The threat of 'sharia' to America

[Warrior-Mentor]

The threat of 'sharia' to America
Chad Groening - OneNewsNow
28 Jan 2009

An Egyptian-born woman whose father died as a martyr for jihad says the West continues to remain ignorant of the threat that Islamic "sharia" law poses to Americans' religious and political freedoms.

Author Nonie Darwish claims she was a virtual slave to Islamic law for the first 30 years of her life. In her latest book Cruel and Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Law, she continues her personal mission to warn the West, by exposing efforts to force and enforce sharia law on unsuspecting nations around the globe.

There is a reason, says Darwish, why the title of her book is Cruel and Usual Punishment. "Unfortunately Islamic law is usual [practice] in the Middle East, in the Muslim world," she explains. "I'm familiar with how it can brainwash people. It can be devastating for the healthy growth of society."

Darwish says now that she is in the West, she has noticed many Muslims who are demanding that Islamic sharia law be given to them as a religious right. But according to Darwish, shaira has nothing to do with religion.

"This is a very elaborate legal system that can [order you be put] to death if you leave Islam," the author points out.

Darwish says no one can afford to be ignorant about the threat of sharia law.

You can find her book available here:
http://www.amazon.com/Cruel-Usual-Pu...3261810&sr=1-7

[Bill Harsey]

Warrior-Mentor,
Thank you for posting this. It's going to creep in like "gun control", a tenth of an inch at a time.
Britain is facing this issue now http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7232661.stm

[Paslode]

Originally Posted by Bill Harsey

Warrior-Mentor,
Thank you for posting this. It's going to creep in like "gun control", a tenth of an inch at a time.
Britain is facing this issue now http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7232661.stm

X2 - That was just what I was thinking. I am always dismayed that so many people are blind to things like this and even find myself wondering why I don't see it like they do.

[Saoirse]

Warrior-Mentor, thanks for posting about this book. I will be sure to read and add it to my "library".
In the UK, there are already Sharia courts that are not only handling the civil cases but also some criminal cases. Sharia law contains numerous provisions that deny tenets of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Conversion from Islam is punishable by death; non-Muslims are second-class citizens; a woman's testimony is not admissible in her own rape case, etc. Sharia Law vs. Constitutional Law (ie Magna Carta)?? . Why anyone would consider incorporating or even replacing the later with the former...baffles me!!
I saw the interviews with Nonie Darwish in the video, "Obsession", informative but disturbing.
IMMHO, with the flow of muslims into this country, unfortunately, it will come to pass in the good ol' USA. It has already started with finances/insurance...look at AIG. That was all over the news late last year:
http://smithfiles.com/2008/12/07/aig...ia-in-america/. (this is just one of many articles)

[SF_BHT]

They will never quit and they are not tolerant of anyone else. Why do we have to change to conform to immigrant....?????

[Saoirse]

Originally Posted by SF_BHT

They will never quit and they are not tolerant of anyone else. Why do we have to change to conform to immigrant....?????

Because that's what the PC lefist liberal appologists want us to do???

[greenberetTFS]

Originally Posted by SF_BHT

They will never quit and they are not tolerant of anyone else. Why do we have to change to conform to immigrant....?????

SF_BHT,

That is an excellent point,Why?..............

GB TFS

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by Bill Harsey

Warrior-Mentor,
Thank you for posting this. It's going to creep in like "gun control", a tenth of an inch at a time.
Britain is facing this issue now http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7232661.stm

Actually it's closer to this:

Islamist extremism is similar to “rising fascism in the 1920s and 1930s”, Tony Blair said last night in his first major speech since leaving office.

At a prestigious charity dinner in New York, the former Prime Minister said that public figures who blamed the rise of fundamentalism on the policies of the West were "mistaken".

He told the audience, which included New York governor Eliot Spitzer and mayor Michael Bloomberg, that Iran was the biggest exporter of the ideology, and that the Islamic republic was prepared to "back and finance terror" to support it.

“Out there in the Middle East, we’ve seen... the ideology driving this extremism and terror is not exhausted. On the contrary it believes it can and will exhaust us first," he said.

“Analogies with the past are never properly accurate, and analogies especially with the rising fascism can be easily misleading but, in pure chronology, I sometimes wonder if we’re not in the 1920s or 1930s again.

“This ideology now has a state, Iran, that is prepared to back and finance terror in the pursuit of destabilising countries whose people wish to live in peace.”

He added: “There is a tendency even now, even in some of our own circles, to believe that they are as they are because we have provoked them and if we left them alone they would leave us alone.

“I fear this is mistaken. They have no intention of leaving us alone.

“They have made their choice and leave us with only one to make - to be forced into retreat or to exhibit even greater determination and belief in standing up for our values than they do in standing up for their’s.”

Mr Blair, who represents the Quartet of the US, Europe, Russia and the United Nations on the Middle East, was speaking at the 62nd annual Alfred E Smith Memorial Foundation dinner at the Waldorf Astoria hotel.

Mr Blair went on: “I said straight after the attack of September 2001 that this was not an attack on America but on all of us. That Britain’s duty was to be shoulder to shoulder with you in confronting it. I meant it then and I mean it now.”

He added: “America and Europe should not be divided, we should stand up together.

“The values we share are as vital and true and, above all, needed today as they have been at any time in the last 100 years.”

Mr Blair received three standing ovations during the evening.

Earlier, the former Prime Minister said: “Out of this region the Middle East has been exported a deadly ideology based on a perversion of the proper faith of Islam but nonetheless articulated with demonic skill playing on the fears and grievances of Muslims everywhere.

“It did not originate from the dispute between Israelis and Palestinians, of course, far from it. But this dispute is used to great effect as a means of dividing people, sowing seeds of hatred and sectarianism.

“The impact of this global ideology is now no longer felt simply in the terrorism that afflicts Lebanon or Iran or Palestine. It is there also now in Pakistan, Afghanistan, in India, of course in Europe, in Madrid and London, and in the series of failed attempts to create terror across our continent.

“And here in New York you felt it in the thousands who died and who still mourn their lost ones.”

On several occasions the dinner chairman said he would have liked to see Mr Blair run for US president in 2008.

continued:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle2693173.ece

[Bill Harsey]

Team Sergeant,
Thank you.

Well said Mr. Blair.

One could almost read those comments as a bit of sage advice to some current leader here in the United States.

[Saoirse]

Originally Posted by Prester John

What amazes me is that devout Muslims demand that Shar'ia law be implemented, yet the implementation of such law goes against the core beliefs of the Muslim world. Without a caliphate in place to rule over such a system of law, it is invalid and unholy. This to me is one of the MOST glaring inconsistencies in the drive for fundamentalist laws.
Doug

I have to disagree with you Doug. Sharia governs everything in their lives and religion, since they do not have follow a rule of separation of church and state. However, the different sects of Islam have different views on whether there should be a caliphate that governs. And IMHO the whole religion is a glaring inconsistency. Since its conception by the warring, raping, pedophile, lying con-artist Mohammad, it has a foundation of violence and deception {taqiyya; according to the Quran, allows the Muslim to conform outwardly to the requirements of unislamic or non-Islamic government, while inwardly "remaining faithful" to whatever he conceives to be proper Islam, while waiting for the tide to turn}

The precepts of Sharia (a mandatory and highly specific legal and political plan for society), which translates approximately as "way" or "path." The precepts of Sharia are derived from the commandments of the Quran and the Sunnah may be divided into two parts:

1. Acts of worship (al-ibadat), which includes:
Ritual Purification (Wudu)
Prayers (Salah)
Fasts (Sawm and Ramadan)
Charity (Zakat)
Pilgrimage to Mecca (Hajj)

2. Human interaction (al-muamalat), which includes:

Financial transactions
Endowments
Laws of inheritance
Marriage, divorce, and child care
Food and drink (including ritual slaughtering and hunting)
Penal punishments
War and peace
Judicial matters (including witnesses and forms of evidence)

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant

Earlier, the former Prime Minister said: “Out of this region the Middle East has been exported a deadly ideology based on a perversion of the proper faith of Islam but nonetheless articulated with demonic skill playing on the fears and grievances of Muslims everywhere.

IMHO I think he is being rather PC here, himself. From my readings and what I have learned over the years, what they are doing is the proper faith of Islam. Everything in their religion dictates that they will make Islam the universal religion and they will create Islamic political states.
In one aspect, I have to agree with some when they say we brought this on ourselves. We did, we turned a blind eye, we apologized for them, we lived in denial, we had a lasseiz-faire attitude toward their emigration around the world. Nobody bothered to look back at history and take notice. I have heard some call it another chapter of the Crusades, is it possible that that is what we are in again? If I remember correctly, the last major push of the crusades was in 1683, and the Turks were driven down through the Balkans but never fully expelled from Europe. After that, there were coninuous abductions and murders of Christians. It never fully stopped; however, it hasn't been as heavy an assault on the West until recently. Through emigration and infilitration into Western societies through politics and economics, they have established themselves again for another major wave of Jihad (or what we have called the Crusades).

[6.8SPC_DUMP]

With our permanent Government's (NSA, CIA, ect.) ideology and the mood of U.S. civilians; I don't think there is any reason to worry about "sharia" law being adopted as a religious freedom. Is there any indication of this other than some Muslims' complaining?

Saoirse-

I don't see how AIG's promotion of a fund that doesn't pay interest nor benefit from gambling, entertainment, alcohol or pork and Muslin immigration will lead to the US adopting "sharia" law.

If it makes you feel better about those damn NY'ers: Unlike your friends here I wouldn't move if you started building a wall around me; I would shoot you.

Added: I did not know Saoirse was female when I wrote this. It was before her avatar and there was nothing to indicate gender in her profile at the time - but that is no excuse for lack of thorough research on my part.

[Saoirse]

Originally Posted by 6.8SPC_DUMP

With our permanent Government's (NSA, CIA, ect.) ideology and the mood of U.S. civilians; I don't think there is any reason to worry about "sharia" law being adopted as a religious freedom. Is there any indication of this other than some Muslims' complaining?

Saoirse-

I don't see how AIG's promotion of a fund that doesn't pay interest nor benefit from gambling, entertainment, alcohol or pork and Muslin immigration will lead to the US adopting "sharia" law.

If it makes you feel better about those damn NY'ers: Unlike your friends here I wouldn't move if you started building a wall around me; I would shoot you.

I am sure there were many people in Europe that thought the same way you do "I don't think there is any reason to worry about "sharia" law being adopted as a religious freedom". that are regretting it NOW. AIG is not the only corporation, there are indicators that other corporations are starting to play ball. Little by little. And lets face it, corporations (through their lobbyists) help, it not outright, heavily influence how this country operates. That is how it starts .... it creeps! I would not worry about Sharia being adopted if more people spoke out against it. But the IslamoFacists are making it clear that speaking out against Sharia and Islam should be a crime (and if they get their way through those "some Muslims complaining", it will be), thus making people hold their tongues in fear.
If you had read any of my other posts that included missives of my life in NYC (which to me equates as a prison sentence that I have since been paroled from), I find nothing redeeming about the city as a whole. MY FRIENDS there, feel the same way as MY FRIENDS here. Unfortunately, they are not members of the ruling leftist liberal party.
And I will take your last comment with the , as a cute bit of sarcasm.

[Warrior-Mentor]

Originally Posted by 6.8SPC_DUMP

With our permanent Government's (NSA, CIA, ect.) ideology and the mood of U.S. civilians; I don't think there is any reason to worry about "sharia" law being adopted as a religious freedom. Is there any indication of this other than some Muslims' complaining?

Saoirse-

I don't see how AIG's promotion of a fund that doesn't pay interest nor benefit from gambling, entertainment, alcohol or pork and Muslin immigration will lead to the US adopting "sharia" law.

Go here:
http://www.davidyerushalmi.com/Law-O...ing-b9-p0.html

Watch the video. Read the report from the McCormick Tribune Foundation.

Then let's talk...

[Saoirse]

In my readings today, I came across this article with a link to a PDF file of a comprehensive explanation of sharia finance.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024725.php#respond

The article, "Shari’ah's 'Black Box”: Civil Liability And Criminal Exposure Surrounding Shari’ah-Compliant Finance," can be found in pdf form at that link. If you are at all interested in becoming informed on this all-important subject, this article is the single best resource.

In the article is the link to the PDF, it's very lengthy but informative.

[Warrior-Mentor]

No to Islamic Law
By: Daniel Pipes
Tuesday, August 04, 2009


Why the West must not accommodate Shari’a.

Those of us who argue against Shari'a are sometimes asked why Islamic law poses a problem when modern Western societies long ago accommodated Halakha, or Jewish law.

The answer is easy: a fundamental difference separates the two.

Islam is a missionizing religion, Judaism is not. Islamists aspire to apply Islamic law to everyone, while observant Jews seek only themselves to live by Jewish law.

Two very recent examples from the United Kingdom demonstrate the innate imperialism of Islamic law.

The first concerns Queens Care Centre, an old-age home and day-care provider for the elderly in the coal town of Maltby, forty miles east of Manchester. At present, according to the Daily Telegraph, not one of its 37 staff or 40 residents is Muslim. Although the home's management asserts a respect for its residents' "religious and cultural beliefs," QCC's owner since 1994, Zulfikar Ali Khan, on his own decided this year to switch the home's meat purchases to a halal butcher.

His stealthy decision meant pensioners at QCC could no longer eat their bacon and eggs, bangers and mash, ham sandwiches, bacon sandwiches, pork pies, bacon butties, or sausage rolls. The switch prompted widespread anger. The relative of one resident called it "a disgrace. The old people who are in the home and in their final years deserve better. … it's shocking that they should be deprived of the food they like on the whim of this man." A staff member opined that it's "quite wrong that someone should impose their religious and cultural beliefs on others like this."

Queried about his decision, Khan, lamely replied he ordered halal meat for the sake of (nonexistent) Muslim staff. Then he backtracked: "We will be ordering all types of meat" and went so far as to agree that religious beliefs should not be imposed on others. His retreat did not convince one former QCC staffer, who suspected that Khan "intended to serve only halal meat at the home but has had to think again because of the row."

A second example of imposing Shari'a on non-Muslims comes from southeast England. The Avon and Somerset police force patrols the cities of Bristol and Bath as well as surrounding areas has just issued hijabs to female officers. The hijabs, distributed at the initiative of two Muslim groups and costing £13 apiece, come complete with the constabulary's emblem.

Now, issuing hijabs as part of uniforms in Great Britain is nothing new – the London police led the way in 2001, followed by other police forces, at least one fire brigade, and even the furniture chain Ikea. What sets the Avon and Somerset hijabs apart from these others is their being intended not just for pious Muslim female staff but also for non-Muslim staff, in particular for their use upon entering mosques.

Rashad Azami of the Bath Islamic Society finds it "highly pleasing" that the constabulary took this step. One of the seven non-Muslim officers to receive a hijab of her very own, Assistant Chief Constable Jackie Roberts, calls it "a very positive addition to the uniform and one which I'm sure will be a welcome item for many of our officers."

Dhimmitude is the term Bat Ye'or coined to describe subservience to Shari'a by non-Muslims. Assistant Chief Constable Roberts' enthusiasm for the hijab might be called "advanced dhimmitude."

"Hijab bullies" (as David J. Rusin of Islamist Watch calls them) who coerce non-Muslim females to cover up are just one stripe of Islamist imposing Shar'i ways on the West. Other Islamists focus on impeding the uncensored discussion of such topics as Muhammad and the Koran or Islamist institutions or terrorist financing; still others exert to bring taxpayer-funded schools, hospitals, and jails into conformity with Islamic law, not to speak of taxi cabs and municipal swimming pools. Their efforts don't always succeed but in the aggregate, they are rapidly shifting the premises of Western, and especially British, life.

Returning to pork: both Islam and Judaism abominate the flesh of pigs, so this prohibition offers a direct and revealing comparison of the two religions. Simply put, Jews accept that non-Jews eat pork but Muslims take offense and try to impede pork consumption. That, in brief, explains why Western accommodations to Halakha have no relevance for dealing with Shari'a. And why the Shari'a as public policy must be opposed.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Pipes (www.DanielPipes.org) is director of the Middle East Forum and Taube distinguished visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution of Stanford University.