Guest Column: Khizr Khan specializes in visa programs accused of selling U.S. citizenship

2 08 2016
Advertisements




UPDATE: HR 569- Special Status for Muslims Bill

7 01 2016

***LATEST UPDATE BELOW as of Sept 10,  2016***
(Scroll down to see latest sponsor update)

Last December I published “Freedom of Speech: The Continued Assault on America’s Most Precious Liberty” which discussed the dangerous aspects of the bill giving special status/protection to one religious group.  I published the entire text of the bill (without the list of sponsors)  in that article- If you have not read it yet, you can see it here — https://definingthenarrative.com/2015/12/31/freedom-of-speech-the-continued-assault-on-americas-most-precious-liberty/

According to GovTrack.us  the House Resolution which will give Muslims special status against “violence, bigotry, and hateful rhetoric” has gained many new co-Sponsors, all Democrats.  This makes 145 co-Sponsors, all Democrats.

The bill is still in Judiciary Committee, which is comprised of 23 Republicans (including Louis Gomhert, Trey Gowdy, and Steve King) and 16 Democrats (including Hank Johnson, who thought the island of Guam would capsize with so many military personnel and equipt, and Sheila Jackson Lee).

Here is a link to the entire text of the bill in pdf itself so you can see the entire list of the original sponsors and download for your own use:  https://ingrafted.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/hr-569-us.pdf

This bill is an American Muslim version of UN Resolution 16/18, a bill pushed by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) which represents the 56 Islamic nations around the world.  Hillary Clinton stumped for it at Ankara, Turkey, while Sec of State.

HR 569 specifically names Muslims as a special class, worthy of protection from “bigotry or hateful rhetoric”.  “Hateful rhetoric” is a subjective term and can mean anything, including criticism of Islam, and in the Shari’a “bigotry” can be something as simple as rejection of Islam itself, which is an offense to Muslims according to the Sharia, and justifies jihad.  We are seeing the results of this manifested in European countries today.  I do not ever recall a House Resolution which gives special preference to Jews, Christians, Buddhists, or any other religious group.  It is outrageous!

We hear the propaganda from the media on a daily basis about how Muslims are the most persecuted group in America.  The simple fact is, of all religious groups, Jews are still the most victimized.  The FBI reports 62% of anti-Religion hate crimes are against Jews, compared to 11% against Muslims.  While that FBI report is 2012, the latest available in a quick search, the latest data gathered by a media study group shows an uptick in post terror attack of about 17% in the next few weeks, but dropping back to 10% higher a year later.  That would increase the overall anti-Muslim instances to about 12-13% of all anti-religious hate crimes are against Muslims while not changing the 62% against Jews appreciably.

This pro-Muslim bill is most likely being peddled by Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Muslim Brotherhood organization who has had incredible influence on the Democrat Party members and some Republicans.  They have free access to the White House and continue to have “preferred” status at WH events.  CAIR is still listed as a “co-conspirator” in the 2008 terrorist funding trial, where several of its members were convicted and are currently in prison.   The indictments ceased when Mr. Obama took office.

Contact your Representative as well as the House Judiciary Committee members which you will find at this link:  http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/committee-members .

Tell them to stop HR 569 in Committee.

New Post

******ATTENTION*****

LATEST UPDATE as of 9/10/16:  Most recent Additional Co-sponsor:  Garamendi, John [D-CA3] (joined May 23, 2016)

Updated 5/17/2016  NEWEST Additional Co-sponsors are:
Foster, Bill [D-IL11]  Capuano, Michael [D-MA7]  Adams, Alma [D-NC12]  Graham, Gwen [D-FL2]   The Resolution now has 144 cosponsors (144 Democrats, 0 Republicans)

Updated on 4/28/16 -Newest additional Co-sponsors are:  Rep. Pete Aguilar [D-CA31] ,   Rep. Susan Davis [D-CA53] , Rep. Mark DeSaulnier [D-CA11] , Rep. Tulsi Gabbard [D-HI2] . The resolution now has 140 cosponsors (140 Democrats,  0 Republicans).

Updated on 4/22/16:  HR 569 now has 136 Democrat sponsors (No Republicans to date). Latest additions include the following Representatives:  Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick [D-AZ1] , Rep. David Scott [D-GA13],  Rep. Eliot Engel [D-NY16] Clarke, Yvette [D-NY9] ,  Hoyer, Steny [D-MD5] , Kind, Ron [D-WI3] , Nolan, Richard [D-MN8] , Levin, Sander [D-MI9] , O’Rourke, Beto [D-TX16] , Visclosky, Peter [D-IN1],   Beatty, Joyce [D-OH3]

Update 2/3/16:  HR 569 now has 125 Democrat sponsors (No Republicans to date) Latest additions include the following Representatives:  Rep. Janice Hahn [D-CA44]Rep. John Lewis [D-GA5],  Rep. Earl Blumenauer [D-OR3] Rep. Nita Lowey [D-NY17] ,  Rep. Sean Maloney [D-NY18],  Rep. Grace Napolitano [D-CA32] , Rep. Donald Norcross [D-NJ1],  Rep. John Sarbanes [D-MD3]< /a>Rep. Jackie Speier [D-CA14]Rep. Timothy Walz [D-MN1].

Update 1/20/16 :  There are now 115 Democrat sponsors on HR 569 (No Republicans to date).  New additions include:  Rep. Joe Courtney [D-CT2]  Rep. Juan Vargas [D-CA51]  Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman [D-NJ12]  Rep. Tony Cárdenas [D-CA29]  Rep. Donald Payne [D-NJ10]  Rep. Bobby Rush [D-IL1]   Rep. Nydia Velázquez [D-NY7]  Rep. Elijah Cummings [D-MD7]  Rep. Lois Frankel [D-FL22]  Rep. Kathleen Rice [D-NY4]

Previous additions (1/11/16) include Rep. Suzanne Bonamici [D-OR1] , Rep. Ben Luján [D-NM3] , Rep. Jerrold Nadler [D-NY10] , Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard [D-CA40] , Rep. Bennie Thompson [D-MS2] ,  Rep. Chaka Fattah [D-PA2] , Rep. Anna Eshoo [D-CA18] ,  Rep. Hakeem Jeffries [D-NY8] ,  Rep. Ann Kuster [D-NH2] ,  Rep. Rick Larsen [D-WA2] , Rep. Brenda Lawrence [D-MI14] , Rep. Ted Lieu [D-CA33] ,  Rep. Robert “Bobby” Scott [D-VA3] ,  Jared Huffman, D-CA; Steve Israel, D-CA; Alan Lowenthal, D-CA; Michelle Luian Grisham, D-NM;  James McGovern, D-MA;  Seth Moulton, D-MA; Patrick Murphy, D-FL; Raul Ruiz, D-CA;  Louise Slaughter, D-NY; Adam Smith, D-WA.

 





Freedom of Speech – The Continued Assault on America’s Most Precious Liberty

31 12 2015

ontheriseHouse Resolution 569 was introduced into the United States House of Representatives on December 17, 2015.  It will be part of the legislation reviewed by Congress in 2016.  Just to give you a peek at the language included, here is the introduction, right off the top of the bill:

“Condemning violence, bigotry, and hateful rhetoric towards Muslims in the United States.”

Well, I think “violence” against anyone is already condemned and considered a crime under existing legislation across the land.  “Bigotry and hateful rhetoric” has been the target of lawsuits, city ordinances, statutory law, and social pressure for generations now.  So why do we need more legislation on the books condemning these behaviors and crimes against anyone?  Of any religion? Race? Creed?

The U. S. Dept of Justice defines “hate crimes” as:  “the violence of intolerance and bigotry, intended to hurt and intimidate someone because of their race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, or disability.”  41 states and the District of Columbia have laws against “hate crimes” on their books.  These gist of these laws is that the penalty for committing a crime against a random victim is not as bad as for a crime against someone who has been targeted for one of the above reasons, which presupposes then the victim of a “hate crime” is hurt more than your average run of the mill victim.  Seriously, an assault victim bleeds just as much whether the perp has chosen them because of a “hate” reason or an economic one, or for for whatever reason.  A murder victim is just as dead whether chosen for the color of their skin or for the car they were driving, or the money in their pocket.  Dead is dead, and the murderer is still a murderer and will spend the rest of their miserable lives in prison or be executed.  As you can tell, I struggle with the logic of “hate crimes”.

Be that as it may, the fact remains there are plenty of laws on the books that address the issue for all victimized people, regardless of race, religion, etc.

But the point of this bill is this:  Muslims are a special class of people, worthy of much higher standards of protection than, say, Jews, Christians, or Buddhists, Sikhs, or atheists.

Rep. Don Beyer, 8th Dist VA. Via Wikipedia

So where does this idea come from?  Well, I can tell you this much.  It wasn’t the brainchild of Virginia Representative Don Beyer (D), sponsor of HR 569, who just happens to represent Virginia’s 8th Congressional District, which just happens to include the city of Falls Church, which just happens to be the location of the Dar al Hijra Islamic Center.  This is the mosque, you may remember, where several of the Sept 11th hijackers attended, where Anwar al-Alawki was the Imam (before he fled to Yemen where a US drone took him out), and Major Nidal Hassan attended prior to his Jihad on Fort Hood.  Dar al-Hijra just happens to be the mosque co-founded by Ismail Elbarasse, whose basement was a storage hold for a plethora of documents seized by the FBI in 2004, among which was the document known as the “Explanatory Memorandum for the Strategic Goal for the Muslim Brotherhood in North America”.  This was one of the documents entered as evidence in the largest terrorism funding trial in US history.  The mosque itself appears to have a long history of Islamic extremist  and terrorist ties.

But, yet, even so, the Dar al-Hijra (“Land of Migration“) mosque is not the origin of HR 569.

HR 569 is but a mirror image of UN Resolution 16/18, which was formerly known as the “Defamation of Religion”, or more accurately “The International Blasphemy” law.   The goal specifically in HR 569 is to stop any criticism of Islam or anyone or anything Islamic.  This has been the steady mantra in the Islamic groups ever since President Obama stated in the UN General Assembly “The future must not belong to those who would slander the prophet of Islam.”

Muslims encourage stifling of free speech

Muslims encourage stifling of free speech

That statement was like blood in the water for sharks.  It followed the White House propaganda line concerning the Benghazi affair where Ambassador Chris Stevens and 3 other Americans were murdered by Islamic Terrorists.  Muslim groups in the UN as well as around the country called for illegalizing criticism of Islam.  The Islamic Society of Greater Kansas City posted a link on its own website to a petition for a “law against insulting one’s religion”.

Obama was echoed by the likes of Pakistani President Zardari who said, “The international community must not become silent observers and should criminalize such acts that destroy the peace of the world and endanger world security by misusing freedom of expression.”  In other words, violence on the part of Muslims around the world must be expected when someone criticizes Islam or the prophet Muhammad, and it is the critic’s responsibility, not the violent Muslim’s.

That same chorus was joined by the newly elected Muslim Brotherhood President Morsi of Egypt, and then Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said it was time to put an end to the protection of Islamophobia masquerading as the freedom to speak freely.  Turkey’s President Erdogen called Islamophobia “a crime against humanity”.

These officials were inside the UN in New York promoting their speech killing rhetoric while outside on the street and around the nation protestors were echoing the same thing, demanding the criminalization of free speech.  Secretary of State Hillary Clinton co-chaired an international conference in 2011, applauding the adoption of UN Resolution 16/18, and promised to apply pressure at home in the United States to suppress Islamophobia.

UN Resolution 16/18 is the work of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), the largest special interest group in the world and second largest governance body compared to the UN itself.  OIC, funded largely by Saudi Arabia, represents 56 (Syria was 57) Islamic states throughout the world in their common interest of advancing the cause of Islam, which includes establishing the Sharia worldwide.  OIC has been a subject of previous posts on this blog. For more information on OIC click here.  The term “Islamophobia” was coined by OIC and propagated by CAIR, and has become part of the lexicon used to silence critics of Islam.  (OIC’s inferred definition of “Islamophobia” does not mean ‘fear of Islam‘ as the word suggests; rather ‘critical of, unaccepting or hostile to Islam in any way‘.)

Obviously then, the OIC, by way of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), is behind HR 569.

CAIR was at the forefront immediately following the recent San Bernardino jihad (which left 14 dead and 22 wounded) and, according to Investors Business Daily, “running interference” between investigators and witnesses and suspects”.

“As medics were still removing bodies from the mass shooting, CAIR rushed to assemble a bizarre press conference, letting the media ask questions of Farook’s brother-in-law before the FBI had a crack at him.” – (H/T IBD read more here)

CAIR remains on the FBI’s “bad boy list”, and has been denied delisting by Federal Court as an ‘unindicted co-conspirator’ in the largest terror funding trial in US history in 2008 – Un-indicted because the current administration suspended all previous indictments concerning that trial.  CAIR is a Muslim Brotherhood organization and has been proven to have direct connections to HAMAS.

CAIR was  proactive and led the narrative in the San Bernardino jihad about the concern of “backlash” against Muslims.  Less than 2 days later, the US Atty General was leading the charge on CAIR’s behalf stating her greatest fear was not terrorist attacks, but retaliatory acts of violence against Muslims.  She went on, while addressing a Muslim gathering, to include “rhetoric and bigoted actions” in her list of prosecutions under way.

CAIR, the Muslim Brotherhood and all its affiliates are having great success formulating or perpetuating the narrative.  Something tells me that “rhetorical terrorism” is a term that will be used by more than those spoiled little socialistic college students on college campus’ this fall.  While they’ve been looking for a “safe space” from “impactful” words, the Islamists have been working to outlaw them.

Stephen Coughlin, expert in Sharia and Islamic terrorism, and past consultant to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told Daily Caller this:

“Over the last few years, major left-wing and Islamists organizations have been working diligently to reframe free speech in an oppositional narrative that distinguishes sanctioned speech, designated free speech, from hate speech in a long-term campaign to brand nonconforming speech as hate speech that is at first to be ridiculed and then criminalized”. (Read more Daily Caller)

Read that again.  Major Coughlin has summarized the entire Progressive playbook into one paragraph.

HR 569 in the US Congress has little chance of passing even if it gets out of Judicial Committee.  And it’s a resolution, not statute (Not that resolutions are not important and formative).  However, the really scary thing is it does have 82 Co-Sponsors, all Democrats.  82.  [UPDATED 2/3/16:  HR569 now has 125 Democrat co-sponsors.  For more updated info see here.]

You can download the entirety of HR 569 here complete with sponsors names, or see the text below.  It’s not long and I promise it will raise your blood pressure!

RESOLUTION Condemning violence, bigotry, and hateful rhetoric towards Muslims in the United States. HRES 569– Whereas the victims of anti-Muslim hate crimes and rhetoric have faced physical, verbal, and emotional abuse because they were Muslim or believed to be Muslim;

-Whereas the constitutional right to freedom of religious practice is a cherished United States value and violence or hate speech towards any United States community based on faith is in contravention of the Nation’s founding principles;

-Whereas there are millions of Muslims in the United States, a community made up of many diverse beliefs and cultures, and both immigrants and native-born citizens;

-Whereas this Muslim community is recognized as having made innumerable contributions to the cultural and economic fabric and well-being of United States society;

-Whereas hateful and intolerant acts against Muslims are contrary to the United States values of acceptance, welcoming, and fellowship with those of all faiths, beliefs, and cultures;

-Whereas these acts affect not only the individual victims but also their families, communities, and the entire group whose faith or beliefs were the motivation for the act;

-Whereas Muslim women who wear hijabs, headscarves, or other religious articles of clothing have been disproportionately targeted because of their religious clothing, articles, or observances; and

-Whereas the rise of hateful and anti-Muslim speech, violence, and cultural ignorance plays into the false narrative spread by terrorist groups of Western hatred of Islam, and can encourage certain individuals to react in extreme and violent ways:

Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the House of Representatives—  expresses its condolences for the victims of anti-Muslim hate crimes; (2) steadfastly confirms its dedication to the rights and dignity of all its citizens of all faiths, beliefs, and cultures;
(3) denounces in the strongest terms the increase of hate speech, intimidation, violence, vandalism, arson, and other hate crimes targeted against mosques, Muslims, or those perceived to be Muslim;
(4) recognizes that the United States Muslim 12 community has made countless positive contributions to United States society;
(5) declares that the civil rights and civil liberties of all United States citizens, including Muslims in the United States, should be protected and preserved;
(6) urges local and Federal law enforcement authorities to work to prevent hate crimes; and to prosecute to the fullest extent of the law those perpetrators of hate crimes; and
(7) reaffirms the inalienable right of every citizen to live without fear and intimidation, and to practice their freedom of faith.

Well…isn’t that special…?  I’m not even gonna unpack that sucker!!!

***For Updates on HR 569 click here.***





3 Things You Probably Don’t Know About Islam

18 12 2015

Many Americans still are confused about Islam, thanks to propaganda from Muslim Brotherhood organizations like CAIR, MPAC, ISNA, ICNA, Muslim Students Assn, etc.

This video says in 9 minutes what I’ve been saying the last 9 years.  Take a look!





Victory for Freedom of Speech

2 11 2015
On Wednesday, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals completely reversed a lower court’s decision and ruled in favor of Evangelical Christians who were arrested for disturbing the peace at the 2012 Arab Festival in Dearborn, Michigan.  The Christians had bottles, eggs, and other items hurled at them by Muslims for publicly preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  A short video of this episode can be found here.
During this festival, a group of Muslims approached the Christians and asked to hear about the Gospel. The Christians obliged and began sharing about the Bible, Jesus, and their faith.  Other Muslims became angry and assaulted the Christians for their speech.  The police ended up arresting the Christians, not the Muslims.
The case, Bible Believers v. Wayne County, was brought by the American Freedom Law Center (AFLC) on behalf of the Christians.
On August 27, 2014, a divided, three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit dismissed the civil rights lawsuit, finding the violent response of the Muslim hecklers justified the Wayne County sheriffs’ order to the Christians they would be arrested for disorderly conduct if they did not leave the festival area.
Yesterday, the Sixth Circuit ruled in favor of the Christians on every issue, completely reversing the lower court opinion, and directing the court to enter judgment in the Christians’ favor.
In its decision, the Sixth Circuit ruled the County and the two Deputy Chief defendants were liable for violating the Christians’ First Amendment rights to free speech and the free exercise of religion, and for depriving the Christians of the equal protection of the law. The court ruled the individual defendants did not enjoy qualified immunity, and the County was liable as a municipality for the constitutional violations.
In its opinion, the Sixth Circuit stated, in part:
“In a balance between two important interests-free speech on one hand, and the state’s power to maintain the peace on the other-the scale is heavily weighted in favor of the First Amendment. . . . Maintenance of the peace should not be achieved at the expense of the free speech. The freedom to espouse sincerely held religious, political, or philosophical beliefs, especially in the face of hostile opposition, is too important to our democratic institution for it to be abridged simply due to the hostility of reactionary listeners who may be offended by a speaker’s message. If the mere possibility of violence were allowed to dictate whether our views, when spoken aloud, are safeguarded by the Constitution, surely the myriad views that animate our discourse would be reduced to the standardization of ideas by the dominant political or community groups. Democracy cannot survive such a deplorable result.
 
“When a peaceful speaker, whose message is constitutionally protected, is confronted by a hostile crowd, the state may not silence the speaker as an expedient alternative to containing or snuffing out the lawless behavior of the rioting individuals. Nor can an officer sit idly on the sidelines-watching as the crowd imposes, through violence, a tyrannical majoritarian rule-only later to claim that the speaker’s removal was necessary for his or her own protection.”
 
In short, this was a complete victory for the Constitution and for all freedom-loving Americans who enjoy the protections of the First Amendment.
The AFLC is first and foremost a public interest litigation firm, which aggressively seeks to advance and defend America’s Judeo-Christian heritage in courts all across our Nation.  The AFLC’s mission is to fight for faith and freedom through litigation, education, and public policy programs.
A short video detailing AFLC’s mission and accomplishments can be seen here.
AFLC is comprised of attorney Robert Muise, a combat veteran Marine Officer and expert in Constitutional law, and attorney David Yerushalmi, one of the nation’s most knowledgeable attorneys on national security, Constitutional law, as well as Sharia (Islamic Law).
AFLC states on their website:  “The strength of our Nation lies in its commitment to a Judeo-Christian heritage and moral foundation and to an enduring faith and trust in God and His Providence. AFLC seeks a return to America’s founding commitment to receive God’s continued blessing to preserve the soul of this great Nation.”
This ruling demonstrates there are still bastions of sanity in the American judicial system where liberty under law still reigns in America, and where judges committed to justice win over the progressives trying to destroy our nation.
Let us celebrate this significant victory today and raise a glass to the courage of the Americans who withstood the attack, the AFLC for its work to defend our liberties, and the Court for doing what it should always do – rule judiciously.
John Guandolo, UTT




The Satanic Alliance: Marxism, Islam and Privileged Hatred

26 10 2015

islamintern

Islamic Marxism, Islamic Socialism, seems to be a contradiction of terms.

Be NOT Deceived!  THIS has been an allied movement for a long time in the US and for generations around the world!

THIS is why the Progressives/Socialists/Marxists find kindred purpose with the likes of the Muslim Brotherhood groups such as CAIR, MSA, ICNA, ISNA, MPAC, and etc. ad nauseam.  Every “Social Justice” movement in the world has origins and common purpose in the destruction of Capitalism, the United States of America, and Western Society in general.  It is Anti-Christian, not Anti-Religion; Christianity focuses on the rights, liberties and value of the individual!  Individuals do NOT exist in this post-American World; Only the Collective!

Familiarize yourselves with “Sustainable Development”, “Sustainability”, “Sustainable Growth”; it is found in the UN (Marxist from its roots) agenda known as “Agenda 21”.  New buzz words encompassing this belief include, 20/20, 20/30, 20/50, “Smart Growth”, and “Smart Growth Corridors”, all coming to a city council near you!

In the following video, watch for phrases like: “Social Justice”, “Socialist”,  “Justice”.  This phraseology is straight out of the Communist Manifesto!

Pay Attention!  The world has already changed and America is now Ahmerikah!

(More on this subject to come)





Islam IS Incompatible with the US Constitution

22 09 2015

I have written extensively on this site of the threat that Islam and it’s self contained jurisprudence known as the “Sharia” (The Right Path) poses to the United States, its Constitution, and all of Western Society.  It is amazing that 15 years post 9/11 and ignorance is the main player in the American media as well as the mainstream pop culture which consumes it.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is beside itself demanding, DEMANDING I say, that Ben Carson get out of the Presidential race and America condemn him as “unfit” to serve as President, because he doesn’t understand the Constitution!

Let’s see now, CAIR, a known HAMAS tied Muslim Brotherhood front group, founded by Nihad Awad and Omar Ahmad, both of whom were members of the Islamic Association for Palestine which was proven in Federal court to have funneled American money to HAMAS and other terrorist groups for jihad,  and still remains on the “Un-indicted Co-conspirator” list left over from the Holy Land Foundation trial, the largest Terrorist Funding Trial in US history, who called on Mr. Obama to back legislation limiting freedom of speech, is lecturing America on the Constitution!

Back in 2013 I wrote an article that explains what Sharia is and how incompatible Islam is, not only with American culture, but our laws including the Constitution.  It includes excerpts from Umdat al-Salik, The Classic Manual of Islamic Holy Law which also gives Quranic justification for each statute.  An excerpt from that article is posted here:

[At] Kansas KU Sharia HandbookUniversity Law School there are classes that teach Sharia to aspiring young law students.  The textbook reads like you would expect; revised history and a sanitized theological discussion, soothing the non-inquisitive mind and ignorant spirit that it’s just “freedom of religion” and no different than Jewish Halakhah or Catholic Canon.  Of course, the sanitized Sharia version leaves out all the gory stuff like dismemberment for thieves and pow’s, execution for apostates (o8.1; “When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.”), homosexuals (p17.1 “Kill the one who sodomizes and the one who lets it be done to him.”), wine-bibbers (p14.2-1, “Scourge whoever drinks wine…if he drinks it a fourth time kill him.”) atheists (o9.0 “The Caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim.”), and anyone of the Jewish or Christian persuasion who does not “submit” to the rule of Islam.  Sharia also obliges the Muslim adherent, male or female, to circumcision (e4.3), and despite Muslim claims to the contrary, there is no age limit for marriage of girls.  A high percentage in the Islamic world are given (for dowry) in marriage by their fathers under the age of 16, many before puberty, such as the recent case in Yemen resulting in the death of the 8 yr old child.  This is not uncommon in Sharia controlled states. But the sanitized version will treat this as an outlier, a regional or custom related practice, when in reality under sharia, the family determines the age.

Touted as mainly for use by Muslims for “family matters”, the sanitized version also leaves out the fact that a woman’s testimony is worth half the value of a man’s and she rates behind any male heirs who get the first shares of the estate right after the mosque,  and a rape victim is generally to blame for her plight and she could be shamed, outcast or worse.  It is not uncommon for rape victims to be beaten or stoned for adultery, fornication, and/or “honor killed”, under sharia as discussed in this article by Hasan Mahmud.

The Sharia that is taught at KU and is shown to the general public also whitewashes Jihad as the “inner struggle”, ignoring the fact that this one line is cherry picked from 8 pages of directives concerning the Jihad (Holy War, o9.0) “to war against non-Muslims…signifying warfare to establish the religion (Islam)…” and presents Hadith’s like Bukhari quoting Muhammad as saying, “I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform the prayer, and pay zakat . If they say it, they have saved their blood and possession from me, except for the rights of Islam over them.”  The remaining headings under “Jihad” are titled: “The Obligatory Character of Jihad”,  “Who is Obliged to Fight in Jihad”, “The Objectives of Jihad” (“The caliph makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians…[and] fights all other people until they become Muslim.”), “The Rules of Warfare”, “Truces”, “The Spoils of Battle”. This section on “Jihad” is immediately followed by, “Non-Muslim Subjects of the Islamic State (Dhimmi)”.  Now I ask you, does that sound like that very personal, struggle within ones own self to submit to Allah and maintain one’s faith?

One other important aspect to Sharia is that it codifies lying, or “deception”, in order to advance the cause of Islam (r8.2) and stay out of trouble with one’s wife!  Aside from the obvious advantage of keeping the wife deceived, “Taqiyya” (deception) is employed especially when Muslims are outnumbered, as a minority of a host society, in order to gain the trust and deceive the host, until a majority of Muslims can use politics, education, or force to overpower it.  Sound familiar yet?  Click here for more on Sharia.

[Shaira quotes and references from: “Reliance of the Traveller, A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law”, by Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri, translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller, accepted by Islamic Scholars around the world as the authoritative English translation]

You see, the objective of Islam is not to be equal, just as CAIR co-Founder Omar Ahmad stated, “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.

Then there is the proposed “Blasphemy Law” that is being called for by Muslims around the world, which would make it a crime against humanity to criticize Islam.  Immediately after Barack Obama gave his infamous speech, declaring “The future does not belong to those who would slander the prophet” at the 2012 United Nations General Assembly, in the wake of the Benghazi terrorist attack (which he and Hillary Clinton blamed on an anti-Muhammad video), Muslims from around the world and closer to home made the hue and cry for freedom of speech to be made criminal.

Muslims encourage stifling of free speech

The Islamic Society of Greater Kansas City posted a link to a petition on their website encouraging visitors to sign on, petitioning “The President of the United States: To sponsor a bill that outlaws any action that may insult one’s religion”.  (The petition got a whopping  351 signatures.)  While the President hasn’t actually sponsored legislation to curtail free speech, he has enacted policies within the many bureaucracies, including DHS and the DOJ, which are threatening American’s freedom of speech.  The Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) immediately petitioned the UN to pass the same ordinance.

You can be sure this will not be slowing down anytime soon.  CAIR and cohorts are like sharks with blood in the water.  Once a breech is made, a flood will ensue.  In fact the flood gates are open and this breech will not be closed under this government. While “American Laws for American Courts” is good law and so far, effective as to it’s intent, it is only as good as our legal system which is becoming increasingly compromised.

American’s (non-Muslim that is) must learn why Islam is detrimental to all of Western Culture and the basic freedoms that we have enjoyed for so long.  Islam is indeed, “The Great Black Beast”, a cloud hanging over head that is going to become more oppressive unless we learn to reject it, and once again embrace the true God which has been the source of all that is good and just in our culture thus far.

Sayyid Syeed, National Director for the Office for Interfaith & Community Alliances for the Islamic Society of North America (another Muslim Brotherhood affiliate), put it this way in 2004, “Our job is to change the Constitution of America”.  That is to make it more compatible with Sharia.

As you can see, Islamic Law doesn’t fit well into the American Jurisprudence and, as Dr. Carson so eloquently stated, is incompatible with our Constitution.

Dr. Ben Carson seems to be a bit old fashioned…I mean…really!  The Constitution is something that he really cares about?  And he is running for President!!








%d bloggers like this: