Sharia TipSheet
Questions for the First Muslim Federal Judicial Nominee
April 27, 2021
On June 10th, the Senate confirmed Judge Zahid Quraishi as the first Muslim federal judge in U.S. history by an 81-16 vote. The nomination earlier passed out of committee 19-3 with Senators Cruz, Sasse, and Hawley voting against. All three voted against the nomination again when it reached the Senate floor.
Thus, we now have a Muslim on the federal bench without having any idea whether his personal beliefs conflict with the U.S. Constitution. Moreover, a very bad precedent has been set: this nominee was never closely examined about his personal beliefs. His not-very-believable assertion he knows nothing about sharia law was allowed to stand, untouched. Future Muslim nominees for any federal office will be able to point back to Quraishi’s nomination process and argue they, too, should be given a pass. Future nominees will be allowed to skate through even if they believe in sharia supremacy with violent jihad as the means to achieve it in accordance with the dictates of standard Islamic doctrine. It is guaranteed most Muslim nominees, if not all, will hold those beliefs. The larger point is the continuing ideological subversion of the U.S. government and the cowardice of our elected representatives to confront it. Some voted against this nomination, but none fought it or even tried to get to the bottom of whether they would be putting a sharia supremacist who does not believe in the Constitution on the federal bench.
UPDATE 5/19/21 - Questions for the Record Steer Clear of Sharia Law
The questions Senators submitted for the record to the nominee - and his responses - steered well clear of the serious issues regarding the nominee’s personal beliefs about sharia law raised in the original article below. Sharia seeks the submission of the entire world to Islamic doctrine and urges violent jihad as the means by which to obtain sharia supremacy, yet no Senator to whom the Sharia TipSheet sent suggested questions had the courage to pursue this line of questioning. The questions for the record were, for the most part, perfunctory and pro forma - mostly stock questions submitted to every nominee. Judge Quraishi’s answers were equally formulaic.
As detailed in the original article below, the Sharia TipSheet sent suggested questions to 11 Republican Senators on the Judiciary Committee. Despite not having a chance to ask questions at the hearing, the following Senators did not submit questions for the record at all - Graham, Cornyn, Hawley, Kennedy, and Blackburn. Senator Marsha Blackburn is of special note because the Sharia TipSheet was assured through personal connections a congressman would deliver the suggested questions to her.
The following Senators did submit questions for the record: Grassley, Cotton, Cruz, Lee, Sasse, and Tillis. Some of them are big heroes to the political Right, but none of them had the courage to probe the nominee further about his beliefs regarding sharia. Senator Ted Cruz is the biggest disappointment, since he was aggressive about trying to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization earlier in his career. Aggressive, no more. Duly noted.
None of the Senators even acknowledged the questions the TipSheet sent (other than the immediate receipts generated by their Web contact forms in response to all messages).
The TipSheet calls out all of these politicians for sweeping the hard questions under the rug and not engaging on the serious issue of whether the nominee subscribes to sharia law concepts that are antithetical to the U.S. Constitution as the supreme law of the land.
The questions and responses touched tangentially on the issues the TipSheet raised below. Senators Grassley and Tillis asked the nominee about religious freedom. Sharia law, of course, only countenances religious freedom for Muslims. Everyone else is required to submit to Islam or pay a tax and not practice their faith. Quraishi answered he would, if confirmed, be bound by legal precedent. That he would follow precedent became a constant refrain throughout his responses.
Senator Ben Sasse asked whether Quraishi has ever “participated in any events at which you or other participants called into question the legitimacy of the United States Constitution?” Quraishi’s response was “No”.
The Committee sent Judge Quraishi a questionnaire before the hearing. The Committee asked for information about any significant opinions he wrote on constitutional issues. He responded, “I have not written any significant opinions on federal or state constitutional issues.”
Thus, despite the preliminary questionnaire, the hearing, and the questions for the record, we know nothing about Judge Quraishi’s true beliefs about sharia law or his fidelity to the U.S. Constitution. The record is blank on these important questions, aside from his impossible claim he know nothing about sharia law which governs all daily activities of Muslims. Yet the Committee - Republican senators included - appears poised to advance him to the federal bench. The American people have not been well served by the Committee’s process in this case. The problem will only grow worse because the precedent has now been set to give all future Muslim judicial nominees a pass when it comes to their personal beliefs about sharia supremacy and jihad, concepts that come straight from their Islamic doctrine.
UPDATE 5/17/21 - IS SHARIA LAW GOOD OR BAD?
by
Dr. Carl Goldberg
Dr. Stephen M. Kirby
On April 28, 2021 federal magistrate judge Zahid Quraishi appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee for his confirmation hearing. He was the first Muslim American nominated for a Senate-confirmed judgeship. Senator Dick Durbin asked Quraishi what he knew about “Sharia Law.” Quraishi responded, “I don’t know anything about that, Chairman.”
CAIR, a Muslim Brotherhood legacy organization, was bothered that this question was asked at all, and in an op-ed piece pointed out that:
Because Sharia Law is based on the teachings of the Koran and Muhammad, it is considered sacred law for all Muslims, and, as Allah’s sacred law, it must be good – for Muslims. For non-Muslims, it is a different story entirely.
Sharia law is all-encompassing, covering all aspects of life; and while much of Sharia law does not concern non-Muslims, much of it affects us directly by contradicting many of our laws and the values which we hold dear.
Here are just a few of the areas where Sharia Law flagrantly violates American law and values:
Senators need to ask Muslim American candidates specific questions that require them to choose between Allah’s Sharia and the American Constitution. For details, Senators should read Dr. Steve Kirby’s book, “Islamic Doctrine Versus the US Constitution”.
UPDATE 4/29/21 - Nominee Claims Not to Know Anything About Sharia Law
Committee members were not given an opportunity to question Quraishi at the hearing. Chairman Dick Durbin did ask him, apologetically, “What do you know about sharia law?” Quraishi answered:
There are several things wrong with the way things stand. First, we have no idea whether Quraishi was being truthful. Aside from one softball question with no follow-up, he has not been examined. His claim that he is a Muslim who knows nothing about standard Islamic doctrine is simply not credible. Second, we have no idea how strongly he adheres to Islamic doctrine of which sharia supremacy is a central precept. Third, it leaves a lot of unanswered questions, including the questions about Quraishi’s fidelity to the U.S. Constitution and other matters set forth in the questions below. Fourth, it sets a bad precedent for future Muslim nominees similarly to escape close scrutiny as to whether their religious beliefs conflict with the U.S. Constitution and U.S. law.
It was very clever of the Democrats to put forth as their first Muslim nominee someone with an unassailable professional record, then dismiss anyone concerned with sharia supremacy as not grounded in fact. The truth of the matter is that sharia supremacy is standard Islamic doctrine. This nominee may have escaped close questioning, but the issue has not gone away. It is now the elephant in the room.
New Jersey has an outsized number of Muslim officeholders who, when asked, declined to express support for the U.S. Constitution. Why should Muslims get to become government officials or federal judges if they will not explicitly renounce the passages in Islamic doctrine calling for the imposition of sharia law on the entire world, or recognize the U.S. Constitution as the supreme law of the land here in America?
The questions below were sent to the 11 Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee in advance of the hearing - Grassley, Graham, Cornyn, Lee, Cruz, Sasse, Hawley, Cotton, Kennedy, Tillis, and Blackburn. They are being sent again to these members today along with the request the questions be submitted for the record. These members have until May 5th to do so, with the expectation the nominee will have to answer them.
As things stand, the Washington establishment seems willing to allow the first Muslim nominee to skate to a federal judgeship without serious examination as to whether or not his personal beliefs are incompatible with the U.S. Constitution. Remember, this is the same Dick Durbin who peddles the false narrative white supremacy is the biggest threat to national security we have, only gives examples of white supremacist acts from years ago to make his case, and denies that months of raging far-Left rioting in Portland and elsewhere are of any consequence. This is delusional. White supremacists are not organized to the degree they can put piles of bricks on any street corner in America as prelude to riot, but Antifa can. Durbin lives in a fantasyland swirling with false narratives. Similarly, he believes in a fantasy Islam where the standard Islamic doctrines of sharia supremacy and jihad as the means to achieve it don’t exist, and anyone who points to the plain meaning of passages related to sharia and jihad in authoritative Islamic scripture is not grounded in fact. Durbin can put on a blindfold, but his fantasy Islam does not prevent actual attacks in the real world, like the relatively recent attacks on the Pensacola and Corpus Christi naval air stations. These attacks and many others were inspired by the very same religious doctrine Zahid Quraishi is widely reported to believe - Islam - but claims to know nothing about. Yet we are supposed to believe his response to Durbin’s softball question was “solid” - another Durbin fantasy.
It is time for a thorough airing in this country of whether or not Islamic doctrine poses a threat to law enforcement and national security, and a good place to start is with this nominee.
---
Original Story 4/27/21
The Senate Judiciary Committee hearing for the first Muslim federal judicial nominee is set for Wednesday April 28th. Zahid Quraishi, if confirmed, would become a federal judge for the U.S. District of New Jersey.
Given the numerous ways Islamic doctrine conflicts with the U.S. Constitution, Quraishi should be asked the following questions (which have been provided to the Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee) at the hearing:
It has been reported you are a Muslim. While there is no religious test for federal office, the Senate and the American people are entitled to know whether your religious beliefs are compatible or incompatible with U.S. law - law which, if you are confirmed, you will be asked to swear to uphold. As a preliminary question, do you as a Muslim affirm and adhere to Islamic doctrine from the Quran, hadith, and other authoritative Islamic sources?
Islamic doctrine holds that sharia law should be the supreme law of the land throughout the entire world. It further holds that sharia law is divine in origin and thus superior to any human-made law, including the U.S. Constitution. If confirmed, you will be asked to swear an oath you will uphold the U.S. Constitution, which by virtue of its Article VI, is the supreme law of the land. Do you renounce the portions of Islamic doctrine calling for the supremacy of sharia law and the subjugation of all human-made law to sharia law?
Islamic doctrine holds that jihad is the means by which the supremacy of sharia law is to be achieved. Do you renounce the portions of Islamic doctrine calling for jihad to achieve sharia supremacy?
What role, if any, should sharia law play in federal cases? In family law?
Will you go on record now and state that our 1st Amendment right to freedom of speech gives the right to anyone in the United States to criticize or disagree with your prophet Muhammad, and will you also go on record now and state that you support and defend anyone’s right to criticize or disagree with your prophet Muhammad, and that you condemn anyone who threatens death or physical harm to another person who is exercising that right?
Our 1st Amendment guarantees freedom of religion in the United States. As part of that freedom, anyone in the United States has the right to join or leave any religion, or have no religion at all. Will you go on record now and state that you support and defend the idea that in the United States a Muslim has not only the freedom to leave Islam, but to do so without fear of physical harm, and will you also go on record now and state that you condemn anyone who threatens physical harm to a Muslim who is exercising that freedom?
According to the words of Allah found in Quran 5:38 and the teachings of your prophet Muhammad, amputation of a hand is an acceptable punishment for theft. But our U.S. Constitution, which consists of man-made laws, has the 8th Amendment that prohibits cruel and unusual punishment such as this. Do you agree with Allah and your prophet Muhammad that amputation of a hand is an acceptable punishment for theft in the United States, or do you believe that our man-made laws prohibiting such punishments are true laws and are to be followed instead of this 7th Century command of Allah and teaching of Muhammad?
According to the words of Allah found in Quran 4:3, Muslim men are allowed, but not required, to be married to up to four wives. Being married to more than one wife in the United States is illegal according to our man-made bigamy laws. Do you agree with Allah that it is legal for a Muslim man in the United States to be married to more than one woman, or do you believe that our man-made laws prohibiting bigamy are true laws and are to be followed instead of this 7th Century command of Allah?
Do you affirm or renounce the following from Islamic sources and scholars:
If confirmed, would you enforce U.S. antiterrorism laws against your fellow Muslims accused of violating those laws (e.g., providing material support for terrorism - 18 U.S. Code § 2339B)?
Are you a member of the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America (AMJA)?
Do you agree with AMJA that
Steve Amundson - Counter Jihad Coalition
David J. Baldovin, Special Agent (ret.), FBI, Tennessee
Richard Roy Blake - Thornton,. Colorado
David Bores, LTC (US Army Ret)
William French - Nashville, TN
Gladys H Fuentes-Citizens Assembled; American Patriot Community - Miami Fl
Wm Gawthrop, PhD
Carl Goldberg - Arizona
Jim Horn
Dan Hromada - Cleveland, Ohio
Stephen M. Kirby, PhD
Christopher Logan
Mike Ramirez, San Antonio, TX 78250
Roger Russin - Citizens Assembled - Miami FL
James M. Simpson, Author
Mary Wierbicki, The United West
Chris Wright - Sharia TipSheet - Liberato.US
Henry Zarb, Floridians First
April 27, 2021
- reposted at The United West and Gates of Vienna
- seconded by RAIR Foundation
- mentioned at WhatYaReckon
On June 10th, the Senate confirmed Judge Zahid Quraishi as the first Muslim federal judge in U.S. history by an 81-16 vote. The nomination earlier passed out of committee 19-3 with Senators Cruz, Sasse, and Hawley voting against. All three voted against the nomination again when it reached the Senate floor.
Thus, we now have a Muslim on the federal bench without having any idea whether his personal beliefs conflict with the U.S. Constitution. Moreover, a very bad precedent has been set: this nominee was never closely examined about his personal beliefs. His not-very-believable assertion he knows nothing about sharia law was allowed to stand, untouched. Future Muslim nominees for any federal office will be able to point back to Quraishi’s nomination process and argue they, too, should be given a pass. Future nominees will be allowed to skate through even if they believe in sharia supremacy with violent jihad as the means to achieve it in accordance with the dictates of standard Islamic doctrine. It is guaranteed most Muslim nominees, if not all, will hold those beliefs. The larger point is the continuing ideological subversion of the U.S. government and the cowardice of our elected representatives to confront it. Some voted against this nomination, but none fought it or even tried to get to the bottom of whether they would be putting a sharia supremacist who does not believe in the Constitution on the federal bench.
UPDATE 5/19/21 - Questions for the Record Steer Clear of Sharia Law
The questions Senators submitted for the record to the nominee - and his responses - steered well clear of the serious issues regarding the nominee’s personal beliefs about sharia law raised in the original article below. Sharia seeks the submission of the entire world to Islamic doctrine and urges violent jihad as the means by which to obtain sharia supremacy, yet no Senator to whom the Sharia TipSheet sent suggested questions had the courage to pursue this line of questioning. The questions for the record were, for the most part, perfunctory and pro forma - mostly stock questions submitted to every nominee. Judge Quraishi’s answers were equally formulaic.
As detailed in the original article below, the Sharia TipSheet sent suggested questions to 11 Republican Senators on the Judiciary Committee. Despite not having a chance to ask questions at the hearing, the following Senators did not submit questions for the record at all - Graham, Cornyn, Hawley, Kennedy, and Blackburn. Senator Marsha Blackburn is of special note because the Sharia TipSheet was assured through personal connections a congressman would deliver the suggested questions to her.
The following Senators did submit questions for the record: Grassley, Cotton, Cruz, Lee, Sasse, and Tillis. Some of them are big heroes to the political Right, but none of them had the courage to probe the nominee further about his beliefs regarding sharia. Senator Ted Cruz is the biggest disappointment, since he was aggressive about trying to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization earlier in his career. Aggressive, no more. Duly noted.
None of the Senators even acknowledged the questions the TipSheet sent (other than the immediate receipts generated by their Web contact forms in response to all messages).
The TipSheet calls out all of these politicians for sweeping the hard questions under the rug and not engaging on the serious issue of whether the nominee subscribes to sharia law concepts that are antithetical to the U.S. Constitution as the supreme law of the land.
The questions and responses touched tangentially on the issues the TipSheet raised below. Senators Grassley and Tillis asked the nominee about religious freedom. Sharia law, of course, only countenances religious freedom for Muslims. Everyone else is required to submit to Islam or pay a tax and not practice their faith. Quraishi answered he would, if confirmed, be bound by legal precedent. That he would follow precedent became a constant refrain throughout his responses.
Senator Ben Sasse asked whether Quraishi has ever “participated in any events at which you or other participants called into question the legitimacy of the United States Constitution?” Quraishi’s response was “No”.
The Committee sent Judge Quraishi a questionnaire before the hearing. The Committee asked for information about any significant opinions he wrote on constitutional issues. He responded, “I have not written any significant opinions on federal or state constitutional issues.”
Thus, despite the preliminary questionnaire, the hearing, and the questions for the record, we know nothing about Judge Quraishi’s true beliefs about sharia law or his fidelity to the U.S. Constitution. The record is blank on these important questions, aside from his impossible claim he know nothing about sharia law which governs all daily activities of Muslims. Yet the Committee - Republican senators included - appears poised to advance him to the federal bench. The American people have not been well served by the Committee’s process in this case. The problem will only grow worse because the precedent has now been set to give all future Muslim judicial nominees a pass when it comes to their personal beliefs about sharia supremacy and jihad, concepts that come straight from their Islamic doctrine.
UPDATE 5/17/21 - IS SHARIA LAW GOOD OR BAD?
by
Dr. Carl Goldberg
Dr. Stephen M. Kirby
On April 28, 2021 federal magistrate judge Zahid Quraishi appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee for his confirmation hearing. He was the first Muslim American nominated for a Senate-confirmed judgeship. Senator Dick Durbin asked Quraishi what he knew about “Sharia Law.” Quraishi responded, “I don’t know anything about that, Chairman.”
CAIR, a Muslim Brotherhood legacy organization, was bothered that this question was asked at all, and in an op-ed piece pointed out that:
- …sharia refers to the various rules that Muslim strive to follow and uphold, all based on the teachings of the Quran and the Prophet Muhammad …
Because Sharia Law is based on the teachings of the Koran and Muhammad, it is considered sacred law for all Muslims, and, as Allah’s sacred law, it must be good – for Muslims. For non-Muslims, it is a different story entirely.
Sharia law is all-encompassing, covering all aspects of life; and while much of Sharia law does not concern non-Muslims, much of it affects us directly by contradicting many of our laws and the values which we hold dear.
Here are just a few of the areas where Sharia Law flagrantly violates American law and values:
- Freedom of Speech and Religion are guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution; Sharia prohibits them when it comes to the topic of Islam.
- Cruel and Unusual Punishment, and Slavery are prohibited by the U.S. Constitution: Sharia allows them.
- Bigamy is prohibited in the United States; Sharia allows Muslim men to have up to four wives.
- Sharia law requires Muslims to make war on non-Muslims until Islam and Sharia law become dominant.
- Sharia law makes women subservient to men and prohibits gender equality.
- Sharia law prohibits equality before the law for Muslims and non-Muslims.
Senators need to ask Muslim American candidates specific questions that require them to choose between Allah’s Sharia and the American Constitution. For details, Senators should read Dr. Steve Kirby’s book, “Islamic Doctrine Versus the US Constitution”.
UPDATE 4/29/21 - Nominee Claims Not to Know Anything About Sharia Law
Committee members were not given an opportunity to question Quraishi at the hearing. Chairman Dick Durbin did ask him, apologetically, “What do you know about sharia law?” Quraishi answered:
- I don’t know anything about that, Chairman. If the question, too, is whether I would apply the laws of the United States and the state of New Jersey, I can tell you in 21 years of practicing law as a federal prosecutor, as a military officer in the United States Army, as a defense attorney and partner at a prestigious law firm in New Jersey, and a United States magistrate judge, I’ve never been asked the question. That being said, I know probably less about it than you do, and I don’t know anything about it.
There are several things wrong with the way things stand. First, we have no idea whether Quraishi was being truthful. Aside from one softball question with no follow-up, he has not been examined. His claim that he is a Muslim who knows nothing about standard Islamic doctrine is simply not credible. Second, we have no idea how strongly he adheres to Islamic doctrine of which sharia supremacy is a central precept. Third, it leaves a lot of unanswered questions, including the questions about Quraishi’s fidelity to the U.S. Constitution and other matters set forth in the questions below. Fourth, it sets a bad precedent for future Muslim nominees similarly to escape close scrutiny as to whether their religious beliefs conflict with the U.S. Constitution and U.S. law.
It was very clever of the Democrats to put forth as their first Muslim nominee someone with an unassailable professional record, then dismiss anyone concerned with sharia supremacy as not grounded in fact. The truth of the matter is that sharia supremacy is standard Islamic doctrine. This nominee may have escaped close questioning, but the issue has not gone away. It is now the elephant in the room.
New Jersey has an outsized number of Muslim officeholders who, when asked, declined to express support for the U.S. Constitution. Why should Muslims get to become government officials or federal judges if they will not explicitly renounce the passages in Islamic doctrine calling for the imposition of sharia law on the entire world, or recognize the U.S. Constitution as the supreme law of the land here in America?
The questions below were sent to the 11 Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee in advance of the hearing - Grassley, Graham, Cornyn, Lee, Cruz, Sasse, Hawley, Cotton, Kennedy, Tillis, and Blackburn. They are being sent again to these members today along with the request the questions be submitted for the record. These members have until May 5th to do so, with the expectation the nominee will have to answer them.
As things stand, the Washington establishment seems willing to allow the first Muslim nominee to skate to a federal judgeship without serious examination as to whether or not his personal beliefs are incompatible with the U.S. Constitution. Remember, this is the same Dick Durbin who peddles the false narrative white supremacy is the biggest threat to national security we have, only gives examples of white supremacist acts from years ago to make his case, and denies that months of raging far-Left rioting in Portland and elsewhere are of any consequence. This is delusional. White supremacists are not organized to the degree they can put piles of bricks on any street corner in America as prelude to riot, but Antifa can. Durbin lives in a fantasyland swirling with false narratives. Similarly, he believes in a fantasy Islam where the standard Islamic doctrines of sharia supremacy and jihad as the means to achieve it don’t exist, and anyone who points to the plain meaning of passages related to sharia and jihad in authoritative Islamic scripture is not grounded in fact. Durbin can put on a blindfold, but his fantasy Islam does not prevent actual attacks in the real world, like the relatively recent attacks on the Pensacola and Corpus Christi naval air stations. These attacks and many others were inspired by the very same religious doctrine Zahid Quraishi is widely reported to believe - Islam - but claims to know nothing about. Yet we are supposed to believe his response to Durbin’s softball question was “solid” - another Durbin fantasy.
It is time for a thorough airing in this country of whether or not Islamic doctrine poses a threat to law enforcement and national security, and a good place to start is with this nominee.
---
Original Story 4/27/21
The Senate Judiciary Committee hearing for the first Muslim federal judicial nominee is set for Wednesday April 28th. Zahid Quraishi, if confirmed, would become a federal judge for the U.S. District of New Jersey.
Given the numerous ways Islamic doctrine conflicts with the U.S. Constitution, Quraishi should be asked the following questions (which have been provided to the Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee) at the hearing:
It has been reported you are a Muslim. While there is no religious test for federal office, the Senate and the American people are entitled to know whether your religious beliefs are compatible or incompatible with U.S. law - law which, if you are confirmed, you will be asked to swear to uphold. As a preliminary question, do you as a Muslim affirm and adhere to Islamic doctrine from the Quran, hadith, and other authoritative Islamic sources?
Islamic doctrine holds that sharia law should be the supreme law of the land throughout the entire world. It further holds that sharia law is divine in origin and thus superior to any human-made law, including the U.S. Constitution. If confirmed, you will be asked to swear an oath you will uphold the U.S. Constitution, which by virtue of its Article VI, is the supreme law of the land. Do you renounce the portions of Islamic doctrine calling for the supremacy of sharia law and the subjugation of all human-made law to sharia law?
Islamic doctrine holds that jihad is the means by which the supremacy of sharia law is to be achieved. Do you renounce the portions of Islamic doctrine calling for jihad to achieve sharia supremacy?
What role, if any, should sharia law play in federal cases? In family law?
Will you go on record now and state that our 1st Amendment right to freedom of speech gives the right to anyone in the United States to criticize or disagree with your prophet Muhammad, and will you also go on record now and state that you support and defend anyone’s right to criticize or disagree with your prophet Muhammad, and that you condemn anyone who threatens death or physical harm to another person who is exercising that right?
Our 1st Amendment guarantees freedom of religion in the United States. As part of that freedom, anyone in the United States has the right to join or leave any religion, or have no religion at all. Will you go on record now and state that you support and defend the idea that in the United States a Muslim has not only the freedom to leave Islam, but to do so without fear of physical harm, and will you also go on record now and state that you condemn anyone who threatens physical harm to a Muslim who is exercising that freedom?
According to the words of Allah found in Quran 5:38 and the teachings of your prophet Muhammad, amputation of a hand is an acceptable punishment for theft. But our U.S. Constitution, which consists of man-made laws, has the 8th Amendment that prohibits cruel and unusual punishment such as this. Do you agree with Allah and your prophet Muhammad that amputation of a hand is an acceptable punishment for theft in the United States, or do you believe that our man-made laws prohibiting such punishments are true laws and are to be followed instead of this 7th Century command of Allah and teaching of Muhammad?
According to the words of Allah found in Quran 4:3, Muslim men are allowed, but not required, to be married to up to four wives. Being married to more than one wife in the United States is illegal according to our man-made bigamy laws. Do you agree with Allah that it is legal for a Muslim man in the United States to be married to more than one woman, or do you believe that our man-made laws prohibiting bigamy are true laws and are to be followed instead of this 7th Century command of Allah?
Do you affirm or renounce the following from Islamic sources and scholars:
- “the worst of all the moving creatures, in the sight of Allah, are those who reject Faith and do not believe” (Quran verse 8:55)?
- the testimony of a woman is worth half that of a man’s in court (various sources collected here)?
- the nonrecognition of marital rape?
If confirmed, would you enforce U.S. antiterrorism laws against your fellow Muslims accused of violating those laws (e.g., providing material support for terrorism - 18 U.S. Code § 2339B)?
Are you a member of the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America (AMJA)?
Do you agree with AMJA that
- Muslims should not work in American law enforcement?
- Muslims should not be “pleased with a legal system that does not come from Allah”?
- Muslims should seek justice in Islamic courts, not secular courts?
Steve Amundson - Counter Jihad Coalition
David J. Baldovin, Special Agent (ret.), FBI, Tennessee
Richard Roy Blake - Thornton,. Colorado
David Bores, LTC (US Army Ret)
William French - Nashville, TN
Gladys H Fuentes-Citizens Assembled; American Patriot Community - Miami Fl
Wm Gawthrop, PhD
Carl Goldberg - Arizona
Jim Horn
Dan Hromada - Cleveland, Ohio
Stephen M. Kirby, PhD
Christopher Logan
Mike Ramirez, San Antonio, TX 78250
Roger Russin - Citizens Assembled - Miami FL
James M. Simpson, Author
Mary Wierbicki, The United West
Chris Wright - Sharia TipSheet - Liberato.US
Henry Zarb, Floridians First
How Islam and the Left Join Forces to Destroy America
October 29, 2020
3-part video series by David Bores (former police chief - bio here)
October 29, 2020
3-part video series by David Bores (former police chief - bio here)
- Part 1: The Birth of the Red/Green Axis and the Marxist and Islamic Doctrine That Propels It
- Part 2: BLM and Antifa Foot Soldiers of the Red/Green Axis and Corporate America Financial Support
- Part III: Consequences of Red/Green Axis, Purge of Islamic Threat Training, and Active Jihadists
|
|
|
|
Sharia TipSheet
"Islam Will Be Victorious" - bumper sticker seen in the U.S.
How many true religions do you know that talk like that?
The answer is none. But, then again, Islam is not a religion. It seeks world domination. It claims to be a superior way of life, not just religiously and spiritually, but politically, socially, and economically. It also seeks to impose an all-encompassing legal system (sharia) to control every aspect of human existence here on earth. Islam is a totalitarian world-government-in-waiting with just enough religious veneer to confuse people. Because it strays far beyond the religious and spiritual realms into the political, legal, social, and economic arenas, Islam has forfeited any special standing or regard ordinarily given to true religions (tax-exempt status, freedom of religion under the First Amendment, our goodwill, etc.).
The Islamists have a comprehensive, carefully thought-out plan to achieve world domination and they are working the plan in every corner of the globe, including the United States. The rest of the world must unite and refuse to let Muslims take over the entire planet as they have actively been seeking from the very beginning of Islam. Militant Islam, Islamist radicals, and the imposition of sharia law in America must be opposed at every turn. The Sharia TipSheet endeavors to arm critics of radical Islam with the truth and raise public awareness that Islam and sharia law are not benign ideologies but are, instead, cancerous at their core and will eventually prove fatal to Western liberal democracy and the American way of life if left unchecked.
For documentation of the TipSheet's worldview, good starting points include -
* * * * * * * * * *
The Sharia TipSheet is independently produced.
Not affiliated with any group.
"Islam Will Be Victorious" - bumper sticker seen in the U.S.
How many true religions do you know that talk like that?
The answer is none. But, then again, Islam is not a religion. It seeks world domination. It claims to be a superior way of life, not just religiously and spiritually, but politically, socially, and economically. It also seeks to impose an all-encompassing legal system (sharia) to control every aspect of human existence here on earth. Islam is a totalitarian world-government-in-waiting with just enough religious veneer to confuse people. Because it strays far beyond the religious and spiritual realms into the political, legal, social, and economic arenas, Islam has forfeited any special standing or regard ordinarily given to true religions (tax-exempt status, freedom of religion under the First Amendment, our goodwill, etc.).
The Islamists have a comprehensive, carefully thought-out plan to achieve world domination and they are working the plan in every corner of the globe, including the United States. The rest of the world must unite and refuse to let Muslims take over the entire planet as they have actively been seeking from the very beginning of Islam. Militant Islam, Islamist radicals, and the imposition of sharia law in America must be opposed at every turn. The Sharia TipSheet endeavors to arm critics of radical Islam with the truth and raise public awareness that Islam and sharia law are not benign ideologies but are, instead, cancerous at their core and will eventually prove fatal to Western liberal democracy and the American way of life if left unchecked.
For documentation of the TipSheet's worldview, good starting points include -
- Catastrophic Failure: Blindfolding America in the Face of Jihad by Stephen Coughlin
- The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America by Andrew McCarthy
- Shariah The Threat to America from the Center for Security Policy (the 'Team B Report' - Frank Gaffney, co-author)
- A JOURNALIST’S GUIDE TO VETTING MUSLIM LEADERS AND MOSQUES (see below)
"Wow, this is really great" - S.
(also useful for law enforcement officers) - Primer on fighting mosque construction applications:
“MOSQUES IN AMERICA: A Guide to Accountable Permit Hearings and Continuing Citizen Oversight” by Karen Lugo, Esq. - Interfaith Dialogue: Ask the Imam - 'Interfaith dialogue' is a weapon of war. This two-page brief prepares you to counter-attack. Sample Question -- Why is the testimony of a woman only worth half that of a man in an Islamic court? (see below)
- Essentials of Sharia from “Reliance of the Traveller” - "fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah", "non-Muslim subjects are obliged to comply with Islamic rules", and other gems from the 'religion of peace'. (see below)
- Sharia Law for the Non-Muslim (see below)
- Refugee Resettlement and the Hijra to America by Ann Corcoran (see below)
- Backyard Jihad: How Parents Can Detect the Invisible Threat of Radicalization by Valerie Greenfield
review by noted writer Andrew Harrod here
* * * * * * * * * *
The Sharia TipSheet is independently produced.
Not affiliated with any group.
| vetting_muslims_and_mosques.docx |
| sharialaw_for_the_nonmuslim.pdf |
| refugee_resettlement_hijra.pdf |
A Sharia TipSheet Original