat?

A Thirteen State Solution for the Holy Land?

US Sends new Missle to a Pacific ally, angering China and Russia Moscow and Peoking

DeaTh noTice ... Freerepublic --- lasT Monday JR died

"‘We Are Not the Crazy Ones’: AOC Protests Too Much"

"Rep. Comer to Newsmax: No Evidence Biden Approved Autopen Use"

"Donald Trump Has Broken the Progressive Ratchet"

"America Must Slash Red Tape to Make Nuclear Power Great Again!!"

"Why the DemocRATZ Activist Class Couldn’t Celebrate the Cease-Fire They Demanded"

Antifa Calls for CIVIL WAR!

British Police Make an Arrest...of a White Child Fishing in the Thames

"Sanctuary" Horde ASSAULTS Chicago... ELITE Marines SMASH Illegals Without Mercy

Trump hosts roundtable on ANTIFA

What's happening in Britain. Is happening in Ireland. The whole of Western Europe.

"The One About the Illegal Immigrant School Superintendent"

CouldnÂ’t believe he let me pet him at the end (Rhino)

Cops Go HANDS ON For Speaking At Meeting!

POWERFUL: Charlie Kirk's final speech delivered in South Korea 9/6/25

2026 in Bible Prophecy

2.4 Billion exposed to excessive heat

🔴 LIVE CHICAGO PORTLAND ICE IMMIGRATION DETENTION CENTER 24/7 PROTEST 9/28/2025

Young Conservative Proves Leftist Protesters Wrong

England is on the Brink of Civil War!

Charlie Kirk Shocks Florida State University With The TRUTH

IRL Confronting Protesters Outside UN Trump Meeting

The UK Revolution Has Started... Brit's Want Their Country Back

Inside Paris Dangerous ANTIFA Riots

Rioters STORM Chicago ICE HQ... "Deportation Unit" SCRAPES Invaders Off The Sidewalk

She Decoded A Specific Part In The Bible

Muslim College Student DUMBFOUNDED as Charlie Kirk Lists The Facts About Hamas

Charlie Kirk EVISCERATES Black Students After They OPENLY Support “Anti-White Racism” HEATED DEBATE

"Trump Rips U.N. as Useless During General Assembly Address: ‘Empty Words’"

Charlie Kirk VS the Wokies at University of Tennessee

Charlie Kirk Takes on 3 Professors & a Teacher

British leftist student tells Charlie Kirk facts are unfair

The 2 Billion View Video: Charlie Kirk's Most Viewed Clips of 2024

Antifa is now officially a terrorist organization.

The Greatness of Charlie Kirk: An Eyewitness Account of His Life and Martyrdom

Charlie Kirk Takes on Army of Libs at California's UCR

DR. ALVEDA KING: REST IN PEACE CHARLIE KIRK

Steven Bonnell wants to murder Americans he disagrees with

What the fagots LGBTQ really means

I watched Charlie Kirk get assassinated. This is my experience.

Elon Musk Delivers Stunning Remarks At Historic UK March (Tommy Robinson)


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

United States News
See other United States News Articles

Title: Nevada Senate hopeful Sharron Angle: Muslim law takes hold in Dearborn, other U.S. cities Read more: Nevada Senate hopeful Sharron Angle: Muslim law takes hold in Dearborn, other U.S. cities
Source: AP
URL Source: http://www.freep.com/article/201010 ... ing-over-Dearborn-other-cities
Published: Oct 8, 2010
Author: AP
Post Date: 2010-10-08 15:44:21 by go65
Keywords: None
Views: 75389
Comments: 116

LAS VEGAS — U.S. Senate candidate Sharron Angle told a crowd of supporters that the country needs to address a “militant terrorist situation” that has allowed Islamic religious law to take hold in some American cities. Her comments came at a rally of tea party supporters in the Nevada resort town of Mesquite last week after the candidate was asked about Muslims angling to take over the country, and marked the latest of several controversial remarks by the Nevada Republican.

In a recording of the rally provided to the Associated Press by the Mesquite Local News, a man is heard asking Angle : “I keep hearing about Muslims wanting to take over the United States ... on a TV program just last night, I saw that they are taking over a city in Michigan and the residents of the city, they want them out. They want them out. So, I want to hear your thoughts about that.”

Angle responds that “we’re talking about a militant terrorist situation, which I believe it isn’t a widespread thing, but it is enough that we need to address, and we have been addressing it.”

“My thoughts are these, first of all, Dearborn, Michigan, and Frankford, Texas, are on American soil, and under constitutional law. Not Sharia law. And I don’t know how that happened in the United States,” she said. “It seems to me there is something fundamentally wrong with allowing a foreign system of law to even take hold in any municipality or government situation in our United States.”

Dearborn has a thriving Muslim community. It was not immediately clear why Angle singled out Frankford, Texas, a former town that was annexed into Dallas around 1975.

Responding to the same question, she also drew comparisons between the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and the Nazi Holocaust. She said the property owners behind the proposed Islamic community center near ground zero should move it in deference to the people who died there.

“There was, in Auschwitz, I think it was Auschwitz, it was at least a prisoner of war camp, where the Catholic Church owned some property and they were going to build a church there. They had every right to do it but they stepped aside and said, no, we are going to allow the Jewish people to make a monument because they lost lives,” she said. “They had a responsibility to be sensitive to what had happened there and it is exactly the same thing as 9/11. Ground zero, we have a responsibility to be sensitive to the loss of a nation, to the loss of families, to the loss of life that happened there.”

Click for Full Text!

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 98.

#6. To: go65 (#0)

Hamtramek is a city close to Dearborn. When I grew up it was basically a Polish area. Now they broadcast the Muslim call to prayer 5 times a day.

jwpegler  posted on  2010-10-08   16:53:35 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: jwpegler (#6)

Define "they" please. The town or the mosque?

war  posted on  2010-10-08   21:10:55 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: war, bad eye (#21)

Define "they" please. The town or the mosque?

The government.

The city council had to pass an amendment to the noise ordinance to allow the mosques to do this.

These call to prayers are LOUD and they are very disruptive to families, sleeping babies, office workers, etc.

Muslims don't care about the disruptive nature of the noise, because they are required to stop what they are doing and pray 5 times a day when they hear this.

It seems to me that this is nothing more than trespassing and property owners should be able to sue the mosques and city to stop it. Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way.

jwpegler  posted on  2010-10-09   11:22:36 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: jwpegler (#26)

The city council had to pass an amendment to the noise ordinance to allow the mosques to do this.

You're aware of the first amendment, aren't you?

Which do you believe would prevail?

A city noise ordinance that abridges religious practice or religious practice?

war  posted on  2010-10-09   12:04:11 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: war (#28)

You're aware of the first amendment, aren't you?

Ha Ha

You're all in favor of that when it suits, you, aren't you, Abdul.

no gnu taxes  posted on  2010-10-09   12:12:45 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: no gnu taxes (#30) (Edited)

Typical response from you. Give me an example when I have opposed it.

Thanks.

war  posted on  2010-10-09   12:14:06 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: war (#31)

You favor free speech for liberals only. You don't think people who own a business have free speech. Even thought the constitution clearly say no nada no laws prohibiting free speech. You should start at dictionary.com and look up the word no. You don't know what "no" means.

A K A Stone  posted on  2010-10-09   12:19:42 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#34. To: A K A Stone (#32)

You don't think people who own a business have free speech.

Liar.

Ownership has nothing to do with speech. The day that I can invite Exxon to dinner in my home is the day i will accept the fact that a business is a person.

I don't BELIEVE that the business has a right to speech.

war  posted on  2010-10-09   12:42:51 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: war (#34)

I don't BELIEVE that the business has a right to speech.

What does NO mean? NO LAW RESTRICTING FREE SPEECH.

Dude business don't talk so of course they don't have free speech. When you go to the drive thru at McDonalds that speaker isn't the building talking. It is an individual hooked up through a speaker. So you are right businesses don't have free speech and even if they did they can' talk. But individuals do have free speech. Even if they work for a company.

This is an example of you being dishonest and disingenious just to push your restarted agenda.

Remember any law passed that said no free speech would be a constitutional violation.

NO LAW...

Time for you to quit spinning.

A K A Stone  posted on  2010-10-09   13:48:29 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#42. To: A K A Stone (#40)

Again...slowly...businesses do NOT engage in speech, they engage in commerce. A business has NO rights. Any law regulating business is not constrained by the Bill of Rights.

just to push your restarted agenda.

Thanks for summing yourself up for me...

war  posted on  2010-10-09   13:58:06 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#43. To: war (#42)

Read the constitution you fucking dumb ass. They aren't allowed to pass any laws restricting free speech. NO LAW. Address that asswipe. Buildings don't talk moron. Quit arguing stuff you know isn't true. Fucking idiot.

A K A Stone  posted on  2010-10-09   13:59:40 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#45. To: A K A Stone (#43)

Read the constitution you fucking dumb ass.

A business cannot speak.

Use common sense.

war  posted on  2010-10-09   14:01:02 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#47. To: war (#45)

What does "no law" mean?

A K A Stone  posted on  2010-10-09   14:05:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#48. To: A K A Stone (#47)

It means that there isn't a law.

What does this mean:

Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech...

And what good is it to something that cannot speak?

That campaign law did not stop any PERSON from speaking.

war  posted on  2010-10-09   14:09:39 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#50. To: war (#48)

How should they stop these "businesses" from speaking?

A K A Stone  posted on  2010-10-09   14:13:54 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#51. To: A K A Stone (#50)

How should they stop these "businesses" from speaking?

Does a piece of paper really walk and talk in your world?

mininggold  posted on  2010-10-09   14:19:41 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#53. To: mininggold, A K A Stone, war (#51)

mininggold: "Does a piece of paper really walk and talk in your world"?

war: "I don't BELIEVE that the business has a right to speech".

I know there are other's like you, but none so visable as the two of you are today. You are a pair of the most useless, worthless, the most IGNORANT waist of skin and air I have ever seen...but like I said, there are others.

People like you are so g-damn focused on 'us against them', that you either don't know what precious gifts you have, your freedoms and liberties, or you'd go out of your way and throw them away, just to piss off someone you don't agree with on other issues.....

YOU JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU HAVE, OR UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU HAVE, AND HOW TO USE THEM....

But that isn't even the worst of it, your kind don't want to know, you don't want to learn, and pass these things on to your future generations, you'd rather get the best of some faceless, nameless, anonymous poster than protect the future of your children. JMHO!

BILL OF RIGHTS: Amendment I

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances".

Murron  posted on  2010-10-09   14:58:36 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#60. To: Murron (#53)

BILL OF RIGHTS: Amendment I

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances".

Are you into the ethyl alcohol now? It will cause hallucinations much like your tirade. A corporation is not the human individual mentioned in the Bill of Rights even if your dreams tell you different. Giving corporations these rights dilutes the rights of real human beings but I wouldn't expect you to think this far ahead.

mininggold  posted on  2010-10-09   15:58:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#67. To: mininggold (#60)

Are you into the ethyl alcohol now? It will cause hallucinations much like your tirade. A corporation is not the human individual mentioned in the Bill of Rights even if your dreams tell you different. Giving corporations these rights dilutes the rights of real human beings but I wouldn't expect you to think this far ahead.

Tell us wise one how the govt would stop people who are members of a corporation from speaking freely. Tell us o wise one.

A K A Stone  posted on  2010-10-09   18:52:51 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#91. To: A K A Stone (#67)

Tell us wise one how the govt would stop people who are members of a corporation from speaking freely. Tell us o wise one.

Tell us oh wise one why our FF didn't pick up on this? Many owned businesses and yet none of their businesses are on record as having voted or otherwise exersized their rights as citizens. I wonder why?

mininggold  posted on  2010-10-09   22:09:37 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#92. To: mininggold (#91)

Tell us oh wise one why our FF didn't pick up on this? Many owned businesses and yet none of their businesses are on record as having voted or otherwise exersized their rights as citizens. I wonder why?

Ok I will answer your question then you answer mine.

No businesses back then voted and no businesses today vote.

The founders didn't have to pick up on anything. They made the constitution and it says free speech period.

Your argument is irrelevant and it doesn't matter if anyone on record (you made that up anyway you haven't read every document) the constitution says no laws against free speech. Anything they would want to do would require a law. And it says "no law". So it would require a constitutional amendment.

This isn't debatable the language in the constitution is perfectly I repeat perfectly clear.

Now you may disagree and think it is wrong. But you can't say it is constitutionally incorrect and be telling the truth.

A K A Stone  posted on  2010-10-09   22:16:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#93. To: A K A Stone (#92)

No businesses back then voted and no businesses today vote.

But the SCOTUS says they now can, so it's just a matter of time.

mininggold  posted on  2010-10-09   22:26:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#95. To: mininggold (#93)

But the SCOTUS says they now can, so it's just a matter of time.

What is wrong with that sentence?

Here I will tell you. You said they can now. Then you said it's just a matter of time. Self contradiction and you probably can't even see it.

So show me where it says a business can vote.

Or maybe your point is that business owners shouldn't be able to vote because they own a corporation.

A K A Stone  posted on  2010-10-10   8:52:25 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#98. To: A K A Stone (#95) (Edited)

What is wrong with that sentence?

Here I will tell you. You said they can now. Then you said it's just a matter of time. Self contradiction and you probably can't even see it.

So show me where it says a business can vote.

Or maybe your point is that business owners shouldn't be able to vote because they own a corporation

How do you know they haven't? Have you investigated every election to find out? The point of the decision is the giving of corporations the same rights as individual private citizens. Do you vote? Hint hint, it's the ultimate expression of free speech.

Or maybe you think because they are owners of a corporation(s) they should be able to vote multiple times. Like at stockholder meetings.

mininggold  posted on  2010-10-10   10:55:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 98.

        There are no replies to Comment # 98.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 98.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com