MUSLIMS ON A MISSION to convince us that Sharia (Islamic) law is just like American law

Posted: February 4, 2012 | Author: barenakedislam |

Abed Awad of Awad & Khoury, LLP says “Negative connotations surrounding Sharia must be dispelled.”

JURIST  Abed Awad, a Partner at Awad & Khoury, LLP says that while US courts routinely encounter cases where implementing certain principles of Sharia is required, the hysteria surrounding the “intrusive” role of Sharia in US courts is extremely misguided…

[ALL VIDEOS BELOW ARE SHARIA-COMPLIANT. Tell me if you see anything other than ‘negative connotations’ in them.]

INDONESIAN MUSLIMS KILLING AHMADIYYA MUSLIMS FOR NOT BEING MUSLIM ENOUGH

In November 2010, Oklahoma voters approved an constitution expressly prohibiting Oklahoma state judges from considering international law or Sharia in their decisions. Munir Awad filed a complaint against the Oklahoma State Board of Elections challenging this, alleging that the anti-Sharia amendment to the Oklahoma Constitution, if certified, would violate the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment of the US Constitution. More specifically, Awad alleged that the amendment targets his religion for negative treatment and creates excessive state entanglement with religion. Stigmatizing him and other Muslims, Awad proffered, the amendment would inhibit the practice of his religion and would prevent a court from probating his Sharia-compliant last will and testament. The US District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma agreed with Awad, issuing a preliminary injunction against the certification of the amendment pending the litigant’s claims were adjudicated on the merits.

IRAQI KURDISH GIRL STONED TO DEATH FOR FALLING IN LOVE

Last month, in Awad v. Ziriax, the US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court’s preliminary injunction but utilized a different constitutional scrutiny standard. The district court below evaluated the plaintiff’s claims under the Lemon v. Kurtzman guidelines. Lemon provides that the scrutinized legislation must have a secular purpose that primarily does not inhibit or advance religion and does not foster excessive government entanglement with religion. The Tenth Circuit reached the same conclusion but evaluated the plaintiff’s claims under the more stringent standard enunciated in Larson v. Valente.

Larson held that the three prong test from Lemon was appropriate in cases where religion benefited at the expense of non-religious citizens. However, when one religion is preferred over another, a strict scrutiny evaluation is required (i.e., a legislation that discriminates among religions is valid on only if it is “closely fitted to the furtherance of any compelling interest”).

The Tenth Circuit held that Oklahoma’s “one sentence” stating that “Oklahoma certainly has a compelling interest in determining what law is applied in Oklahoma courts” failed to “identify any actual problem the challenged amendment seeks to solve.” Without “any concrete problem, any harm Appellants seek to remedy with the proposed amendment is speculative at best and cannot support a compelling interest.”

HANGING HOMOSEXUALS IN IRAN

Without a compelling interest, the Tenth Circuit concluded it was not necessary to proceed to the “closely fitted” prong of the strict scrutiny test. The Oklahoma amendment was deemed unconstitutional. Be that as it may, the Tenth Circuit made several interesting observations about the closely fitted prong. “Even if the state could identify and support a reason to single out and restrict Sharia law,” the Tenth Circuit hypothecated, the amendment is not “closely fitted” as its “complete ban of Sharia law is hardly an exercise of narrow tailoring.”

The anti-Sharia movement seeking to legislate its political agenda is directly at odds with a basic principle laid out by the Supreme Court in Larson: “the clearest command of the Establishment Clause” that mandates “governmental neutrality between religion and religion … The State may not adopt programs or practices … which aid or oppose any religion … This prohibition is absolute.”

So, what is Sharia after all? After briefly describing Sharia, I will use several examples to illustrate the role of Sharia or any religious and/or foreign law for that matter, in a US court.

AFGHAN TALIBAN STONE YOUNG COUPLE TO DEATH

Sharia is more than simply “law” in the prescriptive sense, it is also the methodology through which a jurist engages the foundational religious texts (Qur’an and Sunna) to search for divine will. As a jurist-made law, the outcome of this process of ascertaining divine will is called fiqh (positive law), which is the moral and legal anchor of a Muslim’s total existence. Everything from the way Muslims eat, to how they treat animals and protect the environment, to the way they conduct commercial trade, to the way they solemnize their marriage and to the way their estate must be distributed at death is governed by Sharia, for Sharia dictates every aspect of an observant Muslim’s moral life. Therefore, Sharia is extremely personal to the majority of Muslims regardless of their level of religiosity.

LIMB AMPUTATIONS AS PUNISHMENT

Could not get the video clip to function properly, so try here if you would like to see the video clip (very graphic) click here

Of course, this type of relationship with religion applies to most devout Christian, Jews, Hindus and others, for religious principles and laws are very personal to all religious Americans. Whether it is Jews submitting to the jurisdiction of Rabbinic courts, Christians submitting to Christian Conciliation tribunals or US political activists advocating a religious position on abortion, capital punishment, sex education, same-sex marriage and many other issues, religion and religious law has been alive and thriving in the US since its founding. Of course, the role of religious law or religious principles in the US court system continues to be subject to public policy and constitutional constraints. In the end, however, the US Constitution is the law of the land.

The modern manifestations of Sharia are either a source of legislation or actual nation-state law in the majority of Muslim countries. Sharia is the supreme law of the land in Saudi Arabia. Islamic law is a primary source of the family law codes of Egypt, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and many other Muslim countries, and Sharia is the gap filler in almost all of the civil codes of Muslim countries.

SUDAN WOMAN BEATEN FOR WEARING PANTS IN PUBLIC

The globalization of domiciles, marriages, divorces, corporations and commercial transactions requires US courts to regularly interpret and apply foreign law — including Islamic law — to everything from the recognition of foreign divorces and custody decrees, the validity of marriages, the enforcement of money judgments or the damages elements in a commercial dispute or negligence matters.

Sharia is relevant in a US court either as a foreign law or as a source of information to understand the expectations of the parties in a dispute. As an attorney, consultant or expert witness I have handled more than 100 matters involving a component of Sharia or the laws of the Middle East. I will use several examples to explain the actual role Sharia or the laws of the Middle East play in litigation in the US.

A, a New York resident, married B, a UK resident, in a European country. Their marriage was solemnized by a Muslim clergy. The parties live in both countries. They have one child together. B filed for divorce in England. A countered, alleging that their marriage was not legal. Which jurisdiction governs the validity of the marriage and the place of the marriage, UK law or New York law? If New York law governs, the marriage would be valid as long as the marriage was valid under Sharia.

IRAQI BEHEADING

I could not get this video clip to post correctly, but go here and see the Nick Berg video (very graphic, but proves what Islam does) click here

A, an employee of a US corporation negligently caused the death of B in a country utilizing Sharia. The estate of B institutes an action against A in the US. Based on US conflicts of law, the law where the tort occurred would govern the dispute. The court would require expert testimony regarding the tort law of the country using Sharia, which would include issues relating to Sharia.

A, a Saudi company, enters into a joint venture agreement with B, a US company. Their joint venture agreement provides that Saudi law would govern any disputes. A sues B in state court. State court applies Saudi law to the dispute. Saudi law is based on Sharia law. The primary issue of the dispute is then whether Sharia law provides for consequential damages.

A and B are married. They have lived in New York for the past twenty years. A and B are originally from Jordan. While A and B are visiting Jordan, A divorces B. Upon return, A seeks to enforce the Jordanian divorce. The court must determine whether the Jordanian divorce should be recognized. In this circumstance, the state judge must determine whether the Jordanian divorce violated American public policy. Where the wife was not a resident of Jordan, did not participate in the Jordanian proceeding and where the majority of the marital assets are in New York, the court is more than likely to hold that the Jordanian divorce violates New York public policy.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN SHARIA STYLE

The above examples illustrate Sharia as a foreign law. Sharia, then, is extremely relevant for US judges adjudicating matters within the strictures of our law. Of course, the US judge is applying US conflicts of law to determine the applicable law. In other words, even though the judge is applying a foreign law to the dispute, it is US law that dictates that he apply the foreign law.

Here are two examples of how Sharia is relevant to a US judge not as a foreign law but as a source of information to understand the surrounding circumstances to an agreement or dispute or to clarify an ambiguity or correct a mistake.

ALGHAN TALIBAN BEATING WOMAN IN PUBLIC

A, a New Jersey resident, married B, also a New Jersey resident. Both are Muslim. They had a Muslim Imam solemnize their marriage, which included execution of a Muslim marriage contract. The Muslim marriage contract has a provision called Mahr, which directs the husband to pay the wife the sum of $20,000 in the event of divorce. The wife, A, filed for divorce in the New Jersey Superior Court, seeking the enforcement of the $20,000. The court heard testimony about Muslim marriages, marriage contracts, the meaning of Mahr and related information surrounding the execution of the marriage contract. The judge then considers this information to better understand the expectations of the parties at the time of the marriage and applies New Jersey contract law. The judge enforces the Muslim marriage contract finding it satisfied all of the elements of New Jersey contract law.

BEHEADING OF INDONESIAN MAID IN SAUDI ARABIA

Same facts as above, but B, the groom, at the wedding ceremony, for the first time, is asked to sign the marriage contract for $20,000. Embarrassed and pressured before 300 guests, the groom signed the document. In addition, the document was in Arabic, and he does not read or write Arabic. Several years later, the wife filed for divorce and asks for the $20,000. The New Jersey judge finds that there was no meeting of the minds because of the circumstances surrounding the execution of the document. In other words, the marriage contract between these parties did not satisfy all of the elements of a valid contract under New Jersey law.

In sum, most legal experts would agree with the Tenth Circuit’s conclusions. Why then is there paranoia around the country? Why are warnings that Sharia threatens the constitutional system still raging and picking up steam? Almost every Republican presidential candidate has affirmed his opposition to the imaginary threat of Sharia. For attorneys and legal experts, the above examples are very simple and first-year law student material. These nuances, unique facts and legal subtleties are absent from the discussion about Sharia in America. Their absence is not an innocent coincidence. It is intentional in order to fuel the misinformation and distortion about Islam and Muslims.

MUSLIM PERSECUTION OF CHRISTIANS

As attorneys, we have an obligation to correct the truth about the role of any foreign law in our system. It is always subject to the limits of the Constitution. That is the law of the land. The politicization of this issue is undermining the integrity of our judicial system and constitutional protections. US judges are equipped with the necessary legal tools to evaluate the legal and factual issues before them without the requirement of bright line rules, especially those that originate out of misinformation, distortion and outright discrimination.

Posted on 4 Feb 12 by BNI

Lessons on Jihad From the Movie, “What About Bob?”

Friday

I WAS THINKING of writing an article about the infuriating cleverness of orthodox Muslims, and I was wondering what I could use to illustrate what they’re doing. And then it came to me in a flash: The movie, What About Bob?

In the movie, Bill Murray plays a psychiatric patient who drives his psychiatrist crazy (Dr. Leo Marvin, played by Richard Dreyfus).

I just watched it again and the parallels to orthodox Islam’s dealings with the West are amazing. Bob uses the same techniques on Dr. Marvin that orthodox Muslims use against the United States and Europe, and with similar results: Bob successfully fools everyone except Dr. Marvin, and Dr. Marvin becomes infuriated and helpless, but unable to stop it.

Bob is able to cleverly insert himself into Dr. Marvin’s life without his consent, and able to turn Dr. Marvin’s friends and family against him.

As I watched, I kept stopping to write notes every time I saw a parallel. Here are my notes:

1. Bob’s stand is: I am suffering. Islam’s stand is: We are an oppressed people, we are under attack, we are the underdog, and we are suffering. Bob manages to make normal events in life cause him to suffer. Orthodox Muslims take anything their enemies do and turns it into “oppression.” And if their enemies do nothing offensive, they create opportunities to be affronted.

Read any mainstream Muslim publication, like the Muslim Public Affairs Committee newsletter, and you will see a strong theme running through almost every article: Muslims are oppressed and persecuted (and therefore must “defend” themselves).

I subscribe to several pro-Muslim e-mail newsletters, and this is an extremely common theme. Every little “hate-crime” they can come up with proves that Muslims are an oppressed minority. I recently read this: In the year 2007, the number of hate-crimes in the U.S. committed against someone because of their religion was 1400. Here’s how the hate-crimes break down by religion:

Anti-Jewish 969

Anti-Other Religion 130

Anti-Islamic 115

Anti-Multiple Religions 62
Anti-Catholic 61
Anti-Protestant 57
Anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc. 6

(Source: FBI Hate-Crime Statistics)

Over the course of a year, and with 300 million people in this country, that’s a pretty low incidence of hate-crimes against Muslims. But their perpetual position is that they are an oppressed minority. Here’s why.

2. Bob uses every technique he can find to keep pushing for what he wants. And he uses the one tool that gives him the most leverage with normal people: Pity. Evoke genuine pity, and you can pretty much gain any concession you want. Read more about this.

The stealth jihad uses this principle constantly. Jihadis try to portray themselves — just as their leader Mohammad did — as innocent victims of wrongdoing. Then, having aroused pity, they seek a concession of some kind.

They continue gaining concessions and giving none. Islam is a ratchet: It only goes one way.

3. Bob uses deceit masterfully. Bob hires a hooker to portray Dr. Marvin’s sister to get through on the phone (when Dr. Marvin is on vacation and is not taking calls). Bob impersonates a detective and lies to the operator to get information about where Dr. Marvin is vacationing.

Islam has a principle called taqiyya, which means “religious deception.” They can and do lie to non-Muslims and they have Allah’s permission to do so as long as it serves the cause of Islam.

In the movie, Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West, there are several good examples, captured on film, of a Muslim leader speaking to Western media, saying one thing, and then it shows the same leader speaking to their fellow Muslims saying just the opposite. You see them speaking peace and tolerance to Westerners and two days later vigorously preaching jihad against the West to their fellow Muslims. This is taqiyya.

Probably the single most important reason orthodox Muslims have gotten away with so much is because they use deceit masterfully.

4. Bob pushes for concessions because he is special, unique, weird. And Bob captures everyone’s attention and doesn’t let them go about their normal lives.

Muslims do the same thing. In Norway, for example, Muslims were agitating for a law that would make it illegal to serve alcohol in discos on certain nights (because they are uncomfortable around alcohol). Hege Storhaug, the co-founder of Human Rights Service, rejects such a proposal. “All the time they have special rules,” says Storhaug, “and we reject special requirements. We get a split-up society and Islam gets more presence in the public sphere. People force religious opinions on others. In the most extreme consequence it leads to the Islamization of society…All the time it’s Muslims who come with special requirements. We never hear a peep from Catholics, Jews, Hindus, etc.”

One way to try to gain a concession is to simply ask. Another way (and far more effective) is to ask while providing a good reason why an exception should be made for you that would not be made for others. Bob had “special needs” because he was agoraphobic or afraid of sailing or deathly afraid of germs, and people went out of their way to accommodate him, conceding things to him they would never concede to a normal person.

Islam does the same thing. And they often succeed (read more about what kinds of concessions they have gained). They press for concessions because they are oppressed or because they are unique (they have particular needs because of their unique religion), or because they’ve been wronged or persecuted or whatever.

5. Bob seems really nice to everyone but his enemy. People usually recognize Bob is unusual, but they think he is innocent. But Dr. Marvin sees what he’s doing and how deliberately and insidiously he’s doing it.

By the skillful use of taqiyya, Muslims — even Muslims we know to be bloodthirsty killers — are considered “really nice people” by those who don’t know better. (Read a good example of that here.)

Islamic countries are often very friendly to Western countries while at the same time whipping up national hatred against those same Western countries on Islamic television stations, and funding global jihad against those same countries.

6. Bob uses public embarrassment to force concessions. When he arrives in the small town where the well-respected Dr. Marvin spends his summer vacation, Bob starts yelling at the top of his lungs in the middle of the street, “Dr. Marvin! Doctor Leo Marvin!” He keeps yelling until he has everyone’s attention and Dr. Marvin can’t simply ignore him and get away, which is what he was planning on doing.

Orthodox Muslims try to embarrass organizations into doing what they want. They will go to court even though they know they will lose, they will get the press involved. They’ll do whatever it takes to embarrass people or companies or governments into conceding. Radio stations have fired good people because the station didn’t want to deal with the public embarrassment of a lawsuit. Politicians restrain themselves and go out of their way not to say anything honest that might be offensive to the super-sensitive Muslim-advocacy organizations, because those organizations will do what they can to embarrass the politicians.

Orthodox Muslims have wormed their way into training programs for police and intelligence agencies and intimidated them into not saying anything that might lead to public embarrassment, demonstrating again and again that the Muslim organizations will use public embarrassment to silence critics of Islam.

7. Bob uses Dr. Marvin’s enemies against him. There is a husband and wife in town who are angry because the rich city doctor came and bought their dream home out from under them. Bob gets these people to help him, and they do it to help ruin Dr. Marvin’s life.

Orthodox Muslims are actively converting and recruiting disgruntled convicts in prison — people who are already enemies of the society. Iran sends soldiers into Iraq in order to kill U.S. soldiers, but Iran also supplies Russia and China with oil, so if the U.S. wants to do something about Iran, we will have our two biggest enemies to contend with. In essence, Iran uses our enemies against us.

Closer to home, those of us who are in the process of alerting our fellow citizens to the danger of Islam’s prime directive have enemies among our own fellow non-Muslim citizens. The blind multiculturalists in the media actively fight against us, trying to discredit anyone who criticizes Islam, and the orthodox Muslims use those enemies against us.

I get a newsletter from CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) that brags in almost every issue about how they are bringing this suit against this person or sending press releases out about this or that grievance, and you can see from their wording that they are hitting every hot-button they can think of to gain sympathy from our fellow non-Muslim “enemies.”

8. Bob exploits all of Dr. Marvin’s weaknesses — his egotism, his desire to win his family’s love and approval, his failures and embarrassments, his family’s kindness and innocence, his family’s resentment against Dr. Marvin’s pomposity — Bob exploits it all to get what he wants.

Orthodox Muslims exploit Westerners’ weaknesses, too. One of our “weaknesses” is our reverence for life. Jihadis will hide behind civilians during a battle, knowing Western soldiers will not open fire.

Here’s another example of this principle, from DhimmiWatch:

“Palestinian jihad fighters have even used Christian sites and people as shields against the Israelis. In Spring 2002 they appropriated Bethlehem’s Manger Square as a base of operations, knowing that Israeli forces would not attack them there and would face international opprobrium if they did. This activity precipitated the siege of the Church of the Nativity in April and May of that year. After launching attacks against the Israelis from Manger Square, a group of jihadists fled into the church, where they remained for 39 days — secure in the knowledge that Israel would not attack a Christian holy site. Meanwhile, they desecrated the church.”

Orthodox Muslims are masters of exploiting their enemy’s weaknesses. They immigrate into free countries and then use the democratic process and rights of free speech to agitate against those freedoms and seek to subvert the democracy, as illustrated in the ironic picture here.

They also exploit the multicultural beliefs of the resident population in order to wage jihad by gaining concessions.

9. Bob is absolutely relentless. He doesn’t let up ever. Neither do orthodox Muslims. They keep infiltrating, they keep immigrating, they keep agitating, they keep killing, they keep intimidating, and they will never stop on their own. They’ve been doing it for 1400 years, and they are determined to keep it up until the whole world acknowledges there is no god but Allah and Mohammad is His Messenger.

10. Bob makes sure every response Dr. Marvin makes will backfire. He ensures that no matter what Dr. Marvin does to return to his normal life or solve his problem, it will not work. In the documentary, Target America, you can see each successive American president through the seventies, eighties, and nineties try many different ways of dealing with orthodox Muslims, and every attempt backfired.

The orthodox Muslims made sure they set up a situation where no matter what the U.S. did, it would go badly.

The same infuriating frustration Dr. Marvin feels is what I saw on the faces of all the presidents in Target America as they tried and failed to deal successfully with hijackings and captured hostages and bombings.

11. No matter what he does, Bob makes Dr. Marvin look like the mean one and Bob look like the innocent, underdog victim of Dr. Marvin’s apparently bad-tempered selfishness. Osama bin Laden’s plan was to run planes into the Twin Towers in the hopes that the U.S. would overreact, counting on the fact that the violent overreaction would cause Muslims around the world to unite against the West.

Many people think that’s exactly what happened. Muslims flew planes into the Twin Towers, killing thousands of office workers, and in the end, the U.S. looks like the mean one to a lot of people, and Muslims look like the underdog victims who only need potable water and a little compassion from big, bad America.

12. Bob causes Dr. Marvin’s wife and kids to sympathize with Bob and to resent and reject Dr. Marvin. They all try to look out for poor Bob. They push for Bob to get what he wants. This is analogous to orthodox Muslims causing multiculturalist Westerners to sympathize with Muslims and turn against their fellow countrymen who are trying to protect us all from further harm.

So we have one group of people in the U.S. who want to make sure we’re no longer vulnerable to attack by orthodox Muslims. And we have another segment of the U.S. who wants “stop the hate,” wants to “give peace a chance,” and wants to stop “racial profiling.”

In other words, orthodox Muslims have successfully turned some of our own people against each other. They have manipulated the situation so some non-Muslims are pushing for the orthodox Muslims to get what they want.

This is not just happening in America, it is happening in free countries all over the world.

13. Bob keeps provoking a hostile overreaction from Dr. Marvin and then appears to be the innocent victim of Dr. Marvin’s cruel insensitivity, and then he leverages that to gain concessions. If Dr. Marvin doesn’t respond, Bob escalates or persists in his provocation until Dr. Marvin can’t take it any more and bursts out in anger.

One memorable example from the movie is the dinner scene. Bob moaned with pleasure while he was eating. He kept moaning and saying, “This is so delicious!” And he kept it up until Dr. Marvin suddenly yells at him to shut up. All of Dr. Marvin’s family looks at him with anger and embarrassment. Bob looks like the innocent victim of Dr. Marvin’s irrational rage.

Here’s a good example from William Bennett’s Why We Fight: Moral Clarity and the War on Terrorism:

“From the beginning, the Palestinian strategy was, and still is, to provoke outrages to which Israel has had no choice but to respond with stringent countermeasures, thereby supplying endless footage of Palestinian casualties and eliciting fresh pressure by the West to accommodate ever-escalating Palestinian demands. Israel’s commitment to peace stimulated in the Palestinians not a spirit of reciprocal amicableness but an appetite for more…”

14. Bob knows full well what he’s doing, but successfully appears innocent to everyone but Dr. Marvin, who sees right through him but can’t get anyone else to see it. Those of us who have been trying to alert our fellow Westerners to Islam’s relentless encroachment are having a very difficult time.

Islam appears innocent to many people, and to them, we are suspect. We must be racists or bigots or Islamophobes. This assessment effectively shuts their ears to accurate information about something real enough to cause over seventeen thousand deadly attacks since 9/11.

15. Dr. Marvin clearly expects the problem (Bob) to go away, but he will never go. He keeps insinuating himself more and more thoroughly into Dr. Marvin’s life. Almost every non-Muslim I talk to about Islam’s relentless encroachment expects someone to take care of it and expects the problem to go away. But it isn’t going away. It’s getting worse. Islamic supremacists are insinuating themselves more and more thoroughly into Western societies.

16. Bob is skillful, but conceals it. Dr. Marvin comes up with a brilliant scheme to admit Bob into a mental institution, but the institution can only legally hold Bob for 24 hours before they let him go. They can keep him there only if the staff agrees Bob needs to be institutionalized. Dr. Marvin is sure everyone will see Bob is crazy, but they don’t. Within a few hours, they release Bob. Bob completely charmed the staff, telling jokes and cracking everyone up.

Like Bob, Islam is skillful, but conceals it. The more I learn about the clever infiltration of the Muslim Brotherhood into mainstream American life, the more impressed I am at the long-range planning and the skillful, sophisticated understanding of the American mind. (Read more about that here.)

One branch of the Muslim Brotherhood is CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations. They have successfully fooled most people in America that they represent moderate, peace-loving Muslim Americans. Read about what they are really up to.

17. Bob is in it for the long haul. Eventually, Dr. Marvin loses his mind, goes off the deep end, and he becomes violent and irrational, mainly because nobody else sees what Bob is really doing except Dr. Marvin.

Orthodox Muslims find every crack in the wall they can find and work their way in. And they twist every event and utterance to their purpose. They will not stop, they will not tire, and they have nothing else to live for. This is it. This is the meaning of their existence: Islam must win. Islam must dominate all other cultures, all other religions, all other governments. Allah wills it.

They have infiltrated our schools by giving donations to colleges and then using their seat on the board to exert influence (creating a campus culture of Islam-loving, America-hating students). Orthodox Muslims offered the British government and banks on Wall Street money to help them through the 2008-2009 financial crisis, but with strings attached — the money is “Shari’a compliant” which means, among other things, that there is a built-in written agreement that a certain portion of the money goes to particular charities — charities that support jihad against the West.

Orthodox Muslims have created “legitimate,” mainstream organizations that lobby Washington and “represent the Muslim community” to governments and to the media, and yet have a secret agenda, revealed at the recent Holy Land Foundation Trial, of conquering America from within.

The list goes on and on. They are in it for the long haul, and they absolutely will not stop, ever. They won’t grow tired or give up. If they are going to be stopped, we must stop them. And we had better do it with more success than Dr. Marvin had with Bob.

To get rid of Bob, out of mad frustration, Dr. Marvin tries to blow him up, but Bob ends up “accidentally” blowing Dr. Marvin’s vacation home to smithereens, and then marries Dr. Marvin’s sister!

Bob won. Dr. Marvin lost. We’ve got to do better.

Would you like to entertain yourself while watching a demonstration of Jihadi techniques? Watch What About Bob?

And while you’re watching, see if you can come up with ideas we can use. What would you do if you were Dr. Marvin?

Come back here and leave your ideas in the comments. This is serious business and we need all the smart ideas we can get.

Posted in:  Citizen Warrior

 

ALLEN WEST-SPONSORED EVENT: Anti-terror group paints thousands of Muslims as terrorists (ONLY thousands?)

While most congressional representatives bail on the issue of creeping Islamization, Allen West keeps bringing it to the forefront, which has Hamas-affiliated CAIR spokesIslamists trying to figure out how to silence one politician they can’t seem to buy off.

TPM -A Florida-based “anti-terror” group took to the Capitol on Monday to warn Americans about “fifth column” Muslims who it said are pulling the strings of mainstream Muslim organizations and trying to take over the United States.

With assistance from line graphs and pie charts accentuated with bullets instead of arrows, the group painted the Muslim Brotherhood as behind a massive conspiracy with the long-term goal of absorbing America into an Islamic Caliphate. Not convinced? Well, the group helpfully compiled a list of nearly 6,000 people and 200 organizations it claims are in some way connected to the Muslim Brotherhood.

And thanks to help from Rep. Allen West (R-FL), Citizens for National Security was able to present its alarm of Islamic sedition in the basement of the Rayburn House office building.

Less than two months before the ten-year anniversary of 9/11, Congressman Allen West (R-FL) sponsored a Capitol Hill briefing July 25, on Homegrown Jihad in the USA: Culmination of the Muslim Brotherhood’s 50-year History of Infiltrating America – the first-ever report of its kind produced entirely by a private group of U.S. citizens, notes West in a letter about it to his congressional colleagues.

Volunteer members of Citizens for National Security (CFNS), a nonpartisan 501(c)(3) organization based in Florida conducted the 14-month research that is the basis for the briefing. Its co-founders, Drs. William A. Saxton and Peter M. Leitner will present the report. “It details exactly how the Muslim Brotherhood’s deliberate, premeditated plan is now reaching maturity in this country in the form of homegrown Jihad,” explained Dr. Saxton, CFNS Chairman.

A highlight of the briefing will be an announcement by Dr. Leitner of CFNS’s development of an unprecedented list of individual members of the Muslim Brotherhood in the U.S., and the people and organizations with which they are associated. “Thus far, this database contains thousands of names and hundreds of organizations, and is growing each day as the CFNS research project expands. It will soon be made available to the public,” noted Leitner. 

As the audience feasted on beef, turkey and tuna sandwiches, group co-founder Peter Leitner walked through a long PowerPoint presentationthat laid out a 49-year stealth Muslim Brotherhood plot to infiltrate the United States through a vast web of organizations, many of which have tenuous links at best to the actual Muslim Brotherhood. “It’s a very, very complex organization and a very, very complex problem,” Leitner said of the group he said was behind a plot to destabilize the U.S.

RUNNING MATES?

One of Leitner’s slides was a Venn diagram that purported to show the various techniques that the Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood, the Pakistani Muslim Brotherhood and the Saudi & Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood allegedly use to carry out domestic attacks. The Palestinians, according to Leitner’s chart, preferred money laundering, fraud and political pressure, whereas the Saudis and Egyptians went the subversion, sedition and intimidation on college campuses route instead.

“The Congressman’s hope is that Members of Congress and their staff will get the opportunity to learn more about the dangers of Homegrown Jihad, an issue of great concern to Congressman West,” said Angela Sachitano. ”We cannot ignore the fact that al Qaeda is actively attempting to recruit individuals living within the Muslim American community to commit acts of terror,” West said in a statement. “This threat is real.”

ALLEN WEST NATION

THE BEST VIDEOS FROM WEST: allen-west

Posted in:  Bare Naked Islam