Photo Credit: Road Sassy
Muslims have taken a lesson from Genghis Khan. Consider the modern self-governing Muslim region of Ningxia, China which was once the Xixia empire conquered by the Mongols in 1227. When the Mongol Ruler arrived at the great walled city of Volohoi, he convinced the city commander that Mongols would leave if the city sent out 1,000 cats and several thousand swallows. When he got them, Genghis had bits of cloth tied to their tails and set the cloth on fire. Genghis then loosed the cats and birds against the city. When they fled back they set hundreds of fires. Genghis then had no problem sacking the city.
And now, instead of attacking with swords and armies, Muslims have taken to using or rather abusing the laws of the West to turn our own laws against us. Khalid bin Mahfouz, a billionaire Egyptian who resides in Saudi Arabia, has sued more than a few dozen publishers and authors in British courts, including several Americans, whose books or writings have linked him to terrorist entities. Mahfouz has taken advantage of the UK's plaintiff-friendly libel laws to bar the publication or distribution of written works that focus on Saudi-funded terrorism.
The Midnight Sun,
NEW YORK DEFENDS FREEDOM OF SPEECH
Faced with the prospect of protracted and expensive litigation, and regardless of the merit of the works, most authors and publishers targeted have issued apologies and retractions, while some have paid fines and "contributions” to Mahfouz’s charities. When Mahfouz threatened Cambridge Press with a lawsuit for publishing Alms for Jihad by American authors Robert Collins and J. Millard Burr, the publisher immediately capitulated, offered a public apology to Mahfouz, pulped the unsold copies of the book, and took it out of print.
Shortly after the publication of Funding Evil in the United States, Mahfouz sued its author, anti-terrorism analyst and director of the American Center for Democracy, Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld, for alleging financial ties between wealthy Saudis, including Mahfouz, and terrorist entities such as al Qaeda. The allegations against Ehrenfeld were heard by the UK court despite the fact that neither Mahfouz nor Ehrenfeld resides in England and merely because approximately 23 copies of Funding Evil were sold online to UK buyers via Amazon.com.
In her book "Funding Evil, Updated: How Terrorism is Financed and How to Stop It," she identified Khalid bin Mahfouz, banker to the Saudi royal family and one of the world's richest men, as a leading terrorism financier.
Ehrenfield did not go to the UK to defend herself or to accept English libel laws over her work and consequently lost on default judgment and was then ordered:
- to pay heavy fines
- say she was sorry
burndestroy her books
which she has wisely refused to do, deciding instead to counter-sue Mahfouz in a New York State court to have the foreign judgment declared unenforceable in this country.
Sadly, Ehrenfeld lost her case because the New York court ruled it lacked jurisdiction over the Saudi resident who, the court said, did not have nexus to the state.
Fortunately for our future safety and survival:
Stop Islamic Conquest,
NY Legislature Passes Libel Terrorism Protection Act
I just received in the email a press release under the caption "RACHEL's LAW Unanimously Passed by NY Legislators; Thank you all for supporting the bill."
The release is put out by Assemblyman Rory I.Lancman (New York State Assembly, 25th District) and Sen. Dean G. Skelos (New York State Senate, 9th District). Here it is in its entirety, with one typo cleaned up:
Legislature Passes Libel Terrorism Protection Act To Protect American Journalists and Authors From Overseas Defamation Lawsuits
Albany, NY (March 31, 2008) – The New York State Legislature today unanimously passed the "Libel Terrorism Protection Act" (S.6687/A.9652), sponsored by Assemblyman Rory Lancman (D-Queens) and Senate Deputy Majority Leader Dean G. Skelos (R-Rockville Centre).
When signed into law by Governor David Paterson, this legislation will protect American journalists and authors from foreign lawsuits that infringe on their First Amendment rights.
In Ehrenfeld v. Mahfouz, New York State's highest court held that it would not protect Dr. Ehrenfeld from a British lawsuit filed by Saudi billionaire Khalid Salim Bin Mahfouz, where she was ordered to pay over $225,000 in damages and legal fees to Bin Mahfouz, as well as apologize and destroy existing copies of her books.
Dr. Ehrenfeld sought a court order in November of 2006 to protect her constitutional rights, but in a ruling with national First Amendment implications which sent legal shockwaves throughout newsrooms across America, as well as potentially undermining our ability to expose terrorism's financial and logistical support networks, the New York Court of Appeals ruled that it does not have jurisdiction to protect Americans -- on U.S. soil -- from foreign defamation judgments, which contradict the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
The Libel Terrorism Protection Act declares overseas defamation judgments unenforceable in New York unless the foreign defamation law provides, in substance and application, the same free speech protections guaranteed under our own constitution, and it gives New York residents and publishers the opportunity to have their day in court here in New York.
"This is a great day for free speech and freedom of the press, and I urge Governor Paterson to quickly sign this legislation into law. This law will protect our journalists and authors from trumped up libel charges in kangaroo courts in overseas jurisdictions which don't share our commitment to free speech and freedom of the press," said Lancman.
"This law will give New York's journalists, authors and press the protection and tools they need to continue to fearlessly expose the truth about terrorism and its enablers, and to maintain New York's place as the free speech capitol [sic - capital] of the world," Lancman concluded. Lancman's remarks on the Assembly floor are viewable here.
"The truth is a critically-important component in the War on Terror," said Senator Skelos. "This important new law will protect American authors and journalists who expose terrorist networks and their financiers. In its decision, the Court of Appeals called upon the State Legislature to revise the law. Today, we made clear that New York State will safeguard the First Amendment and these courageous writers." #####
The key element in this law, making defamation judgments unenforceable in New York unless the foreign defamation law provides the same free speech protections guaranteed under our own constitution, makes it impossible for any country to enforce their libel actions against New York citizens since no one has stronger libel laws than our own. I wonder if England likes having their judicial system called a kangaroo court? I love it.
And from The Democracy Project:
Click here to help, at the American Center For Democracy.
David Siegel, longtime editor of the New York State Law Digest, wrote in the March 12 New York Law Journal,[A]ny bill that tries to address any situation as complex as Ehrenfeld is going to pose constitutional issues. If I may be allowed a flippancy, so what! It will boil down to the classic situation in which a statute toils near the border of constitutionality and leaves it to the courts to draw the line.
Far worse than that would be to do nothing in the face of what seems to me an egregious effort, in a forum with libel laws offensive to our own and a dubious venue for the Ehrenfeld case to boot, to let an alleged libel victim pull off a coup in which he makes it too expensive for a New York writer to contest his foreign lawsuit...
For more information about Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld and her fight against Islamic Terror financing, visit Dr. Ehrenfeld's website, The American Center for Democracy. Also while there please make a contribution to support her work and her legal defense against Libel Terrorism.
Related: Here is why terrorism financiers like bin Mahfouz sue in the UK:
New York Post,
RACHEL'S LAW NY'S 'LIBEL-TOURISM' FIX
In a US court, bin Mahfouz would be forced to open his finances to scrutiny and be deposed under oath - neither of which he had to do when suing in England.
Britain has no First Amendment to protect free speech or a free press - and it has recently seen a surge in "libel tourism" - actions by wealthy, nonresident Arabs linked to terrorism who sue in England because its law strongly favors libel plaintiffs.
This attempt to silence by Libel-bashing by Libel Tourists is also called the Arab Effect in the UK:
The Libel Tourist
The Libel Tourist exposes how Saudi billionaire Khalid Bin Mafhouz exploits the British legal system and sues for libel in London even though he does not live there and the articles or books are not published in Britain. It is an outrageous abuse of the legal system," said the film's Executive Producer Rob Pfaltzgraff. Many American authors and researchers are finding themselves silenced and harassed by Mafhouz's trans-continental manipulation of libel laws. MPI's new 8-minute film The Libel Tourist is a story about how Saudi money is used to silence and control the media through the British court system.
Directed by MPI fellow Jared Lapidus, the film explains how Mahfouz filed a libel suit against Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld, author of Funding Evil; How Terrorism is Financed - and How to Stop It. The suit was not filed in the United States, where the book was published and sold, but instead in London, where Mahfouz associates ordered 23 books online. The judge ordered all copies of the book pulped, and ordered Ehrenfeld to pay the legal fees and damages, despite the fact that nothing in her book about Saudi funding of terrorism was ever disproved.
13 Jul 2007,
Muslim group loses cartoons libel case in Denmark
A Muslim group lost a libel case on Friday against the leader of a Danish anti-immigrant party who had accused its members of treason for publicising cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad.
A court ruled that Pia Kjaersgaard, leader of the Danish People’s Party (DPP), did not libel the Islamic Faith Community when she accused some of its members of treason for travelling to the Middle East to publicise a Danish newspaper’s publication of the drawings, which caused a worldwide uproar in 2006.
The court said the term "treason” was not libellous because it was used extensively in public debate. It ordered the plaintiffs, a loose network of Danish Muslim organisations which says it represents 50,000 members, to pay Kjaersgaard 40,000 Danish crowns ($7,400) in costs.