SHARIA LAW at work in Arizona: Dad accused in 'honor killing' will not face death penalty

 NOTE: Honor killings are premeditated murder. So why aren't they treated as premeditated murder? A blogger at the Arizona Republic exposes why. His blog is about the Idealogy of Islam. Link is in the title of  this blog if you click on it.-- Linda

http://www.azcentral.com/community/glendale/articles/2010/02/19/20100219honor-killing.html

Dad accused in 'honor killing' will not face death penalty

by Dustin Gardiner - Feb. 19, 2010 12:00 AM
The Arizona Republic

A Glendale man accused of killing his daughter in an "honor killing" will not face the death penalty.

After sparring with the suspect's defense attorney over its death-penalty-review process, the Maricopa County Attorney's Office has said it will not seek death for Faleh Almaleki, 49.

The Iraqi immigrant is accused of killing his daughter, 20-year-old Noor Almaleki, for being "too Westernized."

Police say he used his Jeep Cherokee to run down his daughter and another woman in a Peoria parking lot Oct. 20. Noor later died of her injuries.

Almaleki is charged with first-degree murder, aggravated assault and two counts of leaving the scene of a serious accident. He has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

The decision not to seek the death penalty comes after Almaleki's attorney, Billy Little, a public defender, asked a judge to take special precautions to ensure the County Attorney's Office wouldn't wrongly seek the death penalty because Almaleki is a Muslim. [NOTE: This is in accord with Sharia law which prohibits a non-Moslem from killing a Moslem for any reason. ]

Little requested that the office make public the process it uses to determine whether to seek capital punishment.

"An open process provides some level of assurance that there is no appearance that a Christian is seeking to execute a Muslim for racial, political, religious or cultural beliefs," Little wrote, referring to County Attorney Andrew Thomas' Christian faith. [NOTE: And so, once again, Moslems are being given special protection just in order to avoid the appearance of prejudice. From now on, it will be clear that the death penalty in Arizona applies only to non-Moslems!!!]

Laura Reckart, a county prosecutor, responded that Little's concern about the "supposed bias" of the office's death-penalty-review process was "without legitimate factual or legal basis." [NOTE: True enough. So, why is the prosecutor's office backing down???]

She wrote that the state can seek the death penalty for any person convicted of first-degree murder if it can prove the existence of at least one aggravating factor, not because of religion.

However, the debate stopped there. On Tuesday, Reckart filed a motion indicating prosecutors would not seek the death penalty. [NOTE:  WHY???]

Mike Scerbo, a spokesman for the County Attorney's Office, declined to comment on the decision.

Prosecutors said Almaleki has admitted killing his daughter because she disgraced the family by not following traditional Iraqi or Muslim values. [NOTE: More sloppy, politically correct reporting from the Arizona Republic. What are "Iraqi values"??? We are talking ONLY about Muslim values. Iraqi Christians do not do this sort of thing.]

They liken the case to honor killings that occur in the Middle East, Africa and other parts of the world. In tribal societies where the practice occurs, male family members feel they must kill a rebellious relative who shames them by not adhering to traditional values. [NOTE: Of the more than 5000 "honor killings a year, according to the United Nations report, the vast, vast majority are committed by Moslems. These Moslems are not members of "tribes" with "traditional values". They are adherents of Islam, with Islamic values.]

Noor had reportedly married a man in Iraq and returned to Arizona to live with a boyfriend and his mother in Surprise, police said. [NOTE: These are violations of sacred Islamic Sharia law which permits, sometimes even requires death as a punishment. Sharia law specifically exempts parents from the death penalty if they kill their children!]

Friday, February 19, 2010 at 07:59 AM

Well in the Desert

I thought I had a well that was deep and true.
The water was very sweet and refreshing.

I tried to take good care of it.
Then one morning I woke up and
The water had disappeared.
All that remained was shifting sand.

Maybe just a mirage in the desert.

By Linda K. Light 

Apartment Refugee

Refugee from my own home

Clashing disharmony all around

Ever seeking a quiet moment

Only finding it in stranger places.

by Linda K. Light

Blood Everywhere

Blood, blood everywhere 

and not a drop of compassion anywhere.
"Party Hearty!!" the wolves cry
as they suck the last bit of sustenance away.

Linda K. Light

Paying It Forward

There was a movie that came out several years ago called “Paying It Forward”. It was about an idealistic boy around ten years old in elementary school. His teacher gave the class a project to do that involved doing random acts of kindness for strangers without asking for anything in return, and then reporting back on what happened. This young boy took it seriously and began doing that. Soon, other strangers were helping other strangers because they had been helped, asking them only to “pay it forward' by helping someone else that they did not know. Soon the whole city began to change with people doing random acts of kindness all over. It even made the daily newspaper. In the end this young boy gave his life literally by “paying it forward” by helping a fellow classmate who was being constantly bullied by this gang. The gang leader pulled out a knife and stabbed the boy to death. It happened on school grounds. The teacher saw it and arrived in time to break it up and get help, but the helpful boy died in his arms, saying, “Just paying it forward”. Well I had a real experience this evening.

I was shopping for groceries late in the evening and had finished around 9 p.m. I sat down with my several bags of groceries at a local bus stop. It suddenly occurred to me that maybe the last bus had gone by because of it being a holiday and they were on a Sunday schedule, which means the buses do not run as late as they do during a regular weekday schedule. I had forgotten this when I left my place. I called my son on my cell phone and had him check the bus schedule. Sure enough, I had missed the last bus by a half hour. There was another man also waiting at the bus stop. He looked to be a business man in his dark suit and white dress shirt. I went over and told him that the last bus had already gone by and why. I was thinking about if I even had enough money to take a cab home, but never said anything to this guy. The man asked where I was going, and I told him. Turned out it was about half the distance of where he was headed further on, so he asked if I wanted to split a cab fare with him. I said sure, but that I need to go to an ATM to get some cash because I didn't have any on me. He had to do the same, so we agreed to meet back at the bus stop in a couple of minutes. He volunteered to call the cab with his cell phone, so I agreed and we split. Turned out we both used the same bank and there was an ATM right behind us that we both used. The cab arrived about five minutes later. He offered to let me sit in the back of the cab with all my bags and he take the front seat beside the driver. I said that that was ok with me. Well, the driver had stuff piled in the seat beside him, so that was out, but I just stacked my 3 bags around me and left the side open for the other guy. We all managed to fit in the back seat.

My stop was first. I had told the driver an intersection a couple of blocks away from my place so as to keep us going in a straight line and not to inconvenience the gentleman sharing the fare with me. The driver let me out at the corner gas station. I told them here was fine that I could walk the couple of blocks to my home from there. They both graciously offered to take me all the way, but I said I was fine, that I did not wish to inconvenience the other passenger. I asked how much I owed the driver and had my wallet out to pay, when the businessman said that it was only a couple of dollars and that he would take care of it. He routinely took the cab this distance when he got off work late at night to his home sometimes about another mile away, so he was familiar with the cost. I graciously thanked him, utterly astounded, and he said, “Just pay it forward. Just help somebody else.” I laughed in joyous understanding and said that I would. I left the cab in a daze and started my trek home with grocery bags in hand.

God bless you, kind stranger.

Is Modern Israel a Fulfillment of Prophecy?

I fully agree with the ideas and theology expressed in this article. I am wholeheartedly against replacement theology.-- Linda L.

 
By Mark Ellick

Is modern-day Israel the fulfillment of prophecy? In this article we will consider and evaluate various positions and determine whether it is or not.

A Closer Look at Replacement Theology

What is "replacement theology"? This theology claims that because of the Jewish people's disobedience and general rejection of Messiah, God has rejected Israel and replaced it with the church. It asserts that the church is the "New Israel," and states that the promises made to Israel in the Tenach (Old Testament) have been transferred to the church. Replacement theology also holds that the prophecies in the Tenach regarding a re-gathering of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and the reestablishment of Israel as a nation should be interpreted allegorically, not literally. Thus, replacement theology argues that modern-day Israel is not a fulfillment of prophecy.

However, God's promise that Abraham's descendants (the Jewish people) would possess the land God promised to Abraham is initially found in a covenant. The Abrahamic Covenant is unconditional, meaning that its fulfillment does not depend on the obedience of Abraham or his descendants. Rather, its fulfillment depends solely on the faithfulness of God. The Abrahamic Covenant is mentioned a number of times in Genesis. Two of these are particularly relevant to our study:

"And the LORD said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him: ‘Lift your eyes now and look from the place where you are-northward, southward, eastward, and westward; for all the land which you see I give to you and your descendants forever.'" (Genesis 13:14-15).
"And I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your descendants after you in their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and your descendants after you. Also I give to you and your descendants after you the land in which you are a stranger, all the land of Canaan, as an everlasting possession; and I will be their God." (Genesis 17:7-8) 

Neither of these passages place any conditions on Abraham or his descendants, and it is in these passages that God promises Abraham, "all the land which you see I give to you and your descendants forever." God, who never lies, promised Abraham that his descendants would possess the land forever - and He will keep that promise!

The prophetic Scriptures concerning Israel's future are founded on the promises contained in the Abrahamic Covenant. Because the promises in the Abrahamic Covenant are unconditional, these same promises found in the prophetic Scriptures must also be unconditional. This includes the promises concerning the re-gathering of the Jewish people to Israel that they might possess the land.

Allegorical Or Literal?

Replacement theology's claim that the prophecies concerning Israel's future should be interpreted allegorically is also incorrect. The promises God made to Abraham were clearly literal. For example, God's promise that He would make Abraham a great nation (Genesis 12:2) has been literally fulfilled. Likewise, the covenant promises concerning Israel's future - and the prophecies that elaborate on these promises - will be literally fulfilled as well. Additionally, the prophecies regarding the reestablishment of Israel are part of a group of prophecies concerning the second coming of Messiah. Because the prophecies concerning Messiah's first coming were fulfilled literally, consistent interpretation dictates that the prophecies concerning His second coming - and the reestablishment of Israel - should be interpreted literally as well.

Conclusion
We may conclude that the teachings of replacement theology are not the most literal interpretations of the teachings of Scripture, and replacement theology must be carefully scrutinized. The covenant promises made to Israel still apply to Israel, and they will be fulfilled literally. This includes the possession of the land of Israel by the Jewish people.

Israel And The Prophetic Scriptures

Let's now consider one of the prophetic Scriptures that elaborates on the promises made to the Fathers concerning the land.

"For I will take you from among the nations, gather you out of all countries, and bring you into your own land. Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols. I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them. Then you shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; you shall be My people, and I will be your God." (Ezekiel 36:24-28)

In this passage, Ezekiel prophesies that the Jewish people will be gathered from the nations among which they have been scattered and return to live in the land promised to their forefathers. This prophecy records, far in advance, the fulfillment of God's promise to Abraham concerning the Land. There is neither a literary nor a biblical reason to interpret this prophecy allegorically. Its fulfillment is, as Ezekiel clearly indicates, literal.

Two Re-Gatherings

We have established that the promises God made concerning the land of Israel still apply to Jewish people and will be fulfilled literally. Now we will determine whether modern-day Israel is a fulfillment of these promises.

There are some who say that while it is true that God will restore the Jewish people to the Land, it is possible that there may be a number of "non-prophetic" re-gatherings preceding the prophetic re-gathering. According to this view, modern-day Israel may be a work of man, not a work of God - and therefore not necessarily a fulfillment of prophecy.

However, according to the Scriptures, there are to be only two re-gatherings of Israel. This is confirmed by the prophet Isaiah:

It shall come to pass in that day that the Lord shall set His hand again the second time to recover the remnant of His people who are left, from Assyria and Egypt, from Pathros and Cush, from Elam and Shinar, from Hamath and the islands of the sea. He will set up a banner for the nations, and will assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth. (Isaiah 11:11-12)

Isaiah chapter 11, which contains the prophecy of a second re-gathering, describes it as a final and permanent re-gathering. Scripture thus indicates that there will be precisely two re-gatherings - no more and no less.
One view of this passage asserts that the modern-day re-gathering and reestablishment of Israel is the first re-gathering, a re-gathering in unbelief for judgment - and that a second re-gathering in belief for blessing will follow this first re-gathering. However, this view does not account for a previous re-gathering: the return of the Jewish people to their homeland after the Babylonian captivity. This appears to contradict Isaiah 11, which calls for precisely two re-gatherings.

A different view of this passage, which accounts for precisely two re-gatherings, asserts that the first re-gathering took place when the seventy-year Babylonian captivity prophesied by Jeremiah ended (Jeremiah 25:8-11), and the Jewish people returned to their homeland (Ezra chapters 1 and 2).

According to this view, since the prophecy concerning the first re-gathering has been fulfilled, the modern day re-gathering of the Jewish people and the reestablishment of Israel as a nation must be the second and final re-gathering and a fulfillment of prophecy. This view is consistent with the promises made in the Abrahamic Covenant and the prophetic Scriptures based on that covenant.

Based on our study of the Abrahamic Covenant and the prophetic Scriptures, we may conclude that God has declared unconditionally that Israel would one day be reestablished - and God has been faithful in keeping this promise. The prophetic Scriptures, properly interpreted, indicate that modern-day Israel is indeed a fulfillment of prophecy.

* The views above are those of the author.

Mark Ellick serves with Chosen People Ministries in Irvine, California

http://www.chosenpeople.com/main/index.php/prophecy/261-is-modern-israel-a-fulfillment-of-prophecy

A New Day

The veil was thin this morning.
Doves were cooing
As the sun peaked thru
The billowing grey clouds,
Full of promise of rain to come.
Yahweh's children were up and about
Greeting their Father
As a new day arose.

Linda K. Light