ISNA Redefines ‘Sharia’ for Western Consumption

Instead of using the U.S. as a model for reform in Islam, Islamists view Islam as a model for reform in the U.S.

By Ryan Mauro

Thu, May 30, 2013

Screenshot of ISNA’s article about how to talk about Sharia in the May/June issue of Horizons magazine.

The latest issue of the Islamic Horizons magazine of the Islamic Society of North America, a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity, has an article with an interesting message: The U.S could learn from Islamic law if it weren’t for the “Islamophobes” bashing Sharia.

The theme of the article is that “Islamophobes” are twisting the meaning of Sharia, and it is up to Muslim-Americans to set the record straight. In a game of semantics reminiscent of the campaign to get the media to stop using the word “Islamist” and the“My Jihad” campaign , the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) is now turning to the words “Sharia” and “fiqh.”

The article argues that critics are actually talking about siyasa, or Islamic administration. Sharia is “divine” and fiqh is Islamic legal rulings. Yet what the article doesn’t explain is that Siyasa is fiqh and fiqh is part of Sharia.

Cover of the May/June 2013 Issue of Islamic Horizons Magazine

Once readers are told that these are three separate things, they are open to their redefining. Most importantly, fiqh is framed as a system of jurisprudence superior to the West. This fits into the theme of ISNA’s parent group, the Muslim Brotherhood, that Islam is not just a faith but an alternative civilization.

Hassan al-Banna, the founder of the Brotherhood, once said, “It is the nature of Islam to dominate, not to be dominated, to impose its law on all nations and to extend its power to the entire planet.”

ISNA’s magazine first argues that fiqh is not a theocratic “system of governance” because “unlike our Christian cousins, Muslims never merged ‘church’ and state.”

The article even blames the failures of Sharia-based governance on Western influence:

“The governments of most Muslim-majority countries follow the western nation-state model that centralizes all lawmaking power with the state. Unfortunately, when these states legislate selected fiqh rules (misleadingly labeled ‘Sharia‘), they effectively act as theocracies because they use state power to declare and enforce ‘Sharia’ with little or no recognition of fiqh pluralism.”

In other words, Muslim theocracies exist because they were too Western.

As for “fiqh pluralism,” according to respected authorities on Sharia, this is referring to the fact that there are four Sunni schools of thought, each having their own divisions—but all of these disagreements are over details within the Sharia framework.

Reliance of the Traveler (emphasis added), an authoritative book on Islamic law endorsed by the top Sunni theological institution and the International Institute of Islamic Thought (a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity) states, “The four Sunni schools of Islamic law, Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’I, and Hanbali, are identical in approximately 75 percent of their legal conclusions.”

The Encyclopedia Brittanica explains that after these schools of jurisprudence were formed by the year 1258, “All subsequent generations of jurists were considered bound to … the unquestioned acceptance of their great predecessors as authoritative and could, at most, issue legal opinions drawn from established precedents.”

After ISNA’s article misleadingly compartmentalizing Sharia, fiqh and siyasa, the overall package of Islamic law is presented as something that could actually improve America as it becomes more diverse. Here are two quotes from the article:

“Rather than being a threat to American rule of law, Islamic legal theory could provide valuable insight into how to honor multiplicity without giving up individual values and identities, or unity of the whole.”

“When it comes to dealing with diversity, America could learn a lot from Islamic law, if only it could stop painting it as something that it is not.”

This message isn’t new for ISNA, it’s only that now it’s being said more delicately. ISNA’s Secretary-General from 1994 to 2006, Sayyid Syeed, was recorded in 2006 saying, “Our job is to change the Constitution of America.” (emphasis added) That’s not the language of someone who is talking solely about spirituality and morals.

Muzammil Siddiqi is one of ISNA’s founders and was its President from 1997 to 2000. He remains listed as a member at large of the Board of Directors. In 1996, he said that Muslims “should participate in the [democratic] system to safeguard our interest and try to bring gradual change for the right cause … We must not forget that Allah’s rules have to be established in all lands, and all our efforts should lead to that direction.”

If you are thinking that these “rules” may be referring to an inner spiritual struggle against sin, consider what else Siddiqi’s said (in 2001):

“The criminal law of the Sharia is not practiced here and it is not even required for Muslims to practice the criminal law in a non-Islamic state … Once more people accept Islam, insha’allah, this will lead to the implementation of Sharia in all areas.”

The last part of this statement confirms the fact that the siyasa and fiqh are components of Sharia. The ISNA magazine’s claim that they are separate is debunked by ISNA’s own leadership.

It is often assumed that such deceptive word-play is not approved of by Islamist doctrine. Yet, here’s what the Reliance of the Traveler ruled regarding that matter:

“[I]t is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible … and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory.” (And the goal is to convert America, “the Great Satan”, to Islam through any means possible, even putting a Trojan horse in the White House or even committing violent “Holy War” jihad, against the American Kuffar populace)

“…One should compare the bad consequences entailed by lying to those entailed by telling the truth, and if the consequences of telling the truth are more damaging, one is entitled to lie…” The core belief of the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamists is that their faith is a political doctrine for an alternative civilization. It is Allah’s guide to prosperity and the key to any civilization’s success is to follow it.”

When ISNA says that America would benefit from Sharia/Islamic law, it is recommending compliance with this political doctrine. American Islamists tout this recommendation as a sign of patriotism because, in their mind, compliance with Sharia is good for America.
Instead of using the U.S. as a model for reform in Islam, ISNA’s article views Islam as a model for reform in the U.S.

Posted on 30 May 13 by Clarion Project

Obama’s Snooping Excludes Mosques, Missed Boston Bombers

Posted 06/12/2013 06:34 PM ET

Homeland Insecurity: The White House assures that tracking our every phone call and keystroke is to stop terrorists, and yet it won’t snoop in mosques, where the terrorists are.

That’s right, the government’s sweeping surveillance of our most private communications excludes the jihad factories where homegrown terrorists are radicalized.

Since October 2011, mosques have been off-limits to FBI agents. No more surveillance or undercover sting operations without high-level approval from a special oversight body at the Justice Department dubbed the Sensitive Operations Review Committee.

Who makes up this body, and how do they decide requests? Nobody knows; the names of the chairman, members and staff are kept secret.

We do know the panel was set up under pressure from Islamist groups who complained about FBI stings at mosques. Just months before the panel’s formation, the Council on American-Islamic Relations teamed up with the ACLU to sue the FBI for allegedly violating the civil rights of Muslims in Los Angeles by hiring an undercover agent to infiltrate and monitor mosques there.

Before mosques were excluded from the otherwise wide domestic spy net the administration has cast, the FBI launched dozens of successful sting operations against homegrown jihadists — inside mosques — and disrupted dozens of plots against the homeland.

If only they were allowed to continue, perhaps the many victims of the Boston Marathon bombings would not have lost their lives and limbs. The FBI never canvassed Boston mosques until four days after the April 15 attacks, and it did not check out the radical Boston mosque where the Muslim bombers worshiped.

The bureau didn’t even contact mosque leaders for help in identifying their images after those images were captured on closed-circuit TV cameras and cellphones.

One of the Muslim bombers made extremist outbursts during worship, yet because the mosque wasn’t monitored, red flags didn’t go off inside the FBI about his increasing radicalization before the attacks.

This is particularly disturbing in light of recent independent surveys of American mosques, which reveal some 80% of them preach violent jihad or distribute violent literature to worshipers.
What other five-alarm jihadists are counterterrorism officials missing right now, thanks to restrictions on monitoring the one area they should be monitoring?

Posted on 12 Jun 13 by Investors.com

(h/t to Joe Miller/Restoring Liberty)

[Editor’s Note: This does not necessarily entail the beliefs, thoughts, or theories of the local Act chapters or the National Act office…they are my beliefs, thoughts and/or theories. How does this work…Sheikh Obama tells us that the War on Terror is over, but he has the NSA take cellphone account info (so the government can listen to all phone calls) and take bank account info and credit card info (to see what everyone is buying) to prevent terrorists from attacking…thought the mehdi said the War of Terror was over…sad thing, Muslims and mosques are exempted from his “spying”, so only NON-MUSLIMS are affected by this.

Some people say he is just trying to become king, but in reality, knowing that he is Muslim and a Muslim Brotherhood puppet, he is doing what the Qur’an and Shari’a (Islamic) Law tells him to do…lie to (or mislead) non-Muslims into thinking you are working for them so they give in to what you’re doing and eventually turn to allah for his cause.

No, Obama is doing a lot of things right now to push America into becoming a Muslim country…he is working on killing the economy so we would want to go to Shari’a finance, he is taking away 1st and 2nd Amendments of freedom from us, he is violating his oath of office so he can cater to his Muslim Brotherhood handlers to help them take over the world, he has taking out privacy (cell phone and bank/credit card accounts) to spy on us, he is allowing Muslims to be exempt from all the aforementioned. All this lines up with Shari’a Law. He is operating in Islamic justice, which means that Muslims are better than everyone else, so they get privies and are not looked at, only kuffars (non-Muslims).

So, in knowing Islam, and what the Qur’an, ahadith, Shari’a Law, and the Sira (all of which are the Islamic “sacred” text) Obama isn’t trying to be a tyrannical, dictator type king, he is doing what he can to be the tyrannical, dictator type mehdi. This is why, out of all the previous individuals in history (Nero, Napoleon, Hitler) that score points for being the anti-Christ, but Obama not only scores more points for being the anti-Christ (I am not say he is, just stating his actions is all), but he scores points for being the Mehdi as well, which the other “anti-Christ” figures did not meet at all. So, Sheikh Obama is not trying to become a king, he wants to be the mehdi.]

Report recommends changes for translator that altered Bible to appease Muslims

Posted on June 9, 2013 by creeping

An update on this post, New Bible appeases Muslims, yanks ‘Father,’ Jesus as ‘Son of God’

via Wycliffe pledges to comply with an audit panel’s recommendations on controversial Bible translation practices

After a year’s work, a World Evangelical Alliance (WEA) panel has released its report on the Muslim-context translation practices of Wycliffe Bible Translators and its partner SIL International. Wycliffe requested the audit of its policies after controversy erupted last year over the world’s premier translator supporting translations that altered the phrases “Son of God” and “God the Father” in Muslim contexts.

Western mission agencies have been concerned about literal translations of “God the Father” and “Son of God” in Muslim contexts because the terms imply God had sexual relations with Mary. One SIL-supported translation of Matthew in Turkey rendered “God the Father” something along the lines of “the great protector,” according to locals. (See “The battle for accurate Bible translation in Asia” from the Feb. 25, 2012 issue of WORLD Magazine.)

Both the Assemblies of God and the Presbyterian Church in America threatened to withdraw support from Wycliffe over the issue. Western mission agencies have also felt backlash from local believers in Muslim contexts who felt the agencies were changing the terms out of impatience over church growth. Frontiers, a missions agency that funds translation work, has also supported translations that alter the divine familial terms, but unlike Wycliffe it has not publicly submitted to an audit of its practices or policies. The WEA report may set the standard for Frontiers whether it officially adopts the recommendations or not.

The report never overtly rebukes Wycliffe/SIL, but it does draw clearer lines for the organizations’ translation practices. (Download a PDF of the report.)

Wycliffe’s earlier standards said translators should use a literal translation of the divine familial terms in a “majority” of cases, but left open the possibility of using an “alternative term with equivalent meaning” when the literal translation might “communicate wrong meaning.”

The new report is clearer. “The WEA Panel (hereafter referred to as ‘Panel’) recommends that when the words for ‘father’ and ‘son’ refer to God the Father and to the Son of God, these words always be translated with the most directly equivalent familial words within the given linguistic and cultural context of the recipients,” the report says.

They needed a report to conclude the most directly equivalent words should be used when translating?

The panel says where the familial words had a sexual implication, the translators should add qualifying adjectives to the familial word rather than change the word itself, using terms like “anointed Son of God” or “heavenly Father.” They also recommend that translators use “paratext” (footnotes or commentary) to explain the terms rather than alter the text itself.

The report notes “the centrality of the word for “son” in the biblical presentation of salvation,” and says the centrality “demands that translators render the word with the most direct equivalent possible.”

The report also recommends standards for local involvement in translations and urged Wycliffe to set up a process for handling controversies over the familial terms. The panel says Wycliffe should be transparent about the translation decisions it makes.

Wycliffe had suspended the controversial translations while the review moved forward. A Wycliffe spokesman said that all the suspended translations (and all future translations) would meet these new standards prior to publication.

Critics of Wycliffe’s translation practices were cautious about embracing the report until they had studied it more fully.

Some readers may be interested in this web seminar talk recorded online with questions and answers on the topic. We have not had an opportunity to review it.

Wycliffe, based out of Orlando, Florida is listed by Forbes as #70 The 100 Largest U.S. Charities.

Posted 9 Jun 13 by Creeping Sharia

The Muslim Brotherhood in the Obama Administration

If anyone needed evidence that Hillary Clinton is in the pocket of the Muslim Brotherhood, the events of the last few days should be more than sufficient.  On the anniversary of 9/11, on what should be a day of shame for the Muslim world, the US Embassy in Cairo issued a statement condemning critics of Islamofascism in language appropriate to the office of propaganda for the Muslim Brotherhood. Islamofascists launched violent attacks on Americans, repeating the outrages in miniature of the World Trade Center attacks 11 years ago. In the face of these outrages the posture of the U.S. government is one that would make Neville Chamberlain blush. In four years Barack Obama has managed to turn the entire Middle East over to America’s enemies. So that our readers can understand how this has happened and how far advanced the infiltration of the Muslim Brotherhood into the Obama administration has progressed, we are publishing this pamphlet by Frank Gaffney, President of the Center for Security Policy, called The Muslim Brotherhood in the Obama Administration. We are printing 200,000 copies to distribute to concerned Americans. We are selling them at cost if you buy 25 or more to share with your friends.—David Horowitz

Read the pamphlet below or order your copy by clicking here. 

Posted 14 Sep 12 by Front Page Mag

Arif Alikhan – Assistant Secretary for Policy Development for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Mohammed Elibiary – Homeland Security Adviser.

Rashad Hussain – Special Envoy to the (OIC) Organization of the Islamic Conference.

Salam al-Marayati – Obama Adviser, founder of Muslim Public Affairs Council and its current executive director.

Imam Mohamed Magid – Obama’s Sharia Czar, Islamic Society of North America.

Eboo Patel – Advisory Council on Faith-Based Neighborhood Partnerships

[Editor’s Note: This does not necessarily entail the beliefs, thoughts, or theories of the local Act chapters or the National Act office…they are my beliefs, thoughts and/or theories. This goes back the Muslim Brotherhood vowing they will internally take over America by placing a Trojan horse in office. Mullah Obama has put more Muslims or sharia advocates in office than you could shake a stick at. The Muslims and the advocates (including Barack Hussein Obama) have multiple times stated the US Constitution is old fashioned and needs to be rewritten, as well as putting in bans (gun control) and working on a UN treaty (Res. 16/18) initiated by the Organization of the Islamic Conference against freedom of speech and religion here in the US, with Obama going for it because his statements in the past about we have too much freedom of speech because of the “old” Constitution. All of which points to Islamic doctrine/law (no non-Muslims should own guns, and no one should have the freedom to tell the truth about Islam). America is headed out of being a free country, and headed towards Islamic dictator lead hell. Click HERE if you want to see the Muslim Brotherhood’s document for taking over the US.]

Video: Civilization Jihad Exposed in St. Louis

Posted on March 2, 2013 by creeping

h/t @CausingFitna

posted on 2 Mar 13 by Creeping Sharia

Fed Judge Blasts CAIR in “Muslim Mafia” Case

Dearborn Muslim Calls for Killing Anti-Islam Protesters

“Terror” – the tv miniseries about jihad on America that never aired

Florida imam on tape soliciting money for Taliban

Video: The Truth About Interfaith Dialogues