La question de savoir si le juge Martin est musulman est maintenant débattue sur internet.
I reported that Judge Martin is a convert to Islam, based on a published reportcorroborated by the audio of the court proceeding (quoted in the published report), in which the judge seemed to assert (while lecturing the victim about his purported provocation of the assault), “I’m a Muslim, I find it offensive.”
A member of the judge’s staff yesterday stated without equivocation that Martin is not a Muslim. So why did he say otherwise in the court proceeding ? I now believe, though I’m not a hundred percent certain, that he probably did not say otherwise.
The audio sounds clear enough on YouTube streamed through your computer. But I’ve now listened to the sentence in question many times, wearing a good set of earphones with the volume amplified a bit. Based on that, it’s entirely possible that what Martin said was, “F’Im a Muslim, I’d find it offensive” — as in If I were a Muslim, I would find it offensive. The “F” sound before the word “I’m” is almost inaudible, even with good equipment ; the “d” sound that changes “I” to “I’d” is more perceptible, but you have to work a bit to hear it. »
On notera que, même s’il laisse au juge le bénéfice du doute quant au fait d’être musulman, il persiste à dire que l’affaire a été jugée « on sharia grounds »
Ici, le premier article que Mc Carty avait fait paraitre :
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/291881/sharia-court-pennsylvania-andrew-c-mccarthy
Il est intitulé « The sharia Court of Pennsylvania », et il reste intitulé ainsi après que l’auteur l’ait corrigé en barrant l’expression « and a convert to Islam » (à noter qu’il ne barre rien d’autre), ce qui donne :
« A state judge in Pennsylvania has dismissed an assault and harrassment case against a Muslim defendant who admitted attacking the victim. Magistrate Judge Mark Martin, a veteran of the war in Iraq and a convert to Islam, ruled that Talag Elbayomy’s sharia defense — what he claimed was his obligation to strike out against any insult against the prophet Mohammed — trumped the First Amendment free speech rights of the victim.
Yes, you read that correctly.
There will be much more to say about this. For now, you can find details, here, including the YouTube recording of Judge Martin hectoring the assault victim, Ernie Perce, an activist atheist who paraded last October in a “Zombi Mohammed” costume. Before dismissing the case, Martin lectured Perce about the principles of Islam and the tender sensibilities of Muslims, calling him a “doofus” for failing to appreciate same.
In 27 years of trying and analyzing legal cases, this performance is as shocking and disgraceful as anything I’ve ever seen from an American trial judge.
UPDATE : This post has been corrected because, after further review, it appears Judge Martin’s reported statement on the audio of the court proceeding, “I’m a Muslim, I find it offensive”, is actually, “F’Im a Muslim, I’d find it offensive.” For further details, see this post. »
16/03 03:40 - cistus
LeCorrecteur. Quand on connait la vie de Mahommed, le Coran et les Hadiths,on est tout sauf (...)
16/03 03:30 - cistus
Alors vous défendez les intégristes musulmans car vous vous pensez persécuter par les méchants (...)
11/03 18:14 - Denis Rezler
Non, non ce n’est pas l’islam non merci, pas du tout. C’est l’islam (...)
11/03 17:42 - cistus
Donc demain au nom du respect des uns des autres. On ne pourra plus se déguiser en Hitler au (...)
03/03 05:16 - Catherine Segurane
Discussion sur le sujet sur le site Point de Bascule : http://pointdebasculecanada.ca/actualites/100
28/02 16:42 - Babur
les bêbetes c’est toi et chani vert che pa koi l’islam vous vous en servez comme (...)
Agoravox utilise les technologies du logiciel libre : SPIP, Apache, Ubuntu, PHP, MySQL, CKEditor.
Site hébergé par la Fondation Agoravox
A propos / Contact / Mentions légales / Cookies et données personnelles / Charte de modération