Orange Coast College Doubles Down on Dumb

Gary Fouse

Leave it to poor old Orange Coast College to dig the hole deeper after being being nationally embarrassed by Professor Olga-Perez-Stable Cox's videotaped classroom statements referring to the election of Donald Trump as "an act of terrorism". After making the situation worse by trying to suspend the student who produced the tape and harassing the College Republicans, OCC has now proclaimed Prof. Cox as the Faculty Member of the Year!

"Ah  wunnerful, ah wunnerful, ah."


This reminds me of when Obama got the Nobel Peace Prize just for being elected president in 2008.

Is Sharia Law Compatible With US Law?

Gary Fouse

This article first appeared in New English Review.

Currently, many states are attempting to pass-or have passed- legislation which would preclude other forms of law being incorporated into state law. To be specific, the particular law they are trying to avoid is Islamic law-sharia (though they must avoid specifically targeting Islamic law as opposed to those of other religions). Correspondingly, Islamic leaders in the US are trying to combat this trend and prevent said laws from being passed. On one front, Muslim leaders in the US are involved in a public relations drive to convince non-Muslims that sharia law is perfectly compatible with the US Constitution and US law. It is not, and it is very easy to prove it.

Sharia in Arabic means, "straight path". In the early time of Islam it referred to the straight path to water, life's necessity. Since Islam is designed to guide virtually every aspect of the believer's life, sharia is quite detailed. Its two main sources are the Qu'ran and the Sunnah (sayings, actions and approvals of the Prophet Mohammad). Its interpretation through the centuries has come from the learned Islamic scholars.

Much of sharia is benign and related to principles of how one worships, marriage, divorce, financial rights etc. There are also civil and criminal aspects and punishments for criminal violations. Aside from the obvious discriminatory details regarding women and non-Muslims, it is in the area of criminal punishments that sharia is most problematic.

This past weekend, I attended a day-long seminar presented by the (Islamic) Institute of Knowledge in Diamond Bar, California on the topic of sharia. This was the third such event I have attended. While the very capable presenters explained sharia well and defended it, they  included an explanation of the most problematical part of sharia, that is hudud sharia, which covers fixed punishments for "crimes against God". According to what was presented, there are 5 "crimes" included in hudud. (Hudud is plural of hadd, which means "boundary" in Arabic.)

1 Unlawful sex-which may be adultery involving married people having sex outside of marriage or fornication involving unmarried people. According to the Qu'ran, the latter is punishable by 100 lashes, and the former by stoning.

2 Accusing someone falsely of unlawful sex, which is punishable by 80 lashes.

3 Theft, which is punishable by cutting off the hand.

4 Drinking alcohol- 80 lashes.

5 Highway robbery, which is considered a more serious form of theft especially if it involves death. This form of robbery is punishable by death.

What the presenters attempted to do was quickly point out that the standards of proof for these crimes are extremely high to the point of making conviction and administering the above punishments almost impossible. For example, the adultery charge requires confession and 4 male witnesses (emphasis mine).

I could stop right here with my thesis that sharia is not compatible with US laws, but there is so much more. We have not even gotten to the "crimes" of apostasy and blasphemy yet. We were told Saturday that apostasy and blasphemy are not covered under hudud.  Well and good, but they are still out there. The subject of apostasy really only came up due to audience questions (mine), which had to be written on note cards and passed to the front hopefully to be selected. We were told that in a non-Muslim country, the decision to leave Islam is between that person and God. In a Muslim country, it was explained that the apostate would be given 4 chances to repent and return to Islam before any sentence could be carried out. It was also explained that even in Muslim lands, if a person left Islam quietly, they would be left alone, but if they "undermine the state or stir up trouble", they would be guilty of treason and the death penalty would apply. (I was told once by a Saudi lawyer that in his country, an accused apostate gets 3 chances to repent before being executed.)

So as not to engage in overkill, let's cut to the chase. It is irrelevant whether or not the standards of proof are ridiculously high. It is irrelevant whether or not a person gets the chance to repent. What is relevant is that in our country, we don't even have laws against drinking (adults), adultery or fornication. Nor do we have laws against apostasy or blasphemy. Yet under sharia law, these are considered crimes and merit either the death penalty or lashing. We must also reject any law that discriminates against women or against those who do not belong to a particular faith-in this case Islam. Furthermore, in modern (nation-state) times, treason is considered betraying one's nation-not one's religion.

These aspects of sharia are clearly not compatible with our values and our laws. Every person living in the US-Muslim or non-Muslim- is entitled to enjoy every single protection that our constitution offers. Properly drafted, laws that preclude any outside law (including sharia) from being considered or recognized in our own laws should be passed.

The Face of Angela Merkel's Insane Immigration Policy

Gary Fouse

Hat tip Vlad Tepes


This is the Face of Angela Merkel's insane immigration policy. His name is Domenico, and he is one of the victims of yesterday's axe attack by a Kosovar asylum seeker at the main train station in Duesseldorf.

Below is the translation of what his mother has put on social media:

This is my son Domenico in the intensive care of the University Clinic…
Amok at the Düsseldorf Main Train Station
He was hit in the head with an axe, from behind… Surgery took Long
The media is downplaying it all
It is terrible and incomprehensible
You are welcome to share this….
I Love You my Son


As usual, the mother is correct. The media is downplaying it all. The attacker is described as mentally ill. The police have reported that they have given him his medicine which he had neglected to take. What's next-his release? It seems every time an attack happens, the attacker is described as mentally disturbed. Perhaps, that is the case here, but aside from any mental imbalance, what was the motive for this attack?

Domenico is just another victim not only of Merkel's policy, but the policy of most all the Western Europe governments, as well as the policy of the EU. I guess the Europeans just have to get used to the new multi-culturalism and "cultural enrichment" that the left celebrates.

Academic Crybabies

Gary Fouse

Hat tip Campus Watch

In the world of academia, academic freedom is a concept that professors only apply to themselves and their particular beliefs not to the beliefs of those with whom they disagree. In the world of academia, to disagree with a professor and criticize what they "profess" is an attack, a threat, something that puts their jobs and their very lives in danger. As an example, we now have what I will call the "Gang of 63". When they learned recently that there was a group compiling a list of names of professors students should avoid (if they don't want to be exposed to what PW calls "a radical agenda in lecture halls"), they cried foul-then publicly requested their names be added as some sort of badge of honor. They are accusing Campus Watch of slandering them and threatening them with violence.


In the interest of full disclosure, I am not an employee of Campus Watch though some of my articles have been cross-posted there on occasion. Nor am I affiliated with Professor Watch. Nor did I have any part in putting that list together. Having said that, I am familiar with several of the professors whose names appear on the list and have interacted with some of them. Hell, Mark LeVine even accused me of being "slanderous" when I called him an anti-Israel activist to his face in front of an audience. Talk about trying to have it both ways!

The reason you see the image above with the Palestinian flag attached to the crybaby's face is that virtually all of the names I recognize are anti-Israel activists. Here is an example of these "scholars" hysterical language:

"The newly inaugurated U.S. administration has created an atmosphere of violence, racism, Islamophobia, and anti-Semitism. A less discussed aspect of these attacks is on academic freedom. The 2016 election has taken to new extremes the threats to academic freedom. We can see a preview of what this administration intends in their response to the recent cancellations of "talks" by professional provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos, who engages in public, cruel harassment of students who are critical of his extremist views, from the lectern through trigger cameras that project students' images without their consent. He then proceeds to taunt them and incite actions against them on the basis of their physical appearance, race, sexuality, and gender. Instead of condemning this kind of incitement, President Trump has threatened to withhold federal funding from UC Berkeley after Yiannopoulos' "talk" was cancelled at UC Berkeley and other UC campuses."

In the interest of full disclosure, they might have said that Yiannopoulos' "talk" at Berkeley was cancelled due to a riot.

Then there is this scholarly gem:

"This watchlist echoes Horowitz's project, Campus Watch."

As pointed out very effectively by CW, they are not affiliated with David Horowitz or his Freedom Center. If they can't get that right, what does that say about their scholarship in the classroom?

But I am going to put this "California Scholars for Academic Freedom" on my own list. In fact, I am going to give them their own link  at Fousesquawk. Henceforth, you will find them under the heading: Fiction Section.

Carnival in Germany

Gary Fouse

Hat tip Vlad Tepes

A German took the below-linked video in Duesseldorf during Rosenmontag (Rose Monday). The police are everywhere. The narration is in German with English sub-titles.


And why so many police? Ask Angela Merkel. It is to protect the Germans from the hundreds of thousands of low-lifes, criminals, rapists, and possible terrorists that she let into the country.

"Wir schaffen dass." (We can do this)