Posted tagged ‘Sharia law’

The Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America’s Ominous Post-Election Statement

January 24, 2017

The Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America’s Ominous Post-Election Statement, Front Page MagazinePhilip Haney, January 23, 2017

(This is a very long and, at times, tedious article. However, it is well worth not only reading but also studying since it gives excellent insights into Islamists and why they despise President Trump’s opposition to “radical Islam” and what he is likely to do to fight it. — DM)

salah-al-sawy

With the unexpected election of Donald J. Trump as the 45th President, America has reached an historic crossroads vis-à-vis our domestic and foreign counter-terrorism and immigration policies. As will be seen as we walk through the Roadmap’s text, the AMJA regards the election of President Trump as a disruptive calamity – a potentially devastating setback – in its multi-generational strategy to promote Islam, and relentlessly integrate (not assimilate) the core principles of Shariah law into mainstream American society.

As we work our way through the Roadmap, we will soon discover that it is actually laid on the solid foundation of a crucially important strategic concept that supports the GIM (as authorized by the Muslim Brotherhood). In Arabic, this strategic approach is known as Al-Qaeda Al-Motzema Al-Islamia, while in English, it is known as the Observant (Obedient) Muslim Base.

Yes, Al-Qaeda, the word translated here as ‘base,’ is the same word we commonly associate with Jihadist groups throughout the world. However, in its original meaning, Al-Qaeda is actually a concept, i.e., a ‘base of operations,’ rather than a subversive, violent terrorist organization operating somewhere far away in Afghanistan, Iraq or Syria.

Remarkably, an overt example of Muslim Brotherhood infiltration into the American political arena was seen in the January 21, 2017 appearance of Imam Mohamed Magid at an interfaith religious service for President Donald J. Trump.

Mohamed Magid, who is Imam of the All Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS), has also served as both President and Vice-President of ISNA (an HLF co-conspirator which is also closely linked to ADAMS), was scheduled to recite a simple opening prayer. Instead, he went ‘off script’ and recited two verses from the Quran that just happen to reflect concepts included in both the AMJA Roadmap, and in Article 1 of the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights (also see Paragraph 4 above).

The two verses (as quoted by Imam Magid at the prayer service) are Quran 49.13: “O humankind, We have created you a single male and female (Adam and Eve) and made you into nations and tribes and communities, that you may know one another. Really, the most honored of you in the sight of God is the most righteous of you, and God has all knowledge,” and Quran 30.22: “And among the signs of God is the creation of heaven and earth, and the variation in your languages and your colors. Verily, in that are signs for those who know.”

In addition to co-conspirator ISNA, ADAMS has close ties to several other Muslim Brotherhood front groups, including HLF co-conspirator International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), and the SAFA Trust, which was raided by the FBI after 9/11 because organizations and leaders “in the SAFA Group maintained a financial and ideological relationship with persons and entities with known affiliations to the designated terrorist Groups PIJ (Palestinian Islamic Jihad) and HAMAS.”

Incredibly, one of the SAFA Trust’s sub-organizations was the Sterling Charitable Gift Fund, whose 6 primary advisors included Imam Mohamed Magid.

What is the link between all of these groups and the AMJA Roadmap? The link is Imam Magid himself, who in addition to serving as past President and Vice-President of the ISNA, and as Imam of ADAMS, currently serves as AMJA Expert number 26, where he is listed as “Shaykh Mohammad AlMajid, Imam of Adam Center in Virginia.”

Since Imam (Shaykh) Magid is a current member of AMJA, it is very plausible that he deliberately went ‘off script’ at the prayer service, in order to make a public declaration (sound the alarm) to the entire Islamic world, while using his opportunity to speak at a high-profile public forum to reiterate one of the concepts discussed in the Roadmap.

***************************

Introduction

The purpose of this article is to decipher the ominous, but heavily camouflaged language embedded within the English text of a recent scholarly document, published on the website of the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America (AMJA), which is entitled Post-Election Statement: Principles and Roadmap(aka the Roadmap).

As a 40-year specialist in the Strategy & Tactics of the Global Islamic Movement (GIM) and founding member of the Department of Homeland Security Customs and Border Protection (retired), my intention is to ‘pull out the threads’ of references in the Shariah-compliant Roadmap that are derived from the Quran and Hadith (and other academic sources), so that the general public sees more clearly that the AMJA is more than a simple ‘home-grown’ American Islamic organization.

Other ‘threads’ (fundamental Islamic doctrines) that are tightly woven into the fabric of the AMJA Roadmap include explicit religious Obligations (Paragraph 3), the Shariah-authorized response to the Oppression of Islamic civil rights (Paragraph 6), Loyalty & Enmity (Paragraph 10), the doctrine of Unity & Brotherhood within the global Islamic community (Paragraph 10), and allusions to the Islamic Revival Movement (Paragraph 13).

Why is the AMJA Roadmap even important? Could a scholarly article written by the leaders of a harmless-sounding American Islamic organization possibly have a corrosive influence on our Constitutionally protected values of Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness?

The answer is: Yes.

With the unexpected election of Donald J. Trump as the 45th President, America has reached an historic crossroads vis-à-vis our domestic and foreign counter-terrorism and immigration policies. As will be seen as we walk through the Roadmap’s text, the AMJA regards the election of President Trump as a disruptive calamity – a potentially devastating setback – in its multi-generational strategy to promote Islam, and relentlessly integrate (not assimilate) the core principles of Shariah law into mainstream American society.

As we work our way through the Roadmap, we will soon discover that it is actually laid on the solid foundation of a crucially important strategic concept that supports the GIM (as authorized by the Muslim Brotherhood). In Arabic, this strategic approach is known as Al-Qaeda Al-Motzema Al-Islamia, while in English, it is known as the Observant (Obedient) Muslim Base.

Yes, Al-Qaeda, the word translated here as ‘base,’ is the same word we commonly associate with Jihadist groups throughout the world. However, in its original meaning, Al-Qaeda is actually a concept, i.e., a ‘base of operations,’ rather than a subversive, violent terrorist organization operating somewhere far away in Afghanistan, Iraq or Syria.

To continue, in order for the GIM to integrate Shariah into a non-Islamic societies (like America), it is essential that an obedient, well-organized Islamic Al-Qaeda (base) first be established, with each member of the community striving to his or her utmost to promote Islam, which in Arabic is called Dawah.

For at least three generations, right here in America, Muslim Brotherhood front groups such as the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) have been building up the Al-Qaeda Al-Motzema Al-Islamia.

During this process, what organization has provided the gravitational force – acting as the sun in the center of the Islamic solar system – to the Al-Qaeda Al-Motzema Al-Islamia here in America? Or, what unifying force holds these Muslim Brotherhood planets (organizations) in their respective orbits?

The answer is the AMJA, which maintains an archive of reliable, Shariah-compliant Fatwas needed to assure the Muslim community (and their leaders) that they are all following the correct, straight path of Allah.

Note: For several additional examples of AMJA Fatwas, please see Appendix I – AMJA Fatwas below.

AMJA Background

In English, the AMJA is known as the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America. However, this benign-sounding title is dramatically different, and much more ominous, when translated directly from the Arabic, i.e., the Majama Fuqaha Al-Shariah B’Amrikia (Group of Shariah Specialists in America).

More specifically, the covert use of the term Al-Shariah B’Amrikia (Shariah in America) should send up an immediate ‘red flag.’ After all, haven’t we been reassured repeatedly that Muslims have no intention of implementing Shariah law here in America, and that Shariah poses no threat to our constitutionally protected freedoms? Aren’t those who raise concerns about Shariah routinely branded as bigots, raving conspiracy theorists and dubious Islamophobes?

If there is no intention of implementing Shariah law here in America, then why does the AMJA include the Arabic term Al-Shariah B’Amrikia in its official title and logo? And, if these reassurances are really true, then why are Muslim Brotherhood front groups like CAIR so consistently and vehemently opposed to efforts to pass legislation known as American Laws for American Courts (ALAC)?

In fact, Shariah law does pose a threat to American (and Western) freedoms and values. According to Sheikh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani of the Islamic Supreme Council of America, “Islamic civilization, since the time of Prophet Muhammad until now, is firmly founded on the concept of ‘rule of law’ For that reason, the law is published and known, and citizens and courts are expected to uphold it. In addition, Muslim citizens must adhere to Islamic law – Shariah…the disciplines and principles that govern the behavior of a Muslim individual towards his or herself, family, neighbors, community, city, nation and the Muslim polity as a whole, the Ummah.”

The current AMJA leadership structure includes six members of the Leadership Council (aka Majlis Al-Shura, or the Shura Council), nearly all of whom are graduates of Al-Azhar University in Cairo, plus eight Scholars, 46 Experts and 41 Members. Combined together, this roster of 100 Islamic scholars is a Who’s Who of prominent Muslim Brotherhood leaders and Salafi Muslims affiliated with the Global Islamic Movement.

It is also important to recognize that the AMJA is much more than a simple ‘home-grown’ group of American Muslim clergymen. Instead, it is part of a constellation of influential Islamic organizations, such as the European Council for Fatwa and Research (ECFR), the International Union for Muslim Scholars (IUMS), and the Islamic Research Foundation International (IRFI).

Together, such groups form a global coalition of tightly integrated Muslim scholars known as the Ulema, which gather together periodically for Ijtimah (Consensus) Conferences, where problems that Muslims face in non-Islamic countries are reviewed (more about Ijtimah / Ijtihad is also discussed in Paragraph 10 of the Roadmap).

In turn, these scholars are authorized to issue legal rulings (Fatwa), and to provide guidance to the global Islamic community (Ummah), which are based exclusively on the unalterable authority of Islamic Shariah law – never on the ‘man-made’ U.S. Constitution, let alone state or federal civil law.

Analysis of AMJA Roadmap Text

Note: I use the Sahih International translation of the Quran, which is often (but not always) used by the AMJA scholars. Also, since many words in the Quran (for example, Alamina) can be translated several different ways, I may include additional synonyms. For example, in the case of Alamina, it can be accurately translated as either animals, beasts, created beings, creatures, mankind or men.

Each one of the original 14 paragraphs in the Roadmap has been numbered for clarity and quoted in italics below. After each paragraph is quoted, I provide commentary with highlighted phrases taken from that paragraph of the Roadmap text, along with hyperlinks to the sources.

(1) “In the name of Allah, the Ever-Compassionate, the Ever-Merciful.”

This comes directly from Quran 1.1: “In the name of Allah , the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful.”

(2) “All praise be to Allah alone and may blessings and peace be upon he who was sent as a mercy for all of humanity.”

Also taken directly from Quran 1.2: “[All] praise is [due] to Allah, Lord of the worlds”; it is combined with a phrase from Quran 21.107: “And We have not sent you, except as a mercy to created beings/creatures/humanity/man/mankind/people/worlds.”

In addition, Mohammed is also well known within the Islamic world as ‘the mercy for all humanity,’ as discussed extensively in Prophet Muhammad: A Mercy to Humanity, Part I & Part II.

(3) “No one could possibly be unaware of the political storm that has recently overtaken this country. Some see it as a real threat to the principles of security, freedom, equality, well-being and social justice that form the basis of the American Dream which millions from various ethnic and religious backgrounds seek to achieve. As Muslims are one slice of this society, national and religious obligations demand that they deal with these news events in a way that will protect the nation and its people from any evils, in a manner benefitting all citizens. For this reason, the Assembly of Muslim Jurists in America is addressing the Imams, Islamic workers and the entire Muslim community with permanent values that must be emphasized during this stage as well as a number of principles to be used in dealing with these events, what has happened as well as what is expected to happen.”

Political Storm: It is intriguing that no mention is made here of the chaotic aftermath of the Arab Spring, or of the current storms of violence raging across the Middle East and in the Far East. Instead, the election of Donald Trump as President is seen here as a test, or as a trial, storm, and even as a calamity (as in Paragraph 5 below).

Religious Obligations: This is a direct reference to Articles 1(a), 8 & 9 of the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, which was drafted and ratified by all 57 members nations of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, which was renamed the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) on June 28, 2011. Article 24 of the Declaration states “All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shariah,” while Article 25 states “The Islamic Shariah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration.”

Religious Obligation (Obligatory Duty) in Arabic is Fard, i.e., “what the Islamic Lawgiver [Mohammed] strictly requires to be done, and whose obligatory character is proved by definitive evidence. Someone who denies the Fard is considered a disbeliever (Kafir), as he or she is denying what has been ordained by clear-cut and decisive texts.”

Fard is separated in to groups: [1] “Fard Al-Ayn (Individual duty): The group of tasks that are every Muslim is required to perform individually as a duty, such as Salah (Daily Prayer), Hijab (Covering) or the Hajj (Pilgrimage) to Mecca at least once in a lifetime,” and [2] “Fard Al-Kifaya(Sufficiency/Communal duty): The duty which is imposed on the whole Ummah. One is not required to perform it as long as a sufficient number of community members fulfill it.”

Religious Obligation (Fard) is also discussed extensively in the definitive, authorized English translation of Shariah law, known as The Reliance of the Traveller (Umdat Al-Salik).

Entire Muslim Community: This refers to the global Islamic community, i.e., the Ummah aka Nation (as in Nation of Islam)

Permanent Values: This concept is derived from Quran 3.110: You are the best nation produced [as an example] for mankind. You enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and believe in Allah. If only the People of the Scripture had believed, it would have been better for them. Among them are believers, but most of them are defiantly disobedient. The concept of permanent values is also based on Quran 2.41: And believe in what I have sent down confirming that which is [already] with you, and be not the first to disbelieve in it. And do not exchange My signs for a small price, and fear [only] Me.

Permanent Values: For a detailed discussion of this subject, see article by G. A. Parwez entitled Quranic Permanent Values

What Is Expected To Happen: This is a plain and direct call to the Al-Qaeda Al-Motzema Al-Islamia(the Observant Muslim Base) to maintain a heightened state of awareness and engagement, for the purpose of defending Islam from disbelievers.

(4) “Muslims of America are neither guests nor strangers here. Muslims, due to them being descended from humanity’s parents, Adam and Eve, and being created from this earth, are part of the greater family of humanity. They are also citizens here like the other citizens with both rights and responsibilities. This land is ruled by a constitution and the rule of law that protects the rights of all its minorities with due respect at all levels, even though the visceral speech of the recent heated election may have seemed to deny this. We shall adhere to our rights and the rights of other Americans and shall strengthen our bonds with the civil rights organizations, Muslim or non-Muslim. We shall work with them and defend them whenever needed. However, at the same time, we must always fulfill our obligations completely and be active participants in society working to protect the security and well-being of its inhabitants.”

Humanity’s Parents, Adam and Eve: Another allusion derived from Article 1 of the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights, which reads: All human beings form one family whose members are united by their subordination to Allah and descent from Adam. All men are equal in terms of basic human dignity and basic obligations and responsibilities, without any discrimination on the basis of race, color, language, belief, sex, religion, political affiliation, social status or other considerations. The true religion is the guarantee for enhancing such dignity along the path to human integrity.

This is also a direct allusion to Quran 49.13: “O mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Acquainted.”

Quran Rights And Responsibilities: It is important to reiterate here that the AMJA’s definitions of ‘rights and responsibilities’ are not drawn from the U.S. Constitution & American civil law, but solely from Shariah, and from the Cairo Declaration.

Muslim or non-Muslim: It is intriguing that while the AMJA strictly prohibits American Muslims from working for the FBI, the military, or for U.S. security (and law enforcement) services, because such work could possibly involve “spying on Muslims” (see Appendix I below), it grants specific permission the American Muslim community to work with non-Muslim civil rights organizations, presumably with such ‘allies’ as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), or the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).

Fulfill Our Obligations: In the last sentence of this paragraph, the Roadmap adds a caveat, reminding Muslims who chose to work with such secular, non-Muslim groups, that “we must always fulfill our obligations completely.” Such obligations would no doubt include Dawah (as discussed above).

Obligations: Also discussed in Paragraph 3 and Paragraph 11

(5) “It is known that patience, perseverance, prudence and discernment are among the most important tools for success and happiness, especially during times of calamities. These are needed to establish one’s position on certainty or, at the very least, the preponderance of the evidence. One’s stance cannot be simply a matter of making proclamations in front of cameras or under the pressure of provocations. The Messenger of Allah told Ashaj Abdul-Qais, ‘You have two qualities that Allah loves: forbearance and deliberateness.’ The Muslim Community must proceed with calmness and clarity and must refer matters to the knowledgeable people who are specialists in the relevant fields. Allah has said, ‘But if they had referred it back to the Messenger or to those of authority among them, then the ones who [can] draw correct conclusions from it would have known about it.’”

During Times Of Calamities: This paragraph introduces a founding concept in Islam, that the Muslim community should always defer to trained scholars whenever calamities arise. This practice is followed to prevent individual Muslims (and entire communities) from violating any provisions of Shariah law.

Calamities: Although the Arabic word for calamity (Sawaba) may also be translated as an affliction, disaster or misfortune, it always implies a direct assault on the community, or the faith, of Islam. Variants of Sawaba occur about 77 times in the Quran, including verse 2.156, which says: “Who, when affliction/disaster/misfortune strikes them, say, ‘Indeed we belong to Allah , and indeed to Him we will return.’”

This very passage was cited in the January 05, 2017 CAIR Texas Executive Director’s Message, which is entitled A New Year For Civil Rights And Political Empowerment.

You Have Two Qualities: This reference is from Al-Bukhari and Muslim, two Hadith sources (the sayings of Mohammed): “The Prophet, praised the delegation of ‘Abd Al-Qays from the Hajar region for their deliberation and tolerance, as he said to Ashajj ‘Abd Al-Qays: ‘You have two characteristics that Allah and His Messenger like: forbearance and deliberation.’”

But If They Had Referred It / Those Of Authority: This passage is found in Quran 4.83: “And when there comes to them information about [public] security or fear, they spread it around. But if they had referred it back to the Messenger or to those of authority among them, then the ones who [can] draw correct conclusions from it would have known about it. And if not for the favor of Allah upon you and His mercy, you would have followed Satan, except for a few.”

Note: The subject of submitting (deferring) to ‘those in authority’ is also reiterated in Paragraph 8 and Paragraph 9.

As also discussed in Paragraph 3, this submission to authority also the Fard (Obligatory Duty) of the Al-Qaeda Al-Motzema Al-Islamia, i.e., the Observant (Obedient) Muslim Base.

(6) “There is no blame upon a country if it does what is needed to protect its interests and security as long as it does not transgress or oppress by denying or violating rights. America, even given its excesses, is still one of the best nations when it comes to protecting human rights and the sanctity of humanity. It is a must upon us that we not over generalize or spread fear. Our dealings with the current events must be wise and objective.”

Transgress Or Oppress: The concepts of fighting or striving (Jihad) against Transgression and Oppression are deeply embedded within the ideology of Islam. The consequences of transgressing the statutes and commandments of Shariah law, or of oppressing (opposing) the efforts of the Islamic community, are severe. For three examples, see Quran 2.190: “Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you but do not transgress. Indeed. Allah does not like transgressors,” Quran 21.9: “Then We fulfilled for them the promise, and We saved them and whom We willed and destroyed the transgressors,” and Quran 2.193: “Fight them until there is no [more] Fitnah [oppression] and [until] worship is [acknowledged to be] for Allah. But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression, except against the oppressors.”

Oppression is also discussed in extensive detail in the Hadith (Bukhari), Volume 4, Section 43.

In 2014, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, wrote to President Barack Obama about his views on the situation in Iraq, Gaza and Palestine, while also commenting about “Muslim oppression at the hands of the West in general and the United States in particular.”

Human Rights: Discussed specifically in Article 23 of the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights, and in the preamble of the Cairo Declaration, which states: “Agrees to issue the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam that will serve as a general guidance for Member States in the Field of human rights,” and “In contribution to the efforts of mankind to assert human rights, to protect man from exploitation and persecution, and to affirm his freedom and right to a dignified life in accordance with the Islamic Shariah.”

On January 13, 2016, the Dearborn, MI based American Human Rights Council (AHRC) announced that it had co-signed a petition asking President Obama to commute the sentence of the five Holy Land Foundation (HLF) defendants to time served. The AHRC website states that “Five well- regarded members of the Muslim American community, Mufid Abdulqader, Shukri Baker, Ghassan Elashi, Mohammad El-Mezain, and Abdulrahman Odeh, were given unusually lengthy sentences that shocked the American Muslim community for their harshness,” adding that “The Holy Land Foundation case if one of the most traumatic experiences of the American Muslim community. The case sent shock waves through the humanitarian sector worldwide,” said Imad Hamad, AHRC Executive director. “We believe that given the equities, it is in the interest of justice to commute their sentences to time served,” concluded Hamad.

From an Islamic perspective, it appears that sentencing five individuals to prison for material support of Hamas, a globally designated terrorist organization, is a violation of their civil and human rights, which is another form of Fitnah.

(7) Testing humans with good or evil is how Allah deals with His servants. Whoever sells his faith for this world has suffered a clear loss. The Muslim believes that his religion is the dearest of all things. Any time in which the worldly goods will be accepted in exchange for one’s faith will be a time of ignobility and treachery. The trials and punishments that can come from humans cannot possibly be like that which will come from Allah – and it is only the people of hypocrisy that could ever equate those two. Allah has said, ‘And of the people is he who worships Allah on an edge. If he is touched by good, he is reassured by it; but if he is struck by trial he turns on his face [to the other direction]. He has lost [this] world and the Hereafter. That is what is the manifest loss.’”

Testing / Trials And Punishments: In Arabic, this is known as Fitnah فِتْنَةَ, which occurs 60 times in the Quran. Fitnah is another powerful concept that is woven tightly into the theological fabric of Islam. In fact, Fitnah is the catalyst that leads to outbreaks of violence and chronic terrorism throughout the world. For example, Quran 2.191 says: “And kill [slaughter] them wherever you overtake them and expel them [violently] from wherever they have expelled you, and Fitnah is worse than killing [slaughter]. And do not fight them at Al-Masjid Al-Haram [the Great Mosque in Mecca] until they fight you there. But if they fight you, then kill [slaughter] them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers.”

The concept of Fitnah is a powerful catalyst, leading directly to Jihad, as illustrated in sections Q 1.2(3) and 2.4(4) of Reliance of the Traveller: “The best Jihad is speaking the truth to an unjust ruler.” The word unjust used here is yet another adjective used to describe Fitnah.

Reliance (page 615) also makes the following ominous declaration of Ijtimah (Consensus), effectively shattering the concept of what is known in the West as the self-radicalized ‘Lone Wolf’ (or ‘Known Wolf’, as per Patrick Poole): There is no disagreement among scholars that it is permissible for a single Muslim to attack battle lines of unbelievers headlong and fight them even if he knows he will be killed. But if one knows it will not hurt them at all, such as if a blind man were to hurl himself against them, then it is unlawful. Likewise, if someone who is alone sees a corrupt person with a bottle of wine beside him and a sword in his hand, and he knows that the person will chop his neck if he censures him for drinking, it is not permissible for him to do so, as it would not entail any religious advantage worth giving one’s life for. Such censure is only praiseworthy when one is able to eliminate the wrong and one’s action will produce some benefit.

Sells His Faith / Suffered A Clear Loss are derived from Quran 2.207: “And of the people is he who sells himself, seeking means to the approval of Allah. And Allah is kind to [His] servants,” and from Quran 4.119: “And I will mislead them, and I will arouse in them [sinful] desires, and I will command them so they will slit the ears of cattle, and I will command them so they will change the creation of Allah. And whoever takes Satan as an ally instead of Allah has certainly sustained a clear loss.”

And Of The People: This is taken directly from Quran 22.11: “And of the people is he who worships Allah on an edge. If he is touched by good, he is reassured by it; but if he is struck by trial [Fitnah], he turns on his face [to the other direction]. He has lost [this] world and the Hereafter. That is what is the manifest loss.”

(8) “Islam, with respect to its belief and legal foundations is unalterably fixed. It does not accept any replacement for change. With its branches and rulings, though, it can accommodate people under any time or place. By its legal principles, it is able to absorb changes of time and places and circumstances of necessity and need. However, the law of necessity has its specific legal parameters that one must adhere to. One must refer to the people of knowledge to ensure that the principle is being applied properly. A Muslim must comply with his faith and refer confusing or troublesome matters to the well-grounded scholars. AMJA is of the view that there has yet to occur – and they do not expect to occur – a situation in which one is required to flee with one’s faith, or wherein one is excused from performing some parts of the faith’s teachings.”

Legal Foundations / Legal Principles / Legal Parameters: This is a direct reference to Shariahlaw. As found in section A1.1 of Reliance of the Traveller, “There is no disagreement among the scholars of the Muslims that the source of legal rulings for all the acts of those who are morally responsible is Allah Most Glorious.”

Muslim Brotherhood founder Syed Qutb stated: “There is only one law which ought to be followed, and that is the Sharia.”

Jamaat-e-Islami founder Sayyid Abul A’la Maududi wrote: “Islam wishes to destroy all states and governments anywhere on the face of the earth which are opposed to the ideology and program of Islam regardless of the country or the nation which rules it. The purpose of Islam is to set up a State on the basis of its own ideology and program.”

Is there any room here for the U.S. Constitution, and the Declaration of Independence?

Unalterably Fixed / Any Replacement For Change: These two phrases touch the heart of the looming conflict between the certain unalienable Rights of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness that have been endowed by our Creator, versus the emphatic declaration that the legal foundations of Islam (Shariah law) are unalterably fixed, and that no replacement for change can ever be accepted.

This is not just AMJA’s position. An August 09, 2012 Pew Research Center survey entitled The World’s Muslims: Unity and Diversity asked Muslims whether they believe there is only one true way to understand Islam’s teachings, or if multiple interpretations are possible. In 32 of the 39 countries surveyed, well more than half of all Muslims agreed there is only one correct way to understand the teachings of Islam.

Must Comply With His Faith: Alluded to in Quran 2.207: “And of the people is he who sells himself, seeking means to the approval of Allah. And Allah is kind to [His] servants.”

Well-Grounded Scholars: Reinforcing a principle that was first introduced in Paragraph 5, and reiterated in Paragraphs 9 and Paragraph 10 below, section A1.2 of Reliance of the Traveller states: Unaided Intellect Cannot Know Allah’s Rules. The question arises. Is it possible for the mind alone, unaided by Allah’s messengers and revealed scriptures, to know rulings, such that someone not reached by a prophet’s invitation would be able through his own reason to know Allah’s rule concerning his actions? Or is this impossible?

Flee With One’s Faith: This refers to the Hijrah (Migration), another fundamental concept in Islam, with connotations going back 1,400 years, to the founding history of Islam. At this point, the Roadmap introduces the possibility that Muslims in America may have to flee to a safer location, for the sake of their faith. Socially, this is a very provocative (and potentially inflammatory) statement by the AMJA. It engenders immediate animosity and tension, and serves to further alienate and marginalize the Muslim community in America.

Notice also that in this time of crisis, the AMJA is not encouraging Muslims to assimilate into American mainstream culture, but instead advises them to further distance themselves from it, while surrounding themselves with the protective wall of Shariah law, and preparing for the possibility of leaving the country entirely.

For example, in a January 14, 2017 Huffington Post article about a mosque fire in Seattle, CAIR representative Joseph Shoji Lachman included this statement: “Even in a city with as liberal a reputation as Seattle, people of Middle Eastern descent fear for their lives simply because of their appearance and religion.” As discussed in Paragraph 7 above, this is an example of Fitnah, i.e., Muslims living in a hostile, oppressive, non-Islamic culture, where fear becomes a way of life.

Quoting directly from The Significance of the Hijrah by Ibrahim B. Syed, Ph.D., President of the Islamic Research Foundation International, Inc: The significance of Hijrah…is not limited to the Islamic history or to the Muslims. The Hijrah not only reshaped – socially and politically – the Arab Peninsula, but also had its impact on worldwide civilizations. Throughout the history of Islam, the migration was a transitional line between the two major eras, regarding to the message of Islam; the era of Makkah [Mecca] and the era of Madinah. In its essence, this signified a transition from one phase to another, as follows:

Transition from the position of weakness, where the non-believers of Makkah – particularly the people of Quraish – humiliated, tortured and killed Muslims, to the position of strength. This is where Muslims were allowed to defend themselves and were able to defeat their adversaries. Transition, which is most significantly for early Muslims, to the phase in which Islam was not only the act of worship, but a way of life. This was encompassing (surrounding) politics, economy, social interactions and every other aspect of life. This was the first time when Islam was looked upon as a comprehensive religion.

(9) “Both Muslims and non-Muslims bring harm to Islam and Muslims. Muslims do so via ignorance, taking knowledge from the unqualified, blind zealotry, extremism or by betraying Allah, His Messenger and the believers. The non-Muslims harm Islam and Muslims via enmity and hatred, which is also built upon ignorance and intolerance. You should eagerly learn your faith and its regulations. You should fortify your knowledge and understanding via learning from the well-grounded, pious scholars. Then you should be a Muslim whose deeds, above and beyond his speech, are truthful and sincere. You should be an excellent ambassador for your faith. Representing Islam well and displaying its realities is of great importance during these times.”

Well-Grounded, Pious Scholars: First introduced in Paragraph 5 and reiterated in Paragraph 8 andParagraph 10.

Truthful And Sincere: This concept is derived from Quran 9.119: “O you who have believed, fear Allah and be with those who are true (in word and deed).” For more on this subject from a Quranic perspective, see article entitled The Importance and Reward For The One Who Is Honest.

(10) “The time has come to leave off calling to groups and sectarianism and to stop the division and differences. Truly, togetherness is mercy and division is a form of punishment. It is obligatory upon us now, O Muslims, to spread the feelings of mutual love, mercy and compassion in all dealings with all believers, regardless of their divisions that they align with or the paths that they follow in their Dawah efforts. We must leave behind us all forms of fanaticism and bigotry. Instead, we must form the bond of brotherhood upon the Quran and Sunnah. Those two, and nothing else are the basis of our allegiance or disavowing. We should also avoid delving into those heated discussions of matters of Ijtihad (juristic reasoning) and details of the law. The issues concerning which scholars differ based on juristic reasoning or policy are numerous and if every time two Muslims differed with another over such issues they would flee from one another, there would be no sanctity or brotherhood left between any Muslims. We must not drive away and make enemies out of anyone that we could join our hearts with upon the religion and agree with them on the basics of righteousness and piety. This is especially true during this cautious time. Since this principle of understanding is accepted when dealing with people of other faiths, it must even more so be accepted when dealing with people of one’s own faith.”

Division / Bond of Brotherhood: The subject of Division vs. a Unified Brotherhood (thus the name Muslim Brotherhood) is frequently discussed in Islamic theology (Quran & Hadith), as in Quran 3.103: And hold firmly to the rope of Allah all together and do not become divided. And remember the favor of Allah upon you – when you were enemies and He brought your hearts together and you became, by His favor, brothers.

This is also another example of the insidious, kaleidoscopic nature of Fitnah, as discussed in more detail under the heading Testing And Trials in Paragraph 7 above.

Those Two, And Nothing Else: Once again, net even the U.S. Constitution and/or Western values of freedom and liberty, are exempt for the dominating influence of Shariah law, as derived from the Quran and Hadith.

Allegiance Or Disavowing: Code words for another deeply embedded Islamic doctrine, known as Al-Wala Wa’l Bara, or the doctrine of Loyalty & Enmity. Other adjectives used as synonyms of Loyalty & Enmity include Enjoin & Forbid, or, as found here in the AMJA Roadmap, Allegiance & Disavowal.

The basis for Loyalty and Enmity, which calls on Muslims to be loyal to one another (even if they dislike each other), is found in Quran 9.71: “The believing men and believing women are allies of one another. They enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and establish prayer and give Zakah[Charity] and obey Allah and His Messenger. Those, Allah will have mercy upon them. Indeed, Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise.” The same concept is reiterated in Quran 8.73: “And those who disbelieved are allies of one another. If you do not do so, there will be Fitnah on earth and great corruption.”

In other words, those who oppose the global (and local) unity of the Islamic brotherhood, and who refuse to enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong, are guilty of Fitnah, a serious crime against Islam.

For two additional detailed discussions of this extremely significant topic, see Part 1 & Part 2 of Al‐Wala Wa’l‐Bara, According to the Aqeedah of the Salaf by Shaykh Muhammad Saeed al‐Qahtan. Also see The Doctrine of Loyalty and Disavowal, by Mahmud Dwaikat.

Matters Of Ijtihad: Unified Reasoning, which is derived from the same root verb as Ijtimah(Consensus), is synonymous with a firm reliance on the scholars. This is a major theme of the Roadmap, as already seen in Paragraphs 5, 8 and 9.

(11) “Among the most important of obligations during these days is to open our doors to all sectors of our society and to reach out to the other ethnic and religious groups as well as political movements on both the left and right of the political spectrum. This will be the only way to stop those who deal in hate. The majority of Americans are the best when it comes to dealing with ‘the other.’ We must not allow the ugliness of a few in this society to prevent us from seeing its goodness. The recent election ended in the way that it did for a number of reasons, perhaps most importantly the economic conditions that a large slice of the population is facing. It is not true that racism or rejection of foreigners alone decided this election. Even for those who are afflicted with racist attitudes, the best cure for them is found in Allah’s instruction, ‘Repel [evil] by that [deed] which is better; and thereupon the one whom between you and him is enmity [will become] as though he was a devoted friend.’”

Most Important Of Obligations: Also discussed in Paragraph 3, 4 and 12.

This is a call (and official authorization) for American Muslims to form coalitions with a diversity of ethnic and religious groups, as well as movements on the left and right of the political spectrum. In other words, to start forming new alliances, in as many different arenas as possible, to build a wall of resistance.

Some of the organizations involved in this AMJA-authorized effort to develop common-cause alliances include the 2017 Women’s March on Washington, the Black Lives Matter movement, ANSWER Coalition, the Tides Foundation, and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).

What overlapping goals does the religion of Islam have with left-wing, progressive groups like these? A concise answer is provided by the anti-Trump protest group #DisruptJ20, which “rejects all forms of domination and oppression [i.e., Fitnah], particularly those based on racism, poverty, gender & sexuality, organizes by consensus, and embraces a diversity of tactics.”

Repel [Evil] By That [Deed]: This is from Quran 41:34: And not equal are the good deed and the bad. Repel [evil] by that [deed] which is better; and thereupon the one whom between you and him is enmity [will become] as though he was a devoted friend.

(12) “From among the most important obligations during this stage is to support those institutions and organizations that serve the Muslim community, such as those interested in defending freedoms, civil rights and political activism, those dedicated to social services and relief, and those dedicated to Dawah, religious instruction and providing religious rulings. It is most unbelievable that there are some who cry over the state of the community and then they are too stingy to donate their time or money to such organizations. Worse than that are those who are even too stingy to pray for them or give them a kind word. But the worst of all are those who seek to destroy such organizations.”

Most Important Of Obligations: Discussed earlier in Paragraph 3, 4 and 11.

During This Stage: We’re now coming to the key take-away messages of the AMJA Roadmap, which is actually describing the Shariah-approved course of action that Muslims in America (or anywhere else) should take whenever calamities, oppression and/or resistance to the ultimate implementation of Shariah law are encountered. This concept – of an allegorical journey (Roadmap) – was first discussed by Sayyid Qutb, one of the founding fathers of the Muslim Brotherhood, in his famous book entitled Milestones.

It is also important to notice the continuity of language used in the AMJA Roadmap, from similar concepts (‘stages’ and ‘oppression’) addressed in Sayyid Qutb’s Milestones, to the terms used in the HLF’s formal name (‘Relief’), while also reflecting language used in the Reliance of the Traveller.

Support Those Institutions And Organizations: Who are these institutions and organizations? The list would include groups such as the American Human Rights Council (AHRC), the Islamic Supreme Council of America (ISCA), Islamic Shura Council of Southern California (ISCSC), Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), United States Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO), and the dozens of affiliated organizations named as unindicted co-conspirators in the 2008 federal criminal trial of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), which proved irrefutably that American Muslim organizations were providing direct financial support to Hamas, twice designated as a Global Terrorist Organization (also see US v Holy Land Foundation, Dallas, TX).

Defending Freedoms, Civil Rights And Political Activism: On January 13, 2017, Executive Director Imad Hamad stated that AHRC “joins its voice to the voices of many in the nongovernmental community who have called on President Obama to commute the sentence of the Holy Land Foundation (HLF) defendants to time served.” Mr. Hamad also characterized the five defendants (Mufid Abdulqader, Shukri Baker, Ghassan Elashi, Mohammad El-Mezain and Abdulrahman Odeh) as “well-regarded members of the Muslim American community, [who] were given unusually lengthy sentences that shocked the American Muslim community for their harshness.” This is just the most recent salvo in an long-term barrage of disinformation after the five HLF defendants were indicted on July 26, 2004 for financial support of Hamas. For a few other examples, see here (2006), here (2009), here (2010), here (2010), here (2011) and here (2011).

Social Services And Relief: Islamic organizations that are dedicated to social services and relief include are created to comply with Shariah law, as found in Reliancesection H8.7 (page 226): It is obligatory to distribute one’s among eight categories of recipients (meaning that Zakat goes to none besides them), one-eighth of the Zakat to each category. (in the Hanafi school [of Shariah law], it is valid for the giver to distribute his Zakat to all of the categories, some of them, or to confine himself to just one of them).

The eight categories include [1] the Poor, [2] Someone separated from his money, or short of money, [3] Zakat workers dispatched by the Imam, [4] Those whose hearts are to be reconciled, [5] Those purchasing their freedom, [6] Those in debt, [7] Those fighting Jihad for the sake of Allah and [8] Those traveling for the sake of Allah.

Yes, one-eighth of all Zakat must be given directly to those are fighting Jihad, which is the reason why HLF leaders had no problem giving financial aid to Hamas.

Dawah, Religious Instruction And Providing Religious Rulings: This category would include Shariah-promoting organizations such as the AMJA itself, as well as the Fatwa Center of America, the North American Imam’s Federation (NAIT), and the Institute of Islamic Education (IIE), which is part of a network of Islamic schools (Madrassas) operating across America.

The Worst Of All: This critical Islamic concept, i.e., that those who opposes or resist the cause of Islam are the worst of all, is also derived directly from the Quran. For example, see Quran 8.55: Indeed, the worst of all animals/beasts/created beings/creatures/mankind/men in the sight of Allah are those who have disbelieved, and they will not [ever] believe, and Quran 98.6: Indeed, they who disbelieved among the People of the Scripture and the polytheists will be in the fire of Hell, abiding eternally therein. Those are the worst of all animals/beasts/created beings/creatures/mankind/men.

For more on this subject, see the 2008 QuranicTopics.com article entitled Disbelievers Are The Worst of Creatures.

According to several sources, President Donald Trump intends to support legislation designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization. If the effort to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization actually proves successful, America would be following the lead of several other countries who have already designated the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization, including EgyptSaudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

Also, during his August 15, 2016 speech on fighting terrorism, President Trump said: “[O]ne of my first acts as President will be to establish a Commission on Radical Islam, which will include reformist voices in the Muslim community who will hopefully work with us. We want to build bridges and erase divisions. The goal of the commission will be to identify and explain to the American public the core convictions and beliefs of Radical Islam, to identify the warning signs of radicalization, and to expose the networks in our society that support radicalization.”

On January 10, 2017, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL) reintroduced the Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act of 2017 (also see H.R. 3892, which was introduced November 03, 2015). During his January 15, 2017 Senate confirmation hearing, Secretary of State nominee Rex Tillerson stated that “The demise of ISIS would also allow us to increase our attention on other agents of radical Islam like al-Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, and certain elements within Iran.” This signals that Mr. Tillerson is aware of the threat posed by the Muslim Brotherhood, and that he will seriously consider implementing the 2017 Terrorist Designation Act.

(13) “No one knows the unseen except Allah. It is possible that an individual hates something while Allah has placed a lot of good for him in it. We must prepare for any possibility while hoping for the best outcomes. Before all of the above, and with all of the above, and after all of the above, one must know that there is no bringer of harm and no bringer of benefit except Allah. Nothing can guard an individual from what he fears greater than the protection of his Lord. Therefore, come with us to revive true piety and renew the spirit of repenting to Allah. Certainly, trials and tribulations are not to be repelled simply by material means alone. Instead, they will be overcome by a sincere turning to Allah, submitting to Him, having good expectations of Him and trusting Him in a beautiful manner. Be mindful of Allah’s commands and He will protect you. Be mindful of Allah’s commands and you will find Him in front of you, guiding you. Increase your remembrance of Allah and you will find Allah with you every step of the way, leading you through fear and to security.”

This concluding paragraph of the Roadmap reiterates all of the key points made throughout the document, and ends with a series of Quranic emphatic exhortations for Muslims in America to put their hope and trust fully in Allah, and in his commands (Shariah).

Knows The UnseenQuran 6.59: “And with Him are the keys of the unseen; none knows them except Him. And He knows what is on the land and in the sea. Not a leaf falls but that He knows it. And no grain is there within the darknesses of the earth and no moist or dry [thing] but that it is [written] in a clear record.”

Also see a study from the Quran Tafsir Ibn Kathir, entitled The One Who Knows The Unseen Is Allah.

An Individual Hates Something / Placed A Lot Of Good: This statement is derived from Quran 2.216: “Fighting has been enjoined upon you while it is hateful to you. But perhaps you hate a thing and it is good for you; and perhaps you love a thing and it is bad for you. And Allah Knows, while you know not.”

An Individual Hates Something: For further insight, see the July 07, 2010 AbdurRachman.orgarticle by Imam Ibn al Qayyim, entitled And It May Be That You Dislike A Thing Which Is Good For You.

Revive True Piety And Renew The Spirit: This is an allusion to what is known as the Islamic Revival (Renaissance) Movement, which is a worldwide effort to encourage Muslims to return to SalafiIslam, i.e., the original, pure version of Islam practiced by Mohammed and his early followers. Also see this link to Reviving The Islamic Spirit Conventions worldwide, including a major North American venue in Toronto, Canada.

Trials And Tribulations: Another reference to Fitnah, which is also discussed in Paragraph 6, 7 and 8.

Trusting Him In A Beautiful Manner: Derived from Quran 16.125: “Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and beautiful/good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best.”

Be Mindful Of Allah’s Commands: The entire last sentence derived from a Hadith, which states: “Young man, I will teach you some words. Be mindful of Allah, and He will take care of you. Be mindful of Him, and you shall find Him at your side. If you ask, ask of God. If you need help, seek it from God. Know that if the whole world were to gather together in order to help you, they would not be able to help you except if God had written so.”

In turn, this Hadith is linked to Quran 2.156-157: “Who, when disaster strikes them, say, ‘Indeed we belong to Allah, and indeed to Him we will return.’ Those are the ones upon whom are blessings from their Lord and mercy. And it is those who are the [rightly] guided.”

(14) “O Allah, be gentle with Your servants. All praise is due to Allah alone.”

Be Gentle: Derived from Al-Latif, one of the 99 Names of Allah, and from Quran 42.19: “Allah is Gentle/Gracious/Kind/Subtle with His servants; He gives provisions to whom He wills. And He is the Powerful, the Exalted in Might.”

All Praise: Part of the Aqidah (Authentic Creed): All praise is due to Allah, and Allah’s Peace and Blessings be upon His Final Messenger, his pure family, his noble Companions, and all those who follow them with righteousness until the Day of Judgment. Why is this important to a Muslim? Because, according to a publication also entitled The Authentic Creed, “It is evident from texts of the Noble Quran and the Sunnah that a person’s words and deeds will not be accepted unless they emanate from a true creed. If the creed is not authentic, all words and deeds emanating there from are bound to be rejected.”

Conclusion

Much like a storm siren, fire alarm or warning signal, the AMJA Roadmap is meant to be not only a warning of impending danger, but a call to deliberate, responsive action. The concept of sounding a warning is also emphasized many times in the Quran, as in verse 7.63: “Then do you wonder that there has come to you a reminder from your Lord through a man from among you, that he may warn you and that you may fear Allah, so you might receive mercy.”

Thus, if the AMJA expects the American Muslim community not only to take this warning seriously, but to also take appropriate action(s), then perhaps those of us who are not Muslim would be wise to take heed to the warning as well, lest we be caught unprepared.

Now that we have methodically reviewed the Roadmap, a question arises: “How will leaders of the American Muslim community respond (react), if the Trump Administration actually designates the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization, thus ‘destroying’ the affiliated institutions and groups that have been endorsed and supported by the AMJA?”

As plainly stated in Paragraph 12 of the Roadmap, those who attempt to shut down the network of organizations that support the American Islamic community are characterized as the “the worst of all.”

Therefore, if we take the Roadmap seriously, we must ask a second question: “What actions (resistance) will the AMJA feel compelled to endorse, if the Designation Act of 2017 effectively bans leaders of Muslim Brotherhood front groups such as CAIR, ISNA and MPAC from any further legal involvement in the arenas of politicssocial activism, and law enforcement?”

Remarkably, an overt example of Muslim Brotherhood infiltration into the American political arena was seen in the January 21, 2017 appearance of Imam Mohamed Magid at an interfaith religious service for President Donald J. Trump.

Mohamed Magid, who is Imam of the All Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS), has also served as both President and Vice-President of ISNA (an HLF co-conspirator which is also closely linked to ADAMS), was scheduled to recite a simple opening prayer. Instead, he went ‘off script’ and recited two verses from the Quran that just happen to reflect concepts included in both the AMJA Roadmap, and in Article 1 of the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights (also see Paragraph 4 above).

The two verses (as quoted by Imam Magid at the prayer service) are Quran 49.13: “O humankind, We have created you a single male and female (Adam and Eve) and made you into nations and tribes and communities, that you may know one another. Really, the most honored of you in the sight of God is the most righteous of you, and God has all knowledge,” and Quran 30.22: “And among the signs of God is the creation of heaven and earth, and the variation in your languages and your colors. Verily, in that are signs for those who know.”

In addition to co-conspirator ISNA, ADAMS has close ties to several other Muslim Brotherhood front groups, including HLF co-conspirator International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), and the SAFA Trust, which was raided by the FBI after 9/11 because organizations and leaders “in the SAFA Group maintained a financial and ideological relationship with persons and entities with known affiliations to the designated terrorist Groups PIJ (Palestinian Islamic Jihad) and HAMAS.”

Incredibly, one of the SAFA Trust’s sub-organizations was the Sterling Charitable Gift Fund, whose 6 primary advisors included Imam Mohamed Magid.

What is the link between all of these groups and the AMJA Roadmap? The link is Imam Magid himself, who in addition to serving as past President and Vice-President of the ISNA, and as Imam of ADAMS, currently serves as AMJA Expert number 26, where he is listed as “Shaykh Mohammad AlMajid, Imam of Adam Center in Virginia.”

Since Imam (Shaykh) Magid is a current member of AMJA, it is very plausible that he deliberately went ‘off script’ at the prayer service, in order to make a public declaration (sound the alarm) to the entire Islamic world, while using his opportunity to speak at a high-profile public forum to reiterate one of the concepts discussed in the Roadmap.

Meanwhile, in a example of simultaneous, overlapping social activismHussam Ayloush, who heads the CAIR Los Angeles chapter, compared Trump on Facebook to the proverbial emperor without any clothes, while urging Imam Magid not to “hand him a towel,” while Ahmed Rehab, Executive Director of CAIR Chicago, said on Facebook that he was “thoroughly disappointed” by Imam Magid’s “unilateral decision” to join the prayer service, which “goes against the consensus of our community’s leadership and grassroots.”

So, if the one-day-old Trump Administration already “goes against the consensus of our community’s leadership and grassroots,” what effect(s) will designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group have on the community’s pro-Jihad sympathizers, both here in America, and in other parts of the world?

Will fellow members of the global Ummah feel compelled to help their oppressed brethren, who are facing calamities/disasters and Fitnah from disbelievers here in America?

Is it even vaguely possible that some may take to heart the admonition found in Quran 8.12, which says: “[Remember] when your Lord inspired to the angels, ‘I am with you, so strengthen those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieved, so strike [them] upon the necks and strike from them every fingertip’”?

Or, perhaps these aspiring Jihadists would prefer to follow the guidance found in Quran 47.4: “So when you meet those who disbelieve, strike [their] necks until, when you have inflicted slaughter upon them, then secure their bonds, and either [confer] favor afterwards or ransom [them] until the war lays down its burdens. That [is the command].”

As first reported by Andrew Bostom in March of 2011, AMJA Secretary-General Dr. Salah Al-Sawy was asked by a reader whether “the Islamic missionary effort in the West…[was] to the point where it could take advantage of offensive jihad.”

Then, in a Fatwa published in Arabic on his own website, Dr. Al-Sawy provided the following carefully written endorsement of both offensive and defensive Jihad: “The Islamic community does not possess the strength to engage in offensive jihad at this time. With our current capabilities, we are aspiring toward defensive jihad, and to improve our position with regards to jurisprudence [Shariahlaw] at this stage. But there is a different discussion for each situation. Allah Almighty knows best.”

This is essentially the same tactical approach the AMJA Roadmap is following. In other words, to paraphrase Dr. Al-Sawy’s Fatwa: Since the Islamic community in America does not possess the strength or current capabilities to engage in offensive jihad at this time, it should continue to aspire toward defensive jihad, and strive to improve its position with regards to jurisprudence Shariah law at this stage (as in Sayyid Qutb’s Milestones).

Is my premise just so much hyperbole? Exaggeration? A misunderstanding? Misguided Islamophobia? That remains to be seen.

However, as we move into the Trump Administration, which is expected to be completely antithetical the counter-terrorism and immigration policies of the Obama Administration, this would certainly be an excellent opportunity for the AMJA (and other Muslim Brotherhood front groups like CAIR, ISNA & MPAC) to show America (and the world), once and for all, that Islam really is the Religion of Peace®.

Appendix I – AMJA Fatwas

In April of 2006, AMJA Shariah scholar Dr. Katem Al-Hajj authorized capital punishment for Muslim apostates in America, stating that “as for the Shariah ruling [for apostasy], it is the punishment of killing for the man…as the prophet said: “Whoever a Muslim changes his/her religion, kill him/her,” and his saying “A Muslim`s blood, who testifies that there is no god except Allah and that I am the Messenger of Allah, is not made permissible except by three reasons: the life for the life; the married adulterer and the that who abandons his/her religion.”

In June of 2006, Dr. Al-Hajj issued a fatwa reiterating the Shariah-endorsed punishment [Al-Hadd] of stoning for committing adultery: “All praise be to Allah, and may his peace and blessings be on the last and best prophet and messenger, Muhammad. Since you are ashamed and you have repented sincerely, Allah is all forgiving, so don`t lose hope in his mercy and forgiveness. The act you have committed – as you appear to know – is an offensive sin, and it is a form of fornication, as the Prophet indicated…Yet, it is not the absolute Zina [sexual sin] punishable by Al-Hadd (which is stoning in the case of a married man).”

In July of 2007, AMJA scholar Dr. Main Khalid Al-Qudah issued a fatwa sanctioning animosity and hostility (derived from Quran 5.51) toward non-Muslim “Disbelievers” [Kufar]: “Our belief is that Islam is the final divine religion, supersedes all other divine religions, and that all other religions are abrogated by the prophet-hood of Mohammad. In another words; no one has the right to stay on his/her Christianity or Judaism after the prophecy of Mohammad. Based on the above, if any one from the people of scriptures has received the message of Islam clearly, yet, insisted on his belief, then he is – from an Islamic perspective – a disbeliever. Meanwhile, we believe that hellfire is granted for the disbelievers, which include anyone did not believe in the prophet-hood of the messenger that he/she lived during his/her life.”

In November of 2007, Dr. Al-Hajj posted a 23-page fatwa forbidding Muslims in America to work for the FBI, the military, or for U.S. security (and law enforcement) services, because such work could possibly involve “spying on Muslims,” and because Muslim minorities in non-Islamic countries are “subject to man-made laws, which Islamic law [Shariah] does not recognize, either fully or in part..”

This AMJA-authorized prohibition against involvement with law enforcement was on full display in 2011, when CAIR published a poster admonishing Muslims in America to “Build a Wall of Resistance” and “Don’t Talk to the FBI.” The same precedent was expressed again in 2016, when CAIR called on Muslims to openly defy Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers when questioned on travel from Islamic controlled countries by saying, “None of your Damn Business,” and to “agitate Customs Agents by saying Islamic prayers “very loudly” when questioned”

In January of 2009, AMJA Secretary-General Dr. Salah Al-Sawy issued a fatwa on the penalty for blaspheming the prophet Muhammad: “[F]or those scholars who say that repentance of a person who insults Allah or His Messenger shall not accepted, [they] mean that repentance does not lift up the set punishment for cursing and insulting the Prophet, i.e., execution. Because the Prophet is the one who was actually wronged and insulted and he is no longer alive, therefore, he is not alive to practice his right to forgive him [the blasphemer] for what he did. Also, no Muslim is ever is entitled or authorized to forgive on the Prophet’s behalf.”

In January of 2009, Dr. Al-Qudah issued a fatwa on the death penalty for apostasy, stating that “Under the authority of the Muslim state, the People of the Book have the right to stay on their belief without being compelled to embrace Islam. But if one of them has embraced Islam, it would not be acceptable from him to go back to his original religion. The same rule applies to those who are born into Muslim families. According to the Islamic Law, they cannot commit apostasy. Implementing the punishment of killing the apostate is the sole and the exclusive responsibility of the Muslim state (were there any nowadays). Nobody else has the right to implement it.”

Three months later, in April of 2009, Dr. Al-Qudah issued another fatwa on Shariah-endorsed death sentences for apostates, stating that “The fact that there is no compulsion in religion does not negate the other fact that someone who has embrace Islam cannot change his mind afterward and embrace polytheism.”

 

Finland: Gay man on trial for warning about Islam on Facebook

January 12, 2017

Finland: Gay man on trial for warning about Islam on Facebook, Jihad Watch

The charges relate to Facebook postings Tynkkynen made about Muslims and Islam.

Finns Party gay politician Sebastian Tynkkynen commented in November that “Christianity is the only religion that can be criticised and even disparaged in Finland.” Three Finns Party politicians are now in Finland court over alleged online hate speech against Muslims for their comments about jihad attacks.

Tynkkynen dissolved into tears at the Oulu District Court as he delivered his closing statement during his trial for incitement to religious hatred. Tynkkynen said that as a politician and Christian he could defend himself no further.

Meanwhile, gays are being thrown off rooftops by Islamic State jihadists. Near the Orlando massacre at the Pulse gay nightclub, an imam preached about the Islamic duty to kill gays. The walls are closing in on the West, as Sharia police continue to silence Westerners by replacing our freedom of speech with Sharia penal codes, with leftists’ eager help. Non-Muslims who dare to express their thoughts about jihad attacks and the gross human rights violations committed in the name of Islam are being increasingly singled out for witch-hunts.

In Canada, Muslims took an author to court for revealing the truth about an Islamic school in Quebec; and in Toronto, a school principal was bullied into taking a leave of absence after being harassed by Muslim groups for her postings on Facebook, which discussed news items about the Islamic incursion into the West. Just before Christmas, Canada passed an anti- “Islamophobia” motion in Parliament.

tynkkynen_sebastian

“Finland: Gay man on trial for expressing views / warning about Islam on Facebook…….”, Tundra Tabloids, January 11, 2017:

Oulu District Court deals with Sebastian Tynkkynen today in Oulu for last summer’s anti-Islamic writings.

Prosecutor demands punishment for Tynkkynen for violation of and inciting subversion of religion against an ethnic group.

The charge relates to Tynkkynen’s July 2016 published writings on Facebook. According to the indictment served, as Chairman of the Board of Directors of the True Finns Youth party Tynkkynen had published in July on three different days public writings on Facebook, where he threatens, slanders and insults of a group of people identified with Islam based on their religion.

Along with the Facebook postings Tynkkynen calls for the eradication of Islam from Finland, as well as the removal of Islamic people from the country based on their religion. Removing Islamic people from the country would be done according to Tynkkynen’s Facebook posting with a “massive transport”.

According to the indictment the views expressed by Tynkkynen in the writings of the Muslim group of people are of deliberate nature, racist and xenophobic abusive and slanderous hate speech, which is generally directed to all Muslims…..

Germany Begins Closing Down New Year’s Celebrations

December 31, 2016

Germany Begins Closing Down New Year’s Celebrations, Gates of Vienna, , December 29, 2016

passau-silvester

This is the way the implementation of Shariah law begins.

Don’t expect a conquering Islamic army to sweep into town, stage mass executions in front of city hall, and then post a proclamation declaring that Islamic Law will henceforward be the law of the land. That’s not how it works.

Shariah is instituted as a gradual, piecemeal process. First there is a hijra — a migration of Muslims into non-Muslim lands. Then, when Muslims are present in large enough numbers, they begin assaulting, raping, terrorizing, and killing anyone in their environs who does not follow the tenets of Shariah law — that is, all the kuffar. By these means the infidels are terrorized and “feel themselves subdued”. In order to be safe, they give up their blasphemous kafir celebrations of their own initiative, thereby bringing their behavior into line with Islamic Law. Eventually they conclude a dhimma or “pact” with Islam, and pay the jizya poll tax in order to be allowed to continue living. This makes them dhimmi, people who are inferior and subordinate to Muslims. If they want to live normally, they may decide to say the shahada (La illaha ila Allah, wa Muhammadun rasul Allah) and become Muslims themselves.

On New Year’s Eve last year in Cologne and other German cities, gangs of feral young immigrant men — mostly Muslims — went wild on the streets, groping, molesting, and raping native German women. In recent weeks authorities have been watching with apprehension the approach of December 31, especially since the truck jihad in Berlin on December 19.

And now some of the New Year’s Eve events are being cancelled. What you’ll notice about the following two reports is that the police would prefer that localities and organizations not give reasons for cancelling any events. They feel it’s better for “security” if traditions that go back decades, or even centuries, just disappear without any public explanation.

In the first report, Nash Montana summarizes an article from Der Bürgerblick Passau about the cancellation of the annual New Year’s Eve party on the bridge in Passau:

The city of Passau has cancelled its traditional Silvester (New Year’s Eve) “bridge party”. Up to 1,000 people annually celebrate on the bridge, which was named after King Ludwig I, then was renamed to “Marienbrücke” in WW2, and now is known as the Innbrücke.

A reporter accidentally overheard the mayor talking about the Silvester cancellation, and immediately published it on the Internet, prompting the mayor to make an official statement in a press conference on Wednesday afternoon. The mayor cited a “broad public discussion about the security of large events” as the reason, a so-called abstract terror threat.

For his presser the Mayor Jürgen Dupper included this: “The cancellation of the Silvester celebration for 2016 is an uncomfortable but responsible decision. Of course nobody made the decision lightly — we all know how popular this party is, and how especially many citizens of Passau, especially young people, have waited all year for it. But circumstances being what they are, we see it as our duty not to provoke situations in which control could be lost. I appeal to all who are out on Silvester night to not make it harder for security personnel to do their job.”

Look back one week before the attack in Berlin:

“The concept has generally done well in past years, and therefore we don’t expect any changes for this year,” said the town council spokesperson Herbert Zillinger concerning the Silvester celebration on the bridge. The spokesperson for the police, Alexandra Lachhammer, added that “Passau is safe,” and explained that in any case, the number of security personnel could be increased.

Therefore it is clear that if Berlin hadn’t happened, the Passau Silvester party would not have been cancelled.

It’s also interesting to note that thousands of refugees who today live in Germany or in neighboring European countries passed over this bridge after Passau became “Germany’s Lampedusa” in the fall of 2015.

The second report is a direct translation by Nash Montana of an article in the Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung about the cancellation of a Silvester event in Walsum:

For Security Reasons — Walsum Silvester Ball cancelled

Duisburg-Walsum. The Aldenrade-Fahrn 1837 Gun Club has cancelled this year’s Silvester Ball on Saturday, December 31st in the city hall in Walsum. Reason: It’s “impossible to provide security”. The traditional party has always been seen as a social highlight of the year in the city; it was sold out (550 seats).

North Africans asked for exits and security personnel

The Gun Club learned last Friday that two days before, during the sale of the tickets, “seven unknowns” had appeared who were interested in the Ball event. The nationality of the men is not known, but an informant from the police confirmed to the newspaper that the unknowns were North Africans.

However, the discussion only concerns four men. Apparently only one of the men spoke German, according to Gudrun Henne, the chief executive of the BSV Aldenrade-Fahrn [the Gun Club]. The one who spoke German tried to find out information about exits, and he asked if there would be security personnel on location. This, says Gudrun Henne, set off the alarm in her head, especially after the Berlin Christmas market attack. She has traditionally sold the tickets herself for decades.

Henne immediately reported it to the police, and they gave her a chart with “350 pictures of suspects” to look through. One man she could identify clearly. He lives in Düsseldorf and is a known criminal. The police did not make any statements, but have confirmed that State Security has been activated. Conclusive results are not available, however. [I guess by “conclusive results” they mean raped women and massacred people everywhere? — translator] The police spokesman Ramon von der Maat said: “From our point of view there is no reason to cancel this event.”

Gun Club didn’t want to take the chance, and cancelled the Ball

By Friday the members of the Gun Club “unanimously decided” to cancel the festivities, says And Heddenhausen, the depute chairman of the BSV. Even though it would have been an anniversary ball — forty years ago the first Ball took place. “We just couldn’t take the risk,” said Gudrun Henne on Tuesday, looking visibly concerned and distraught.

“We discussed this for a long time, and have given a lot of thought to security provisions,” she explains. But in the end the conclusion was reached: “We would have lost control.” The beginning of the festivities might have gone fine, but after the fireworks when hundreds of people would be coming back into the hall, things might have happened. The caterer and the artists reacted with great understanding. Rumors were spread, and that’s why the Gun Club decided to publish the reasoning for the cancellation, against the advice of the police, says Henne.

Why the UK’s Sharia Courts Should Be Banned

December 20, 2016

Why the UK’s Sharia Courts Should Be Banned, Investigative Project on Terrorism, Abigail R. Esman, December 20, 2016

(Please see also, Sharia Councils: Taking Liberties. – DM)

1920

They are married off at 15 to men they’ve never met, men who may beat and rape them, or who do not permit them to leave the house. Or they marry out of love, only to learn their new husband has another wife, or plans to take one.  And so they seek counsel – and escape – not through lawyers and the traditional courts, but through sharia councils, and not in Kabul or Islamabad, but in Manchester and London.

Now officials in the United Kingdom are questioning whether such councils violate secular laws and discriminate against the women who come to them for help.  While still Home Secretary last March, before she became Prime Minister, Theresa May initiated the first of an ongoing series of investigations into Britain’s so-called “sharia courts.”

Subsequent hearings have brought the issues into the public eye, but so far they have failed to provide any real resolution. Some sharia court opponents contend that they force women to remain in abusive marriages, or deprive them of their legal rights regarding division of property and other matters. In contrast, some proponents insist that too many Muslim women would be forced to stay in abusive relationships if these tribunals were shut down.

“If I went to an English court, [my ex-husband] would say ‘where is their right to decide about my life?'” one Muslim woman told the BBC. “Now he can’t say anything because the decision has been made using sharia law, and we all believe in that.”

Moreover, an estimated 30 to 40 percent of British Muslim marriages are religious, not civil – a fact which in itself deprives these wives of many of their legal marital rights. Such marriages can be dissolved only through the tribunals.

But opponents, such as Iranian-born activist Maryam Namazie, argue that the tribunals, “are linked to the rise of the Islamist movement.” Others echo her views, such as Women and Sharia Law author and Zurich University Professor Elham Manea, who claims that the first such councils were established by Islamist groups.

There is some validity to this claim: the first British sharia council was established in 1982 by the Islamic Sharia Council, a Luton-based organization currently led by controversial imam Suhaib Hasan. Among Hasan’s many claims to fame are his lectures, available on YouTube, which he says “expose” the Jewish conspiracy to destroy Christians.

Moreover, while the official count of the councils in the UK is set at 32, think tank Civitas has estimated the real number at 85, suggesting that many operate in the shadows. How conservative or how westernized they may be in their mediations is impossible to know. Of the councils that are officially recognized, most are affiliated with mosques. Others hold connections to the Islamic Sharia Council, which also offers counseling “in accordance with the Holy Qur’an and authentic sunnah,” and “anger management” sessions that teach clients to “deal with the situation in a way that is most pleasing to Allah.”

According to France 24, 90 percent of the cases before Britain’s sharia tribunals involve divorce. But Algerian activist Marieme Hellie Lucas told Namazie in an interview, “The ‘laws’ used by so called ‘sharia courts’ are not [even] religiously inspired. They are just the choice that fundamentalists implement between contradictory (even antagonistic) customs, mores, and conservative religious interpretations.”

In fact, Lucas says, “”fundamentalists are the ones who create, sometimes ex-nihilo [from nothing], the dilemma ‘faith vs. women’s rights,’ while many progressive theologians state that they see no contradiction.” Hence, Lucas maintains, allowing such tribunals comes down to favoring “the Muslim fundamentalist extreme-right agenda to the detriment of universal rights.”

Additionally, UK sharia expert Denis MacEoin has found many of the tribunals’ rulings “advise illegal actions and others that transgress human rights standards as they are applied by British courts.”

Women who have had experience with UK sharia tribunals echo concerns raised by MacEoin and Lucas.

For example, one widow told the Independent that subsequent to her husband’s death, her sons had insisted she sell her home and give the money to them. A sharia tribunal had evidently told them that “in English law, I own the house I live in, but this is not the way in Islam.” Despairing, she added, “what is this new Islam that can threaten to take the roof from the head of an old woman like me?”

And in a four-year investigation of British sharia councils, human rights activist Elham Manea “found clerics that ignored marital rape, condoned wife beating, and believed girls of 12 or 13 were old enough to marry,” the Independent reports.  No wonder, then, that MEP Baroness Sheela Flather, in written testimony to a Parliamentary panel investigating the tribunals, argued that laws that apply “to white people [should] apply to everyone. “It is racism,” she declared, if they do not.

Despite these facts, many continue to maintain that banning these tribunals could do as much harm as good. Rather, they advocate oversight and reform of the existing councils to ensure that they reflect and administer equal rights under secular laws. “Though some scholars argue that a civil divorce should count as an Islamic one, this hasn’t been widely accepted yet within the Muslim communities,” Muslim Women’s Network UK director Shaista Gohir told VICE news recently.

But herein lies the core of the problem. Indulging those who do not accept the authority of civil over religious law does nothing to help integrate those who espouse such beliefs. Instead, this approach extends a kind of exceptionalism to Muslims, especially fundamentalist Muslims, permitting them to exist outside of civil law, while lending support to radical beliefs that the laws of the land do not apply to them: only sharia does.

True, as Namazie has observed, “Abolishing Sharia courts and parallel legal systems will not solve all the problems at hand; criminalising FGM or domestic violence has not ended them either. It will however make very clear what is acceptable and what is not and will underline a commitment to gender equality.”

Which is why allowing the oppression of Muslim women in our communities to continue is not protecting Muslim rights, or even Muslim identity. Therefore, banning these sharia “courts” is necessary. If we do not demand equality for women and the respect for one secular, civil law in our society for all, who will?

Shari’a Law Meets the Internet

December 8, 2016

Shari’a Law Meets the Internet, Gatestone InstituteDenis MacEoin, December 8, 2016

Shari’a councils should not have the right effectively to deny women rights they hold as British citizens under British law.

In the end, the biggest problem is that there is no system of external regulation for the councils. There is no legal requirement for them to keep full records of the cases they adjudicate on, no requirement to report to a civil authority with the right to prevent abuses, and not even a requirement for any council to register with a government agency.

The Muslim Brotherhood in the US itself listed the Fiqh Council of North America (FCNA) as one of several organizations who shared their goals, including the destruction of Western civilization and the conversion of the US into a Muslim nation.

The “minorities” jurisprudents generally favour a non-violent approach to the encounter of Islam and the West, while retaining a critical stance towards the latter and a conviction that Islam must, in the end, replace it. But on occasion, as in the Middle East, violence is sanctioned.

 

The UK has for several years faced problems with its growing number of shari’a councils (often misleadingly called courts). These councils operate outside British law, yet frequently give rulings on matters such as divorce, child custody, inheritance and more, which are based on Islamic law and in contradiction of the rights of individuals (usually women) under UK legislation. Many Muslim communities in cities such as Bradford, Birmingham, Luton, or boroughs such as Tower Hamlets in London are both sizeable and close-knit; individuals in them are made to live lives in accordance with Pakistani, Bangladeshi and Islamic traditional norms. This means that contact with British life at large is often restricted, with a lack of assimilation that traps many women and girls into lives very close to the lives of their sisters in Muslim countries.

Much of the concern about the “courts” has been expressed by Baroness Caroline Cox, whose bill to limit their impact on Muslim women has passed more than once through the House of Lords and, recently, into the House of Commons. Her personal determination and clear-sightedness have meant that the matter has remained for several years a focus for debate in politics and the media. Her arguments have received widespread support from women’s rights organizations, especially several concerned with the rights of Muslim women.

This year, in addition, two important academic studies of the issue have appeared. First was Machteld Zee’s “Choosing Sharia?: Multiculturalism, Islamic Fundamentalism & Sharia Councils,” which appeared in January. Zee is a Dutch political and legal scholar who carried out research in the UK, where she was given limited access to two shari’a councils, one in Birmingham and one in London. Her book devotes much time to the problems of what she calls “Essentialist Multiculturalism,” specifically the way multiculturalist theorists condemn individuals to be treated according to the culture and religion to which they belong, rather than as people who may wish to reject one or both of these.

An equally pertinent and academically sound treatise appeared in May: Elham Manea’s “Women and Shari’a Law: The Impact of Legal Pluralism in the UK.” Manea is of Yemeni origin; an Associate Professor in the Political Science Institute at the University of Zurich, a Fulbright Scholar, and a consultant for Swiss government agencies and international human rights organizations. Her book also focuses on the way in which multiculturalism undermines individual rights, especially in a chapter entitled, “A Critical Review of the Essentialist Paradigm.”

“Essentialists” demand that individuals conform to the cultural and legal norms of whatever community they are born into, and apparently prefer a multiculturalist vision of competing cultures and faith groups that maintain social distinctions. rather than mixed but well-integrated societies. The result is that restrictions are placed on the freedom of individuals to take their own path in life. In the instance of close-knit Muslim communities, the heaviest impact is on women. This involves forced and early marriage, first-cousin marriage, restriction of education for girls, rejection of appeals for divorce, denial of a woman’s right to child custody, and enforcement of the rule that women are only entitled to much lower inheritance payments than their brothers. It also means that women are limited in their freedom to work. In fundamentalist communities, their loss of that freedom means that they are forced to stay in the home to cook and look after children. This loss of freedom effectively destroys their opportunity to work (or be educated) alongside men. Women are often forbidden to adopt Western clothing norms even while living in open, Western societies. Shari’a “courts” have a deeply regressive influence on matters such as these.

Baroness Cox does not call for the abolition of the shari’a councils, given that Muslims have a right to turn to their own advisors for advice. But shari’a councils should not have the right effectively to deny women rights they hold as British citizens under British law. Many Muslim women are married purely under Islamic law and their marriages are not registered by civil registrars: this means that they can be denied their right to ask for a divorce or child custody from British courts. In the end, the biggest problem is that there is no system of external regulation for the councils. There is no legal requirement for them to keep full records of the cases they adjudicate on, no requirement to report to a civil authority with the right to prevent abuses, and not even a requirement for any council to register with a government agency — leading to the problem of how many councils exist in the country.

1013Haitham al-Haddad is a British shari’a council judge, and sits on the board of advisors for the Islamic Sharia Council. Regarding the handling of domestic violence cases, he stated in an interview, “A man should not be questioned why he hit his wife, because this is something between them. Leave them alone. They can sort their matters among themselves.” (Image source: Channel 4 News video screenshot)

If political reluctance to upset Muslims is not allowed to prevent Caroline Cox’s bill from becoming law, then there is hope that proper regulation will succeed the present chaos and irregularity that surround the councils as they are now operated. But even this may not be enough. Because of this absence of proper supervision, shari’a rulings impact British Muslims from three directions: through the shari’a councils, from the larger bodies to the informal “courts” that are reputed to operate from small terraced houses in Bradford, Birmingham and elsewhere; through the many online fatwa “banks” (websites) to which individuals refer themselves; and through the fatwas issued by the European Council for Fatwa and Research, based in Dublin.

These last two sources of shari’a rulings are usually ignored in studies of Islamic law in Britain, but they do, in fact, account for an undetermined number of responses to questions from individual Muslims in this country, and more formal diktats seen as binding across Europe, including the UK.

What I term “fatwa banks” are websites run either by individual muftis[1] or larger collective sites on an international scale. The sites I used in “Sharia Law or One Law for All” were Sunnipath, Ask Imam (answers from South Africa, but accessed through the Jamia Madina Mosque in Hyde), Madrasa In’aamiyyah, Darul Iftaa Leicester[2], IslamOnline.net[3], Ask the Scholar, Ask an Alim, Leicester, and the Islamic Shariah Council (Leyton in London).

Others operate out of other countries and in different languages, but can be accessed from the UK without difficulty. The most popular is IslamQ&A, which provides rulings in English and fifteen other languages. It is run from Saudi Arabia by the Salafi mufti Shaykh Muhammad Saalih al-Munajjid, and is not only one of the most popular Salafi websites, but also, according to Alexa.com, the world’s most popular website on the topic of Islam generally. The impact of its fatwas worldwide cannot be exaggerated. It includes some rulings on jihad.[4] There is no space here to reproduce these in full, but here are a few in brief that show the extent to which shari’a rulings diverge from British laws and values.

  1. Waging jihad against Americans (and other enemies of Islam) is to be encouraged.
  2. Shari’a law takes priority over secular law.
  3. A husband may prohibit his wife from leaving the house.
  4. Shari’a law can override British courts.
  5. A Muslim lawyer should not always act in accordance with UK law where it contradicts shari’a.
  6. Polygamy is acceptable even if against the law.
  7. A man may divorce his wife but keep that a secret from her.
  8. Execution or severe beating for homosexuals is correct.
  9. A wife has no property rights in case of divorce.
  10. There is no requirement to register a marriage according to the law of the country one lives in.
  11. A Muslim woman may not marry a non-Muslim man.
  12. Insurance is forbidden even if required by law.
  13. Child marriage is justified.
  14. A husband is not obliged to support a childless wife.
  15. A husband has conjugal rights over his wife. “Both partners have the right to have their physical demands met.” The only difference is that the husband may demand this, while the wife cannot.
  16. Divorce does not require a witness.
  17. Taking out insurance is forbidden.
  18. Medical insurance schemes are forbidden.
  19. If being a police officer in West contradicts shari’a, it is forbidden.
  20. Beating one’s wife is permissible (unless it harshly done).
  21. The mere intention to divorce is sufficient to make it valid, regardless of what is said.

Many of the above rulings are shocking, and by no means all websites or British shari’a councils will endorse many of them. But there they are, freely available to Muslims everywhere. If a believer tends towards strict interpretations of the sacred texts or the laws, he or she may well gravitate to fatwa banks such as these, and may well act on their basis rather than on the judgements of the nearest shari’a council. After all, what real authority do the muftis on the councils have beyond that of the other, online muftis? Shaykh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, for example, outranks pretty well all other contemporary Muslim authorities, with his TV show “Shari’a and Life” reaching an estimated 60 million viewers, and his learned essays promoting his personal views within the overall context of the Muslim Brotherhood, one of the most fundamentalist of today’s Islamic organizations.

Let us leave the British councils for a moment. There is another external source of fatwas. In many Muslim states, shari’a laws may be, and often are, imposed, often to the extent of punishing crimes from theft to murder. This means that matters that would not be crimes in Western states, such as adultery, blasphemy, or apostasy receive corporal punishments or the death penalty.

Knowing that there is no freedom in the West to criminalize these latter faults or to apply shari’a punishments for them, it became essential to come up with fatwas that would give authoritative guidance to Muslims in Western countries on how to conduct themselves in the “Land of War” (“Dar al Harb”, the opposite of the “Land of Islam”) while remaining shari’a-observant. The overall aim is to bring shari’a into Western societies by the back door. Even if Western governments like that of the UK were to find ways to register and control shari’a courts, or even abolish them, religious authorities could subvert this by presenting fatwas that would recommend certain behaviours for individuals and small communities.

The deliberations of the jurisprudents resulted in the need to adapt shari’a rulings to the situation of large-scale Muslim communities living outside enforceable Islamic jurisdictions. This endeavour has been termed Fiqh al-‘Aqalliyyat (“Jurisprudence of the minorities“). The purpose of this system — in which the classical system of Muslims ruling non-Muslims has been reversed — is to find a way to use shari’a without incurring the wrath of the indigenous legal system in secular parliamentary democracies. This has some resemblance to Muslim efforts during the colonial era to use shari’a in personal affairs in British and French colonies such as India or Algeria.

In its current form, the jurisprudence of the minorities dates back to the 1990s. It was developed by two individuals, the formerly mentioned Shaykh Yusuf al-Qaradawi and the late Shaykh Dr. Taha Jabir al-Alwani of Virginia. Al-Qaradawi is, among other things, president of the International Union of Muslim Scholars, a body founded in 2004 with its headquarters in the vastly wealthy Wahhabi state of Qatar. Its close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood have led to its designation by the United Arab Emirates as a terrorist organization. It boasts a membership of at least 90,000 Islamically-qualified scholars from around the world, representing several different sectarian positions.

Al-Alwani (d. 2016) was the founder and former chairman of the Fiqh Council of North America(FCNA), whose 18 members issue religious rulings, resolve disputes, and answer questions relating to Islamic practice. Their declared purpose:

“To consider, from a Shari’ah perspective, and offer advice on specific undertakings, transactions, contracts, projects, or proposals, guaranteeing thereby that the dealings of North American Muslims fall within the parameters of what is permitted by the Shari’ah.”

The FCNA too has close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, which may, under a bill launched by Senator Ted Cruz, soon be designated by the US as a terrorist organization in its own right. The Muslim Brotherhood in the US itself listed the FCNA as one of several organizations who shared their goals, including the destruction of Western civilization and the conversion of the US into a Muslim nation.

The “minorities” jurisprudents generally favour a non-violent approach to the encounter of Islam and the West, while retaining a critical stance towards the latter and a conviction that Islam must, in the end, replace it. But on occasion, as in the Middle East, violence is sanctioned. When asked in an interview about Palestinian suicide bombings, al-Alwani responded, “We think that the Palestinian people have the right to defend themselves in the way they view as suitable and we will back it and support it.”[5]

That view was, until recently, shared by al-Qaradawi, who has supported terrorism, including suicide bombings.

Dr. Denis MacEoin is the author of Sharia Law or One Law for All as well as many academic books, reports, and hundreds of academic and popular articles about Islam in many dimensions. He is a Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Gatestone Institute.


[1] A mufti (a religious scholar who issues fatwas) is a learned man specializing in Islamic law; he issues judgements on cases, determining what is compliant with his law school, but the sentencing is carried out by a judge (a qadi). Sometimes, the same person performs both functions.

[2] The Darul Iftaa in Leicester was founded and run by Mufti Muhammad ibn Adam al-Kawthari, a graduate of the Deobandi Darul Uloom in Bury.

[3] This important site features a “Live Fatwa” session, where answers are given by Muhammad al-Mukhtar al-Shinqiti, director of the Islamic Center of South Plains in Lubbock, Texas. Al-Shinqiti is a prominent figure in Fiqh al-‘Aqalliyyat.

[4] Examples of fatwas from the above sites (apart from Islam Q&A, which I did not consult at that time) may be found in “Sharia Law or One Law for All,” pages 74 to 127. Unwittingly, they provide insights into the topics to which British Muslims who speak English have access: not just the archives of fatwas that they maintain, but in order to ask questions themselves on matters from oral sex to male doctors seeing female patients.

[5] Cited Fishman p. 11 from the London Arabic newspaper, Al-Sharq al-Awsat.

Prime Minister Trudeau’s affection for despots, autocrats and Islamists

December 4, 2016

Prime Minister Trudeau’s affection for despots, autocrats and Islamists, CIJ NewsDiane Weber Bederman, December 4, 2016

justin-trudeau-7-cijnewsJustin Trudeau. Photo: CIJnews

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau displayed his affection for fascism on the death of Fidel Castro. “We join the people of Cuba today in mourning the loss of this remarkable leader.” He seems to be following in the footsteps of his father Pierre. Members of Parliament, media outlets in Canada, and around the world expressed their shock at his comments.

Trudeau has also shared his affection for Chinese Communists. “Justin’s 2013 tribute to the role of big government in forcing people into living more environmentally might explain his flirtation with dictators and despots. ‘There is a level of admiration I actually have for China because their basic dictatorship is allowing them to actually turn their economy around on a dime…”’

Trudeau is in the process of cozying up to the Iranians. Iran; a country run by an autocratic, theocratic despot. Trudeau has opened the doors to warmer relations with Russia.

According to Canadian journalist Terence Corcoran “The Trudeaus have been at this for six decades, flirting with the murderous icons of communist oppression since the 1950s when Trudeau the First expressed his admiration for elements of Stalin’s Soviet Communism.

In the 1960s, a 41-year-old Pierre Trudeau visited Communist China during the great famine and co-wrote a book hailing Maoism and denying the existence of a national food policy that killed 38 million people. He never retracted his China views. But, in the 1970s, he cozied up to Fidel Castro, who until his death Friday has held the Caribbean island in a form of political slavery.”

Paul Wells from the Toronto Star did not parse his words of condemnation. “Trudeau lauded Castro’s ‘tremendous dedication and love for the Cuban people,’ whose speech and dietary protein Castro rationed, by law, for decades. I guess it was tough love.”

Margaret Wente from the Globe and Mail wrote “Mr. Trudeau’s affection for the old dictator puts him in the company of Vladimir Putin and Bashar al-Assad.” She found his comments oddly timed. “He was just winding up a far-flung trip whose theme was human rights, during which he lectured various African nations on the need to improve their treatment of women and sexual minorities. Unfortunately, Mr. Castro wasn’t all that progressive either. “

The Globe Editorial Board wrote their concerns about Justin Trudeau; that his comments leave the disturbing impression that he actually believes what he said about Castro including “I know my father was very proud to call him a friend and I had the opportunity to meet Fidel when my father passed away. It was also a real honour to meet his three sons and his brother President Raúl Castro during my recent visit to Cuba.”

Gerald Caplan wrote “Scarcity became the overriding characteristic of Fidelismo, scarcity in both the quantity and quality of the life he provided. Dissent was not tolerated, political dissidents imprisoned, human rights a foreign intrusion, free speech counterrevolutionary, trade unions government servants, gays an insult to the revolution.”

Kelly McParland of the National Post wrote: “Given a choice between saying something nice about his Dad’s Cuban pal, and defending the values of democracy and human rights, Justin Trudeau picked the wrong one.”

He went with “el Comandante” – the captain, the commander – one of the appellations accorded Cuba’s Fidel Castro during the 50+ years in which treated his country like a personal political project, impoverishing millions while pursuing a self-defeating confrontation with Washington.”

Mark Bonokoski, Toronto Sun wrote “Blind to Cuban history, and blinkered by his fathers’ fairy tales about Fidel Castro, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s statement about the death of the Cuban dictator was an embarrassment of international proportions. He ignored the brutal truth about the man, dancing around like a clown in a parade dodging horse droppings.”

Members of parliament shared their outrage; from Lisa Raitt, to Rona Ambrose, Maxime Bernier, Kellie Leitch, to Stephen Harper’s son. And then there was world-wide condemnation of Trudeau’s affection for this despot.

So I ask all of these people, journalists, columnists, and Canadian Members of Parliament, where is your outrage at Trudeau’s attempts to mimic these despots? First, by allowing him to pass a petition that attacks free speech without a word from any of you.

The Parliament passed petition 411 that could attack free speech.

We, the undersigned, Citizens and residents of Canada, call upon the House of Commons to join us in recognizing that extremist individuals do not represent the religion of Islam, and in condemning all forms of Islamophobia” (dislike of or prejudice against Islam or Muslims, especially as a political force).

In English this means that we will not be able to criticize Islam as a political force. This is denying us of our right to criticize an ideology that is diametrically opposed to the ideology of democracy.

This leads me to the next question. Where is your outrage with Trudeau’s statement that Islam is compatible with the west while the leading Muslim organization in Canada, ICNA, posted a publication on its official site saying this is not true?

The political system of Islam is totally incompatible with western democracy.

The concept of government party and the opposition is alien to Islam.

All belong to one Ummah with only one goal and pursue the same aims and objects of Islamic guidelines!”[Online publication of ICNA Canada’s site]

ICNA (Islamic Circle of North America) Canada is an Islamic nation-wide organization striving “to build an Exemplary Canadian Muslim Community” by “total submission to Him [Allah] and through the propagation of true and universal message of Islam.” Dr. Iqbal Massod Al-Nadvi is the Amir (President) of Islamic Circle of ICNA Canada and is also serving as Chairperson of Canadian Council of Imams.

Whom should we believe? Non-Muslims or respected Muslim leaders?

Trudeau’s stance is a breach of our Constitution and free speech. Islam, based on Sharia Law as is being interpreted by major Islamic groups, is innately homophobic, misogynistic, xenophobic and viciously anti-semitic. Saudi Arabia just announced they aren’t ready for female drivers!

Islam, as being reflected in Islamic literature in Canada, does not treat all people as equal; does not believe in free will; does not accept gay rights or women as equal to men. Islam the ideology does not separate itself from Islam the religion so it is not tolerant of other religions (there are no synagogues or churches in many Muslim countries) and it makes demands on democracy to accommodate religious beliefs in the secular world.

Where is Main Stream media when it comes to “outing” Trudeau and his comments about Islam? Where are these people who are shocked by Trudeau’s comments about Castro and his love of autocrats, despots and theocrats? Why are they not holding him to account for his declaration that Islam is compatible with the West?

Germany Submits to Sharia Law

December 1, 2016

Germany Submits to Sharia Law, Gatestone InstituteSoeren Kern, December 1, 2016

A German court has ruled that seven Islamists who formed a vigilante patrol to enforce Sharia law on the streets of Wuppertal did not break German law and were simply exercising their right to free speech. The “politically correct” decision, which may be appealed, effectively authorizes the Sharia Police to continue enforcing Islamic law in Wuppertal.

The self-appointed “Sharia Police” distributed leaflets which established a “Sharia-controlled zone” in Wuppertal. The men urged both Muslim and non-Muslim passersby to attend mosques and to refrain from alcohol, cigarettes, drugs, gambling, music, pornography and prostitution.

Critics say the cases — especially those in which German law has taken a back seat to Sharia law — reflect a dangerous encroachment of Islamic law into the German legal system.

In June 2013, a court in Hamm ruled that anyone who contracts marriage according to Islamic law in a Muslim country and later seeks a divorce in Germany must abide by the original terms established by Sharia law. The landmark ruling effectively legalized the Sharia practice of “triple-talaq,” obtaining a divorce by reciting the phrase “I divorce you” three times.

A growing number of Muslims in Germany are consciously bypassing German courts altogether and instead are adjudicating their disputes in informal Sharia courts, which are proliferating across the country.

“If the rule of law fails to establish its authority and demand respect for itself, then it can immediately declare its bankruptcy.” — Franz Solms-Laubach, Bild’sparliamentary correspondent.

A German court has ruled that seven Islamists who formed a vigilante patrol to enforce Sharia law on the streets of Wuppertal did not break German law and were simply exercising their right to free speech.

The ruling, which effectively legitimizes Sharia law in Germany, is one of a growing number of instances in which German courts are — wittingly or unwittingly — promoting the establishment of a parallel Islamic legal system in the country.

The self-appointed “Sharia Police” sparked public outrage in September 2014, when they distributed yellow leaflets which established a “Sharia-controlled zone” in the Elberfeld district of Wuppertal. The men urged both Muslim and non-Muslim passersby to attend mosques and to refrain from alcohol, cigarettes, drugs, gambling, music, pornography and prostitution.

1653-1A German court has ruled that a group of Islamists who formed a vigilante patrol to enforce Sharia law on the streets of Wuppertal did not break German law and were simply exercising their right to free speech. They were charged under a law that prohibits the wearing of uniforms at public rallies — a law originally designed to ban neo-Nazi groups from parading in public.

The vigilantes are followers of Salafism, a virulently anti-Western ideology that openly seeks to replace democracy in Germany (and elsewhere) with an Islamic government based on Sharia law.

Salafist ideology posits that Sharia law is superior to secular, common law because it emanates from Allah, the only legitimate lawgiver, and thus is legally binding eternally for all of humanity. According to the Salafist worldview, democracy is an effort to elevate the will of humans above the will of Allah, and is therefore a form of idolatry that must be rejected. In other words, Sharia law and democracy are incompatible.

Wuppertal Mayor Peter Jung said he hoped the police would take a hard line against the Islamists: “The intention of these people is to provoke and intimidate and force their ideology upon others. We will not allow this.”

Wuppertal Police Chief Birgitta Radermacher said the “pseudo police” represented a threat to the rule of law and that only police appointed and employed by the state have the legitimate right to act as police in Germany. She added:

“The monopoly of power lies exclusively with the State. Behavior that intimidates, threatens or provokes will not be tolerated. These ‘Sharia Police’ are not legitimate. Call 110 [police] when you meet these people.”

Wuppertal’s public prosecutor, Wolf-Tilman Baumert, argued that the men, who wore orange vests emblazoned with the words “SHARIAH POLICE,” had violated a law that bans wearing uniforms at public rallies. The law, which especially prohibits uniforms that express political views, was originally designed to prevent neo-Nazi groups from parading in public. According to Baumert, the vests were illegal because they had a “deliberate, intimidating and militant” effect.

On November 21, 2016, however, the Wuppertal District Court ruled that the vests technically were not uniforms, and in any event did not pose a threat. The court said that witnesses and passersby could not possibly have felt intimidated by the men, and that prosecuting them would infringe on their freedom of expression. The “politically correct” decision, which may be appealed, effectively authorizes the Sharia Police to continue enforcing Islamic law in Wuppertal.

German Courts and Sharia Law

German courts are increasingly deferring to Islamic law because either the plaintiffs or the defendants are Muslim. Critics say the cases — especially those in which German law has taken a back seat to Sharia law — reflect a dangerous encroachment of Islamic law into the German legal system.

In May 2016, for example, an appeals court in Bamberg recognized the marriage of a 15-year-old Syrian girl to her 21-year-old cousin. The court ruled that the marriage was valid because it was contracted in Syria, where such marriages are allowed according to Sharia law, which does not set any age limit to marriage. The ruling effectively legalized Sharia child marriages in Germany.

The case came about after the couple arrived at a refugee shelter in Aschaffenburg in August 2015. The Youth Welfare Office (Jugendamt) refused to recognize their marriage and separated the girl from her husband. The couple filed a lawsuit and a family court ruled in favor of the Youth Welfare Office, which claimed to be the girl’s legal guardian.

The court in Bamberg overturned that ruling. It determined that, according to Sharia law, the marriage is valid because it has already been consummated, and therefore the Youth Welfare Office has no legal authority to separate the couple.

The ruling — which was described as a “crash course in Syrian Islamic marriage law” — ignited a firestorm of criticism. Some accused the court in Bamberg of applying Sharia law over German law to legalize a practice that is banned in Germany.

Critics of the ruling pointed to Article 6 of the Introductory Act to the German Civil Code (Einführungsgesetz zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuche, EGBGB), which states:

“A legal standard of another State shall not be applied where its application results in an outcome which is manifestly incompatible with the essential principles of German law. In particular, it is not applicable if the application is incompatible with fundamental rights.”

This stipulation is routinely ignored, however, apparently in the interests of political correctness and multiculturalism. Indeed, Sharia law has been encroaching into the German justice system virtually unchecked for nearly two decades. Some examples include:

  • In August 2000, a court in Kassel ordered a widow to split her late Moroccan husband’s pension with another woman to whom the man was simultaneously married. Although polygamy is illegal in Germany, the judge ruled that the two wives must share the pension, in accordance with Moroccan law.
  • In March 2004, a court in Koblenz granted the second wife of an Iraqi living in Germany the right to remain permanently in the country. The court ruled that after five years in a polygamous marriage in Germany, it would be unfair to expect her to return to Iraq.
  • In March 2007, a judge in Frankfurt cited the Koran in a divorce case involving a German-Moroccan woman who had been repeatedly beaten by her Moroccan husband. Although police ordered the man to stay away from his estranged wife, he continued to abuse her and at one point threatened to kill her. Judge Christa Datz-Winter refused to grant the divorce. She quoted Sura 4, Verse 34 of the Koran, which justifies “both the husband’s right to use corporal punishment against a disobedient wife and the establishment of the husband’s superiority over the wife.” The judge was eventually removed from the case.
  • In December 2008, a court in Düsseldorf ordered a Turkish man to pay a €30,000 ($32,000) dowry to his former daughter-in-law, in accordance with Sharia law.
  • In October 2010, a court in Cologne ruled that an Iranian man must pay his ex-wife a dower of €162,000 euros ($171,000), the current equivalent value of 600 gold coins, in accordance with the original Sharia marriage contract.
  • In December 2010, a court in Munich ruled that a German widow was entitled to only one-quarter of the estate left by her late husband, who was born in Iran. The court awarded the other three-quarters of the inheritance to the man’s relatives in Tehran in accordance with Sharia law.
  • In November 2011, a court in Siegburg allowed an Iranian couple to be divorced twice, first by a German judge according to German law, and then by an Iranian cleric according to Sharia law. The director of the Siegburg District Court, Birgit Niepmann, said the Sharia ceremony “was a service of the court.”
  • In July 2012, a court in Hamm ordered an Iranian man to pay his estranged wife a dower as part of a divorce settlement. The case involved a couple who married according to Sharia law in Iran, migrated to Germany and later separated. As part of the original marriage agreement, the husband promised to pay his wife a dower of 800 gold coins payable upon demand. The court ordered the husband to pay the woman €213,000 ($225,000), the current equivalent value of the coins.
  • In June 2013, a court in Hamm ruled that anyone who contracts marriage according to Islamic law in a Muslim country and later seeks a divorce in Germany must abide by the original terms established by Sharia law. The landmark ruling effectively legalized the Sharia practice of “triple-talaq,” obtaining a divorce by reciting the phrase “I divorce you” three times.
  • In July 2016, a court in Hamm ordered a Lebanese man to pay his estranged wife a dower as part of a divorce settlement. The case involved a couple who married according to Sharia law in Lebanon, migrated to Germany and later separated. As part of the original marriage agreement, the husband promised to pay his wife a dower of $15,000. The German court ordered him to pay her the equivalent amount in euros.

In an interview with Spiegel Online, Islam expert Mathias Rohe said that the existence of parallel legal structures in Germany is an “expression of globalization.” He added: “We apply Islamic law just as we do French law.”

Sharia Courts in Germany

A growing number of Muslims in Germany are consciously bypassing German courts altogether and instead are adjudicating their disputes in informal Sharia courts, which are proliferating across the country. According to one estimate, some 500 Sharia judges are now regulating civil disputes between Muslims in Germany — a development that points to the establishment of a parallel Islamic justice system in the country.

A major reason for the growth in Sharia courts is that Germany does not recognize polygamy or marriages involving minors.

The German Interior Ministry, responding to a Freedom of Information Act request, recently revealed that 1,475 married children are known to be living in Germany as of July 31, 2016 — including 361 children who are under the age of 14. The true number of child marriages in Germany is believed to be much higher than the official statistics suggest, because many are being concealed.

Polygamy, although illegal under German law, is commonplace among Muslims in all major German cities. In Berlin, for example, it is estimated that fully one-third of the Muslim men living in the Neukölln district of the city have two or more wives.

According to an exposé broadcast by RTL, one of Germany’s leading media companies, Muslim men residing in Germany routinely take advantage of the social welfare system by bringing two, three or four women from across the Muslim world to Germany, and then marrying them in the presence of a Muslim cleric. Once in Germany, the women request social welfare benefits, including the cost of a separate home for themselves and for their children, on the claim of being a “single parent with children.”

Although the welfare fraud committed by Muslim immigrants is an “open secret” costing German taxpayers millions of euros each year, government agencies are reluctant to take action due to political correctness, according to RTL.

Chancellor Angela Merkel once declared that Muslims must obey the constitution and not Sharia law if they want to live in Germany. More recently, Justice Minister Heiko Maas said:

“No one who comes here has the right to put his cultural values or religious beliefs above our law. Everyone must abide by the law, no matter whether they have grown up here or have only just arrived.”

In practice, however, German leaders have tolerated a parallel Islamic justice system, one which allows Muslims to take the law into their own hands, often with tragic consequences.

On November 20, 2016, for example, a 38-year-old German-Kurdish man in Lower Saxony tied one end of a rope to the back of his car and the other end around the neck of his ex-wife. He then dragged the woman through the streets of Hameln. The woman, who survived, remains in critical condition.

The newsmagazine, Focus, reported that the man was a “strictly religious Muslim who married and divorced the woman according to Sharia law.” It added: “Under German law, however, the two were not married.” Bild reported that the man was married “once under German law and four times under Sharia law.”

The crime, which has drawn renewed attention to the problem of Sharia justice in Germany, has alarmed some members of the political and media establishment.

Wolfgang Bosbach, of the ruling Christian Democratic Union (CDU), said: “Even if some people refuse to admit it, a parallel justice system has established itself in Germany. This act shows a clear rejection of our values and legal order.”

On November 23, Bild, the largest-circulation newspaper in Germany, warned that the country was “capitulating to Islamic law.” In a special “Sharia Report” it stated:

“The 2013 coalition agreement between the CDU and the Social Democrats promised: ‘We want to strengthen the state’s legal monopoly. We will not tolerate illegal parallel justice.’ But nothing has happened.”

In a commentary, Franz Solms-Laubach, Bild’s parliamentary correspondent, wrote:

“Even if we still refuse to believe it: Parts of Germany are ruled by Islamic law! Polygamy, child marriages, Sharia judges — for far too long the German rule of law has not been enforced. Many politicians dreamed of multiculturalism….

“This is not a question of folklore or foreign customs and traditions. It is a question of law and order.

“If the rule of law fails to establish its authority and demand respect for itself, then it can immediately declare its bankruptcy.”

 

Dr. Jasser joins Your World discussing ideological vetting that must occur in wake of OSU attacks

November 30, 2016

Dr. Jasser joins Your World discussing ideological vetting that must occur in wake of OSU attacks, American Islamic Forum for Democracy via YouTube, November 29, 2016

(Please see also, How James Mattis As Defense Secretary Could Bust Our Deathly Political Correctness About Islam. — DM)

Saudi Arabia is already here, in Toronto

November 25, 2016

Saudi Arabia is already here, in Toronto, CIJ NewsDiane Weber Bederman, November 24, 2016

islam-awareness-week-at-york-u-4-photo-cijnewsIslam Awareness Week at York U. Photo: CIJnews

Well, Mr. Prime Minister, you don’t have to move Saudi Arabia to live in that culture, because under your government, these intolerant, abhorrent teachings are here in Canada, at universities and in our bookstores and shared in public places like Dundas Square in downtown Toronto. They are teachings that Muslims are trying to have accepted here in Canada.

***********************

Dear Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau,

If you were to take your family, your wife and children and move to Saudi Arabia, as an immigrant, not an expat, how long do you think it would take you to embrace the culture of your adopted country?

How long would it take before you preached the need for women to wear a Burka when leaving home, and that they must be accompanied by a male relative at all times?

Or how long before your beautiful, independent wife Sophie Grégoire Trudeau (she has kept her maiden name and said in Havana that women “can no longer be ignored”), would accept that she cannot drive, can no longer be independent of you, that her husband has not only the right but the responsibility to punish his wife for not performing her wifely duties, and that it is appropriate to beat your wife to bring her into line? Would Mme Grégoire Trudeau accept a lashing in the street from the religious police for any perceived infraction of the laws regarding modesty?

How long would it take the two of you, Sir, to teach your sons that women are inferior to men and your daughter that she has few civil rights, and that Muslims are superior to all others? And how would you explain to your children, Xavier James , Ella-Grace Margaret , and Hadrien the sight of men hanging from cranes in the middle of the square-guilty of being gay?

And what would you say to your children as you walked along the streets and saw people without hands or feet-amputated in the name of Islamic justice? And how would you explain to your children that it is appropriate to refer to Jews as pigs and descendants of apes? That is acceptable to call for “Death to the West” and “Death to Israel”?

Well, Mr. Prime Minister, you don’t have to move Saudi Arabia to live in that culture, because under your government, these intolerant, abhorrent teachings are here in Canada, at universities and in our bookstores and shared in public places like Dundas Square in downtown Toronto. They are teachings that Muslims are trying to have accepted here in Canada. They are using the false claim of freedom of religion when in fact this has nothing to do with religion and everything, Sir, to do with trying to bring Sharia Law, the ethic that underpins the ideology of Islam and undermines western freedom into law in Canada.

I am going to go out on a limb here and suggest that you would never embrace those teachings-that ideology. That you and your wife would enver accept the teachings in “Women in Islam & Refutation of some Common Misconceptions,” authored by the Saudi scholar Dr. Abdul-Rahman al-Sheha and printed by the Saudi Dawah organization Muslim World League (رابطة العالم الاسلامي) Or teachings being promulgated in Canada in the book “The Quran” (Saheeh International) shared now at York University during Islam Awareness Week.

The following are excerpts from the book that include Quranic verses followed by a modern interpretation:

Surah (chapter) Al-Baqarah

Verse 79

So woe 32 to those who write the “scripture” with their own hands, then say, “This is from Allah,” in order to exchange it for a small price. Woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they earn.

Footnote 32

i.e., death and destruction.

Verse 131

When his Lord said to him, “Submit,” he said, “I have submitted [in Islam] 45 to the Lord of the worlds.”

Footnote 45

The meaning of the word “Islam” is “submission to the will of Allah.” This is the way of life ordained by Allah and taught by all of the prophets from Adam to Muhammad (PBUH). A Muslim is one who submits himself to Allah.

Verse 191

And kill them wherever you overtake them and expel them from wherever they have expelled you, and fitnah 69 is worse than killing. And do not fight them at al-Masjid al-Haram until they fight you there. But if they fight you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers.

Footnote 69

Among the meanings of fitnah are disbelief and its imposition on others, discord, dissension, civil strife, persecution, oppression, injustice, seduction, trial and torment.

Or Surah (chapter) Al-Maidah

Verse 33

Indeed, the penalty 262 for those who wage war 263 against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment,

Footnote 262

Legal retribution.

Footnote 263

i.e., commit acts of violence and terrorism against individuals or treason and aggression against the Islamic state.

Or this:

Verse 75

And among the People of the Scripture is he who, if you entrust him with a great amount [of wealth], he will return it to you. And among them is he who, if you entrust him with a [single] silver coin, he will not return it to you unless you are constantly standing over him [demanding it]. That is because they say, “There is no blame upon us concerning the unlearned.” And they speak untruth about Allah while they know [it].

Footnote 133

The Jews do not consider it a sin to cheat or lie to a gentile or a pagan.

Verse 112

They have been put under humiliation [by Allah] wherever they are overtaken, except for a rope [i.e., covenant] from Allah and a rope [i.e., treaty] from the people [i.e., the Muslims]. 144 And they have drawn upon themselves anger from Allah and have been put under destitution. That is because they disbelieved in [i.e., rejected] the verses of Allah and killed the prophets without right. That is because they disobeyed and [habitually] transgressed.

Footnote 144

Once they have surrendered, the People of the Scripture retain their rights and honor (in spite of their refusal of Islam) through payment of the jizyah tax in place of zakah and military service due from Muslims. They are then under the protection of the Islamic state.

Just take a walk with your family along Dundas Square or stroll through York University. You can talk to people who share these beliefs openly and proudly and are expending great energy in proselytizing them. So, Sir, as a proud feminist and supporter of LGBTQ2 rights, a man who cherishes diversity, accommodation, inclusion, and tolerance, how do you defend these teachings in our cities and universities, let alone to your wife and children? And will these ideals be taught during Muslim Heritage Month?

As always, Sir, I look forward to your comments. I am ever hopeful that one day you will take the time to respond to my concerns, Sir, for I have no doubt that there are millions of Canadians who would like to hear the answers to these questions. And, Sir, we have that right and you, Sir, have the obligation to respond.

Islamic literature in Toronto deals with wife beating, stoning, crucifixion, amputation

Muslim Dawah (outreach, “call to Islam”) activists at Toronto’s Dundas Square distributed during recent years a variety of Islamic literature (click HERE)

The following are the highlights of some of the Islamic books/booklets which were obtained by CIJnews:

  • Homosexuality is a major sin

  • Liberated’ Western women… are trapped in a form of slavery
  • Polygamy is permitted in certain conditions

  • Wife must obey the “commands” of her husband

  • Wife beating is permissible in certain conditions (“Submissive or subdued women… may even enjoy being beaten”)

  • Muslims have a duty to spread the message of Islam in society

  • Prayers to Allah to give Muslims victory over the disbelievers
  • Non-Muslims of an Islamic State have to pay the jizya (poll-tax) tax
  • Punishment of flogging for public intoxication and traffickers

  • Punishment of stoning to death for married adulterers

  • Punishments of amputation (hand and leg), crucifixion and execution in serious crimes
  • Punishment of cutting off the hand for the thief

  • Punishment of execution for apostates
  • Possession of slaves is permissible in certain conditions.

ICNA Canada’s online syllabus: women are inferior to men, Western civilization “enemy” (clickHERE)

ICNA Canada’s online syllabus: Songs, music, jesters, buffoons are “satanic work” (click HERE)

ICNA Canada’s online syllabus: Muslim wife must obey her husband when he calls her to bed(click HERE)

ICNA Canada’s online syllabus: “majority of the dwellers of Hell are women” (click HERE)

ICNA Canada’s online syllabus: pregnant adulteress to be stoned after giving birth (click HERE)

ICNA Canada’s online syllabus on wife beating (click HERE)

ICNA Canada’s online syllabus on stoning adulterers, chopping off thieves’ hands (click HERE)

ICNA Canada’s online syllabus on wearing hijab and honour killing in Islam (click HERE)

ICNA Canada’s online syllabus legalizes “slave-girls” (click HERE)

ICNA Canada online syllabus: “Muslims will dominate the Jews”, kill them (click HERE)

ICNA Canada syllabus: “give us victory over the disbelieving people” (click HERE)

ICNA Canada’s syllabus explains ruling on ‘sex slaves’ in Islam (click HERE)

ICNA Canada free book: “Every human being is born as a Muslim” (click HERE)

ICNA – Canada’s senior official appears to blame gays for Ontario “lurid” sex education (clickHERE)

Trudeau: We strive to show that “Islam is not incompatible” with Western values (click HERE)

The ‘Big Lie’ Is Back

November 22, 2016

The ‘Big Lie’ Is Back, Center For Security Policy, Frank Gaffney, Jr., November 22, 2016

lie

Source: Breitbart

In 2011, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton promised the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to use “some old fashioned techniques of peer pressure and shaming” against those whose exercise of free speech “we abhor.”

At the time, she had in mind specifically perpetrators of what the OIC, the Muslim Brotherhood, other Islamic supremacists and their enablers on the Left call “defamation of Islam.” But the same playbook – in the tradition of Mrs. Clinton’s mentor, Saul Alinsky – is now being followed with a vengeance against what is abhorred by the cabal best described as the Red-Green Axis.

Much in evidence among such “old-fashioned techniques” now being employed is what’s known as “the Big Lie.” It entails the endless repetition of outrageous falsehoods to defame, and ultimately silence, one’s political opponents.

Three good men Donald Trump has selected for key strategic and national security positions are currently getting the Big Lie treatment: his White House Counsel Steve Bannon, Attorney General-designate Senator Jeff Sessions, and incoming National Security Advisor Lieutenant General Michael Flynn. They are being relentlessly vilified as “racists,” “bigots” and “haters.”

I feel these able public servants’ pain. Indeed, I know what it’s like to be subjected to the Big Lie. For years, the Islamists and their allies on the hard Left – notably, the discredited (for example, here and here) Southern Poverty Law Center – have used character assassination and vitriol against me (for example, here, here and here) to protect what they otherwise cannot defend: the totalitarian program its adherents call Sharia. The false assertion last week that I had been asked to serve on the Trump transition team sent these rogues into fresh paroxysms of hateful denunciation, repeated like a mantra by their media echo chamber (for example, here, here, here and here).

I am hardly alone in being diagnosed by such charlatans with the made-up condition of “Islamophobia.” Indeed, I am proud to be included in the company of men and women being pilloried for what Islamic supremacists and their enablers would have us believe is “defamation of Islam.” In fact, it is simply informed, astute and courageous truth-telling about the global jihad movement and threat it poses. Steve Bannon, Jeff Sessions and Mike Flynn are under assault for doing the same in this and other contexts.

It seems that critics are particularly unhinged by the clarity of these three men and the president they will serve about the fact that Islamic supremacism is not simply a menace overseas. The Red-Green types are determined to prevent Donald Trump from operationalizing the plan of action he described in a major address on the topic on August 15, 2016. Among its highlights are the following:

Our new approach, which must be shared by both parties in America, by our allies overseas, and by our friends in the Middle East, must be to halt the spread of Radical Islam. All actions should be oriented around this goal….Just as we won the Cold War, in part, by exposing the evils of communism and the virtues of free markets, so too must we take on the ideology of Radical Islam….

In the Cold War, we had an ideological screening test. The time is overdue to develop a new screening test for the threats we face today. In addition to screening out all members or sympathizers of terrorist groups, we must also screen out any who have hostile attitudes towards our country or its principles – or who believe that Sharia law should supplant American law. Those who do not believe in our Constitution, or who support bigotry and hatred, will not be admitted for immigration into the country….

Finally, we will pursue aggressive criminal or immigration charges against anyone who lends material support to terrorism. Similar to the effort to take down the mafia, this will be the understood mission of every federal investigator and prosecutor in the country. To accomplish a goal, you must state a mission: the support networks for Radical Islam in this country will be stripped out and removed one by one. Immigration officers will also have their powers restored: those who are guests in our country that are preaching hate will be asked to return home. (Emphasis added)

In short, the Red-Green Axis is having conniptions because the American people have now chosen to lead them a president and an administration that will not just be sensible about this threat. It is also determined to do the job Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and their minions have adamantly shirked: protecting us against, rather than accommodating, Sharia. So the Big Lie and “other techniques of shaming and peer pressure” are now being applied with abandon to outstanding public servants in the hope of reducing their effectiveness and that of the presidency they will serve.

The transparent falsity and political agenda being served by such lies should, instead, discredit their perpetrators. For that to happen, however, the so-called “mainstream press” will have to stop lionizing the Big Liars and uncritically promoting their handiwork.