The Muslim Oath Project
by Stephen M. Kirby
|
Federal Government Watch
2/10/20 - FEMA teaching hopelessly flawed Obama-era Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) counterterrorism approach to police, community leaders, and government officials across the country https://www.understandingthethreat.com/the-disinformation-campaign-at-the-ground-level-carrollton-texas/ 1/18/20 - federal tax dollars continue to flow to dangerous Islamist organizations, including CAIR; total exceeds $41 million since 2007 https://www.jihadwatch.org/2020/01/dhs-approves-100000-grant-of-taxpayers-money-to-hamas-linked-cair 1/16/20 - Senators Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar join 120 other members of Congress in sending congratulatory support letters to terror-tied CAIR (link to letters at end) https://freebeacon.com/issues/more-than-120-members-of-congress-issue-letters-of-support-to-leading-anti-israel-group/ EARLIER |
Sharia TipSheet
Can Muslim Politicians Follow the U.S. Constitution?
March 8, 2020
A recent book raises the question of whether or not Muslim politicians can truly swear to uphold and follow the U.S. Constitution. The issue arises because, according to Islam, sharia law is supreme and any human law - including a constitution - must yield if it is incompatible with sharia law. The book is Islamic Doctrine Versus the U.S. Constitution: The Dilemma for Muslim Public Officials, written by Stephen Kirby and published by the Center for Security Policy.
Kirby’s book sets forth a number of ways Muslim politicians can appear to take the oath of office, but not truly be bound under Islamic doctrine by what the oath says. First, an oath is not binding unless it is sworn in the name of Allah or one of his attributes. Even the phrase ‘so help me God’ does not make the oath binding, because Allah is not the same deity as the God of Christians and Jews. Second, an oath is no longer binding if it becomes a hardship on the oath taker to follow it. Third, an oath is not binding if a Muslim says silently the phrase Inshah’ Allah - if Allah wills - while taking the oath. Thus, Muslim politicians can appear to outside observers to be taking an oath of office when they really are not. This is perfectly fine under Islamic jurisprudence given the religious duty to spread Islam in non-Muslim lands and to conceal one’s true intentions while doing so. Tricky stuff.
Add to all of this the basic problem of how any Muslim can truly swear to uphold the U.S. Constitution which conflicts with Islam in so many ways. There is no right to free speech, no right to bear arms, and no equal rights for women under Islamic doctrine, just to name a few of the ways sharia law and the U.S. Constitution are not compatible.
These are not just theoretical concerns. The author Stephen Kirby sent questionnaires to 80 Muslim public officials and 36 new Muslim candidates for office across the U.S. Kirby’s questions, among other things, probed the conflicts between Islamic doctrine and free speech, freedom of religion, and the 8th Amendment’s injunction against cruel and unusual punishment.
Only six Muslim public officials and three Muslim candidates who received the questionnaire indicated they would support the U.S. Constitution. Most of the people who were sent questionnaires did not reply to them. Among those who did reply was one Muslim political figure who accused Kirby of being racist for even asking the questions. Muslims playing the race card have always puzzled me. Islam is not a race. Islam is ascendant from Morocco to Indonesia. What race are we talking about, exactly?
It does not bode well for America when so many Muslim candidates and officials won’t affirm their support for our Constitution and dodge the question when asked about conflicts between Islamic doctrine and our founding documents. If they won’t affirm our basic law, why should they get to lead us? More to the point, we have only ourselves to blame if we elect people - Muslim or otherwise - who won’t acknowledge that the U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, as it says in Article VI, or have no intention of following it.
March 8, 2020
A recent book raises the question of whether or not Muslim politicians can truly swear to uphold and follow the U.S. Constitution. The issue arises because, according to Islam, sharia law is supreme and any human law - including a constitution - must yield if it is incompatible with sharia law. The book is Islamic Doctrine Versus the U.S. Constitution: The Dilemma for Muslim Public Officials, written by Stephen Kirby and published by the Center for Security Policy.
Kirby’s book sets forth a number of ways Muslim politicians can appear to take the oath of office, but not truly be bound under Islamic doctrine by what the oath says. First, an oath is not binding unless it is sworn in the name of Allah or one of his attributes. Even the phrase ‘so help me God’ does not make the oath binding, because Allah is not the same deity as the God of Christians and Jews. Second, an oath is no longer binding if it becomes a hardship on the oath taker to follow it. Third, an oath is not binding if a Muslim says silently the phrase Inshah’ Allah - if Allah wills - while taking the oath. Thus, Muslim politicians can appear to outside observers to be taking an oath of office when they really are not. This is perfectly fine under Islamic jurisprudence given the religious duty to spread Islam in non-Muslim lands and to conceal one’s true intentions while doing so. Tricky stuff.
Add to all of this the basic problem of how any Muslim can truly swear to uphold the U.S. Constitution which conflicts with Islam in so many ways. There is no right to free speech, no right to bear arms, and no equal rights for women under Islamic doctrine, just to name a few of the ways sharia law and the U.S. Constitution are not compatible.
These are not just theoretical concerns. The author Stephen Kirby sent questionnaires to 80 Muslim public officials and 36 new Muslim candidates for office across the U.S. Kirby’s questions, among other things, probed the conflicts between Islamic doctrine and free speech, freedom of religion, and the 8th Amendment’s injunction against cruel and unusual punishment.
Only six Muslim public officials and three Muslim candidates who received the questionnaire indicated they would support the U.S. Constitution. Most of the people who were sent questionnaires did not reply to them. Among those who did reply was one Muslim political figure who accused Kirby of being racist for even asking the questions. Muslims playing the race card have always puzzled me. Islam is not a race. Islam is ascendant from Morocco to Indonesia. What race are we talking about, exactly?
It does not bode well for America when so many Muslim candidates and officials won’t affirm their support for our Constitution and dodge the question when asked about conflicts between Islamic doctrine and our founding documents. If they won’t affirm our basic law, why should they get to lead us? More to the point, we have only ourselves to blame if we elect people - Muslim or otherwise - who won’t acknowledge that the U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, as it says in Article VI, or have no intention of following it.
|
Pensacola Mosques, Attended by Saudi Shooter, Are Extremely Dangerous, Expert Says
February 6, 2020 Former Federal Agent Dave Gaubatz on Dangerous U.S. Mosques
|
|
DHS Willfully Blind to Islamic Threats to the Homeland
October 16, 2019
Re-posted at
The Department of Homeland Security is to be commended for expressly naming what it calls the “Radical Islamist Terrorist Threat” in its new Strategic Framework for Countering Terrorism and Targeted Violence. However, once again, DHS comes up woefully short in recognizing significant aspects of the threat.
The Framework discusses the threat at length (p. 9-10), but confines its discussion to foreign groups such as Islamic State (IS), Al Qaeda, and Hezbollah, their internationally mobile returning fighters, and the ‘homegrown violent extremists’ (HVEs) these groups inspire domestically.
No mention is made of the threat posed by Islam’s core doctrine of jihad or of the fact that many mosques in America have been rated Dangerous, Very Dangerous, or Extremely Dangerous by Dave Gaubatz, a well-known author and analyst with national security credentials. Apparently, in DHS’ view, a threat is not a threat if it’s a political hot potato. (The Justice Department and FBI so far refuse to cough up any records regarding their view of mosques in a pending FOIA case.)
Instead of parsing the threats posed by Islamic core doctrine and sharia (Islamic law), the DHS Framework descends into more of the same homogenized CVE mush it spouted during the Obama administration (Countering Violent Extremism). DHS began to move away from CVE and return to reality-based counterterrorism analysis and training early in the Trump administration. Unfortunately, the Department halted that work and reversed course once again towards CVE under former DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen. The Framework is replete with CVE concepts and terminology as, for example, when it discusses “a more holistic approach to preventing terrorism.” (p.1) CVE has been heavily criticized elsewhere for years, but one problem with treating all terrorist threats - from animal rights activists to jihadis - as the same is that it leaves counterterrorism personnel ill-equipped to deal with the specific means and methods employed by each discrete group of terrorists.
Finally, no mention is made at all of the Muslim Brotherhood or its U.S. front groups. Any Framework that fails to address this unsurpassed threat to the homeland is doomed from the outset. The Brotherhood’s main front group in the U.S. is CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations). CAIR poses as a civil rights group but its true nature is indicated by its status as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism-financing trial.
According to a recently published report on CAIR:
- a “number of individuals associated with CAIR have been convicted of terrorism-related charges over the years”
- “CAIR’s [Nihad] Awad has publicly allied himself with both the PLO and HAMAS terrorist groups in the past, and CAIR refuses to denounce HAMAS.”
- “As urgent as international threats undeniably are and will continue to be, top level U.S. national security leadership attention must be turned to the domestic insurgency threat posed by the subversive, jihadist agenda of the Muslim Brotherhood and the rest of the Islamic Movement in this country. CAIR is undoubtedly the lead Brotherhood front group driving this threat, but its top position within the U.S. Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO) and, in turn, its close working relationship with the pro-Muslim Brotherhood, HAMAS-supporting regime of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, add a further and foreign dimension to the threat that must not be ignored.”
- “The Trump administration must confront the Muslim Brotherhood’s many tentacles in the U.S. Federal law enforcement should begin a renewed effort to investigate Brotherhood groups in the U.S. and at the very least, revoke CAIR’s tax exempt status. It is plain from this report that CAIR is not a “civil rights” organization, but one intent on imposing the Muslim Brotherhood’s malevolent ‘…grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers…’”
DHS and the entire U.S. government need to go beyond merely naming the “Radical Islamist Terrorist Threat” and deal with the multi-faceted dimensions of the threat, starting with bringing back fact-based training that educates counterterrorism personnel on the specifics they need to counter the threat. Until that happens, DHS and the federal government are dismally failing at job one - keeping the U.S. homeland safe.
DHS, go back to the drawing board and get real.
SEEN AND AGREED:
- David Bores
- Philip B. Haney, Founding Member, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Customs & Border Protection (CBP - Ret.)
- Andrew E. Harrod
- Robert Heffley
- Vince Hughes
- James Lafferty - Chairman, Virginia Anti-Shariah Task Force (VAST)
- Clare Lopez
- Dick Manasseri
- Jim Simpson
- Chris Wright - Sharia TipSheet - Liberato.US
|
MUST-SEE VIDEO
Heritage Foundation Benghazi Panel Conference - Brigitte Gabriel
|
|
|
|
|
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