4,424 comments posted · 43 followers · following 26
"I am saying that living with a man, taking care of him and being the primary voice he hears every day gives us unique influence."
It's not like that in Islam. Women are to be segregated with the children, away from the men.
Larry David should have peed on Nihad Awad. Even most Muslims could get down with that.
Cornelius, Egypt's idea of 'cold peace' means not only not upholding a single term of the Camp David Accords, but creating, funding, and arming Hamas. Oh, Mubarak wants Egypt's creation out of Egypt, but there's a perpetual one-way flow through the Sinai, not to mention all the state visits with Hamas leaders who leave armed with suitcases full of American jizya. The military option would have never been open to anyone but sorry little Syria, who wasn't much back during the Shah's reign in Iran, and maybe Iraq, who wouldn't have tried it without a few semi-intimidating nations to go along with. What do 'diplomatic relations with Israel' even mean? Not much. Israel needs nothing from Arab pseudo-nations. Never has. That pseudo-diplomacy benefits Egypt and Egypt only by making Mubarak seem semi-legitimate so he can secure extra jizya and have diplomatic relations with real countries. When Egypt is your peace broker in the region you're better off just not dealing with anyone in the region. That sort of diplomacy serve to legitimate an illegitimate regime with zero benefit to Israel.
The Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act permits suits against foreign governments for torts which cause injury in the United States. The plaintiffs urged that killing and injuring Americans and destroying their property by the terrorists on 9/11 in NY, Pennsylvania and Washington DC, fit within this definition, and that those who provided them with support should be thus held liable.
The Justice Department, relying on a theory rejected by both the district court and the Second Circuit (as well as all other appellate cases which considered this issue), has taken the position that not only does the injury have to take place in the United States, AND not only does the direct cause of the injury have to take place in the US (e.g., the planes striking the WTC), BUT that all actions (e.g, the funding) have to take place in the US.
Here is the portion of the statue (28 USC Sec. 1605(a)) —- you decide:
a) A foreign state shall not be immune from the jurisdiction of courts of the United States or of the States in any case–
(5) not otherwise encompassed in paragraph (2) above [COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES], in which money damages are sought against a foreign state for personal injury or death, or damage to or loss of property, occurring in the United States and caused by the tortious act or omission of that foreign state or of any official or employee of that foreign state while acting within the scope of his office or employment; except this paragraph shall not apply to–
(A) any claim based upon the exercise or performance or the failure to exercise or perform a discretionary function regardless of whether the discretion be abused, or
(B) any claim arising out of malicious prosecution, abuse of process, libel, slander, misrepresentation, deceit, or interference with contract rights;
Again, where does it say that the tortious act or omission has to take place within the United States?
I'm off to meet Hugh now. And you're not.