| FrontPageMag.com | Articles By Robert Spencer | Articles By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Robert Spencer Bio |  |
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
In "Yes, they can," at the Center for Security Policy, Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., discusses the prospects for the further encroachment of Shariah in the U.S.
Senator Barack Obama became President-elect on the uplifting, if inexact, slogan, "Yes, we can." This week, there is growing evidence that people who have in mind doing away with the presidency of the United States – and all other aspects of our secular, democratic and constitutional form of government – are similarly convinced of their inevitable success. Judging by the sheer audacity of their agenda, "Yes, they can" would appear an apt description of the prospects for the Saudis and other champions of the totalitarian program they call Shariah.In the run-up to an emergency summit outgoing President George Bush has called to address the now-global financial crisis, the oil-rich Islamists of the Persian Gulf led by Saudi Arabia have not only established that their petrodollars are indispensable to any solution. They also seem to have secured the Bush Administration's acquiescence to the sinister strings attached to any bail-out of the West in which they might participate.
Specifically, the Saudis and their friends want the United States to join those, particularly in Europe, who have accommodated themselves to Shariah. No, we are assured, they aren't taking about the brutal theo-political-legal code that features such barbaric practices as beheadings, floggings, stonings, amputations, female genital mutilation and mysogeny more generally.
All they want, those in the know insist, is for Washington to encourage Wall Street – more and more of which is owned by the U.S. government – to embrace Shariah-Compliant Finance (SCF). A Treasury Department seminar convened last week depicted SCF as nothing more than a kind of socially responsible investing vehicle that respects Muslim religious beliefs by eschewing interest-bearing transactions and those involving pork and "sin" stocks. So, what's the big deal? The Catholics, Methodists and Jews have their funds, why not the Muslims?
What makes the Shariah-Compliant Finance gambit both a big and troublesome "deal" is that, unlike these other religious traditions, Shariah's adherents are pursuing a global theocracy. They believe they must impose their agenda on everybody else, religious and secular alike, using violence if necessary. And SCF is explicitly described by leading practitioners as a complement to violent holy war: "financial jihad" and "jihad with money."
In other words, there is no such thing as free-standing Shariah-Compliant Finance. According to all of the recognized authorities and institutions of Islam, Shariah is a unified, indivisible program to which all faithful Muslims must adhere comprehensively.
Not surprisingly, therefore, the Saudis & Co. are not simply seeking to insinuate Shariah-Compliant Finance into our capital markets. They are also advancing the creation of a parallel Shariah-governed society through various other means.
One of these techniques will be in evidence when the Saudi monarch himself convenes a meeting in New York City in the hope of imposing Shariah blasphemy laws worldwide. In light of the stated, and seemingly benign, purpose of the so-called "Culture of Peace" event hosted by King Abdullah at the United Nations – namely, promoting interfaith understanding and tolerance, numerous world leaders, including President Bush, will be present. Never mind that Saudi Arabia is arguably the most intolerant nation on earth, a fact even some in the Bush administration have acknowledged.
The real reason attendance at the King's séance is going to be impressive, of course, has more to do with the hope that petro-largesse will flow to those who ingratiate themselves to the House of Saud. Abdullah appears confidently to have signaled that, if the West plays ball on the "Culture of Peace" agenda, the Saudis and their fellow Islamists will be constructive at what might be called the subsequent "Culture of Money" meeting in Washington.
What will the answer be when the Islamists insist that free speech must not allow the slander, libel or defamation of Shariah, or other aspects of their faith? If the European Union and the United Nations Human Rights Council have already accommodated themselves to this demand, why should we object? So what if, by so doing, we would effectively thereby be precluded from talking about – or even understanding – the Islamist threat we face, to say nothing of eviscerating the First Amendment? As the Treasury Department can attest, we need the money.
Unfortunately, this is no time for us to be diminishing awareness throughout the Free World of the various, grave dangers we face from adherents to Shariah's seditious program. London's Sunday Telegraph reported this weekend that a classified British government assessment has concluded that there are "some thousands of extremists in the U.K. committed to supporting Jihadi activities, either in the U.K. or abroad."
Such extremists are said to be engaged in attack planning in the United Kingdom "either under the direction of al-Qaeda, or inspired by al-Qaeda's ideology of global Jihad" (read, Shariah). They may inflict "mass casualties" and constitute a "severe" threat to the Government Security Zone (including the Houses of Parliament and key executive offices) in the heart of London.
At such a moment, a federal judge in Oregon has held the law criminalizing material support for terror is unconstitutionally "vague." Taken together with the other manifestations of our capitulation, is it any wonder the champions of Shariah are convinced that "yes, they can" have their way with us? Who will disabuse them of this terrifying notion? We can, but will President-elect Obama lead the way?
See more at the Coalition to Stop Shariah site.
Posted by Robert at November 10, 2008 9:01 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
Will Obama lead the way? Of course he will. With the help of his friend and pastor who honors noteable dignitaries such as Farrakahn
http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=detay&link=156455
There is nothing to fear from BO and if you are worried, why then, YOU must be a racist and a bigot.
New beginning’ for Nation of Islam, says Farrakhan
Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan delivers a speech in observance of Saviours' Day in Chicago.
Nation of Islam Minister Louis Farrakhan stressed unity among religions, while still preaching a message of black empowerment, at a rare public event on Sunday deemed "a new beginning" for the Chicago-based movement.
In the nearly two-hour speech, Farrakhan covered topics including immigration, public schools, violence and morality. He vaguely referred to the presidential election, but did not specifically mention any candidates. "We are all in a journey to become complete human beings," the 75-year-old Farrakhan told the crowd of thousands gathered inside Mosque Maryam and in white tents outside. "Look how we have become so divided, so hateful, while claiming the same creator."Farrakhan renewed a call for many to get back to the basic tenets of Islam, while still encouraging black pride. "Black people must stop seeing themselves as inferior, and whites must stop seeing themselves as superior," he said, adding that black Muslims "have to keep going our own way." Though other religious leaders and non-Muslims were invited to the public event, most of those in attendance were Nation of Islam followers.
Farrakhan did not lay out any specific plans for the "new beginning," but he offered his opinion on many topics and made a plea for understanding with immigrants south of US borders.
"Our brothers and sisters from South America are not trying to take your jobs. They are trying to survive," Farrakhan said.Noting the current economic turmoil, he said, "God is troubling America because America can do better." He noted the theme of "change" in the presidential election and said change must also come through religious communities. "The change that will feed our hearts is not necessarily a political change,"he said. "Our mission is to help bring in a government of peace."
In February, Farrakhan appeared at an annual Saviours' Day event in Chicago and called Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama the "hope of the entire world" that the US will change for the better.
The Obama campaign quickly denounced Farrakhan's support because he has made comments in the past widely viewed as being anti-Semitic.
Nation of Islam officials said Farrakhan's statements are often taken out of context. The event comes just weeks after the death of Imam W.D. Mohammed, the son of Nation founder Elijah Muhammad, who broke with the group and moved thousands of African-Americans toward mainstream Islam.
While the Nation has espoused black nationalism and self-reliance since it was founded in the 1930s, in recent years members have reached out to other groups. For instance, the Nation has a Latino liaison and has become involved in immigrant rights rallies and marches.
Farrakhan has haltingly tried to move the Nation toward traditional Islam, which considers the American movement heretical because of its view of Elijah Muhammad as a prophet, among other novel teachings.
Orthodox Islam teaches that there has been no prophet after Prophet Muhammad. He has also downplayed some of the group's more controversial beliefs. The Nation of Islam has taught that whites are descended from the devil and that blacks are the chosen people of God.
21 October 2008, Tuesday
AP CHICAGO
I still can't get past the realization that BO was a member of a church for 20 years and in all that time NEVER realized what Farrakhan was all about and NEVER realized that his friend and pastor preached Black Liberation Theology.
Well, you wanted a marxist government America--well now you got one!
ENJOY!
Posted by: witness![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at November 10, 2008 9:26 PM
Your name got top billing on speakers list...I'm sure you will be a hard act to follow...
Posted by: duh_swami at November 10, 2008 9:59 PM
Robert, thanks for continuing the fight against Sharia! This story reflects my stance in defending your site to the masses at LGF. Keep up the good fight!
Posted by: theblakester at November 10, 2008 10:10 PM
'Farrakhan renewed a call for many to get back to the basic tenets of Islam, while still encouraging black pride. "Black people must stop seeing themselves as inferior, and whites must stop seeing themselves as superior," he said, adding that black Muslims "have to keep going our own way."'
Whites don't see themselves as superior, but there are a lot of blacks who see themselves as inferior, helped along by the tyrannical thumb pressing on them by their so called black leaders. Exploiters is more like it.
Enough! I don't oppress people, I don't believe in forcing other people to do things my way and I have no interest in taking away someone else's rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. There are many people in this country who are enslaved in their minds just like Muslims are. I will not submit to them anymore than I will to the scourge of Sharia.
In America, equality is guaranteed to all (except for unborn babies) and I will never apologize to someone who does not have the good sense to believe that and accept it. Because I am secure in my knowledge of my rights guaranteed to me by the Constitution, I am not obligated to feel less or bow down or even feel sorry for someone else who isn't. I do feel sorry for those misled folks because they throw away their potential in order to hold a grudge that doesn't get them anywhere, but I do so by my choice. I am not obligated to do it. That is the difference, between the American way and the old Soviet Union's way or Islamic Supremicism's way.
Defiance,
Isabella
Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at November 10, 2008 10:50 PM
Isabellathecrusader...
Paragraph #1...Applause.
Paragraph #2...More applause.
Paragraph #3...Even more applause.
Paragraph #4...A standing ovation...
Posted by: duh_swami at November 10, 2008 11:33 PM
So, what I would say to the incoming administration, as well as the outgoing: What? We are so concerned with money and appeasing Islamic nations that we are willing to sell our souls, barter off our stance against the dangers of Shariah so that we can gain some false sense of economic security? I mean, these actions certainly are NOT those of a nation as powerful as America, this does NOT promote the freedom that our forefathers fought for. This is surely not economic freedom, but rather, and most simply put, this is economic slavery. This is another reason why I liked McCain so much. Sure, initially he was not completely sold on drilling in ANWAR but towards the end of the campaign, he was all in because he recognized that meant economic freedom FROM the middle east. AND, I think McCain FINALLY realized that it is a matter of national security, as well as ensuring the blue prints of our freedom and liberty remain intact, that they'd not just become another article of fabric to be burned as we have seen our flag desecrated so often in the streets of these places we are trying to cow tow to. What people don't understand is that while, sure, we are going to feel growing pains while trying to get the economy back on track, should we really sell our ideals and our freedom up the river in the process? I think most on this web site would unite in the simple answer of "No".
In fact, I had the pleasure of meeting an Israeli soldier recently. She had so many insightful things to say, and we are truly bonding. However, the first time we talked, one thing she was concerned about was America's seeming obsession over the economy. While she acknowledged that she realizes economic security strengthens national security, she continues to point out that we as Americans are so preoccupied with the finance that the next time, and yet God forbid, there is an attack, we will be completely caught off guard.
Posted by: Heidi J at November 11, 2008 12:00 AM
Come on, Robert. We don't have photos of Obama holding hands with the Saudi Royals. He's a constitutional law professor, and I doubt he has any tolerance for brutal Sharia law, due to not too recent inequalities in our own American justice system.
Also, European assimilation of Sharia will not happen here because of the ACLU. And we both know the reason for that.
at November 11, 2008 4:33 AM
Thank you, Duh. Somebody needed to say this. There was a thread a week or so ago with Leon going on and on about the oppression of the poor blacks. Give me a break. A lot of the time we oppress ourselves with our own stinkin' thinkin' that has nothing to do with anything anybody outside of us does. But it is much easier to blame somebody else, especially if our leaders encourage it and it gives them political clout, than to look within ourselves to address and repair the problems. In America at the moment, (because with the Obama nightmare coming to a theatre near you we may lose this shortly,) freedom and liberty FOR ALL means just what it says.
Bingo, you said about Obama:
"He's a constitutional law professor, and I doubt he has any tolerance for brutal Sharia law..."
If that is true then why did Obama campaign for Rail Odinga, the prime minister of Kenya who ran on a pro-Sharia platform and whose followers, when he lost the election (before he took the position anyway) went on a Muslim-on-Christian killing spree, including the burning alive of Christians in a church his followers locked them in this past New Year's Day? Obama seems to be very tolerant of Sharia to me.
Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at November 11, 2008 8:34 AM
Also, European assimilation of Sharia will not happen here because of the ACLU. And we both know the reason for that.
Posted by: Bingo
Are you sure?
Posted by: PMK at November 11, 2008 8:36 AM
Bingo:
we've not yet seen Obama holding hands with the Saudis, but one thing you can count on, ESPECIALLY after he attends this Islamic leaders summit that the Obama camp keeps going on about, oh, you can bet pictures will surface then. More importantly, dialog that will affect us for years to come will be surfacing, as well. Also, Isabella makes a great point, and one that I had completely forgotten, about Obama's support of Odinga. Scary stuff, for sure.
Posted by: Heidi J at November 11, 2008 8:54 AM
Obama will smooch and hold hands with the Saudis. It's Presidential tradition. Bush wasn't the first to do it. Obama won't be the last to do it.
And, while we don't yet have photos of it, we do have photos of him dressed as a Muslim "tribal elder"...
Posted by: Abscedere at November 11, 2008 9:52 AM
From post above: Obama will smooch and hold hands with the Saudis
No doubt, but will the Saudi's smooch with him?
It takes two to tango, but we have yet to see how the Sauds will relate to a man that their Prophet referred to as a 'raisin head'.
Probably there are converts and even the devout, that don't know about Mohammads attitudes toward other races, but I'm certain the Saudi's do.
So we will see if racism on the part of the Saudi's will show itself...They will try to hide it, but smooching may be a little much...
President Obama has to support Odinga...Odinga say's he is Obama's cousin...It's a family thing...
at November 11, 2008 10:24 AM
"London's Sunday Telegraph reported this weekend that a classified British government assessment has concluded that there are "some thousands of extremists in the U.K. committed to supporting Jihadi activities, either in the U.K. or abroad.""
They either don't get it, or they don't want to.
Orthodox Jews and devout Christians are not generally described as 'extremists'.
Rabbi's and priests are not generally described as 'extremists'?
But when it comes to those pious Muslims (including clerics) who believe they are obliged to fully comply with the tenets of their complete way of life, the 'extremist' label is so typical.
I can think of only three reasons for that 'extremist' label: ignorance of what Islam really teaches, or the reluctance/refusal to believe what it really teaches, or the reluctance/refusal to offend those whose belief system is so antithetical to our own.
Posted by: PRCS at November 11, 2008 12:07 PM
Duh Swami,
There will be a romance between Obama and the Sauds but it will have less to do with smooching and more to do with Obama bending over and picking up the soap. And then going for coffee. Or maybe tea.
Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at November 11, 2008 1:20 PM
Obama carries way too much baggage as the first Black President to go down in history as the Man who reintroduces it.
It will come down to Surrender or War. I think Obama is too Proud to surrender.
Either Obama finds out what it has been like for George Bush for the last 6 years or the Demoncratic leadership will change their minds as to what is OK to do in war. They might even get the NYT to stop telling everyone what were doing.
Posted by: flowerknife_us at November 11, 2008 3:51 PM
...
It will come down to Surrender or War. I think Obama is too Proud to surrender....
Posted by: witnessJERUSALEM – Hamas held a meeting in the Gaza Strip several months ago with aides to President-elect Barack Obama, but the terror group was asked to keep the contacts secret until after last week's elections, according to a senior Hamas official.
Ahmed Yousef, Hamas' chief political adviser in Gaza, told the leading Al-Hayat Arabic-language newspaper Hamas has maintained regular communication with Obama aides that even continued during the past week.
http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80730
at November 11, 2008 5:19 PM
Either Obama finds out what it has been like for George Bush for the last 6 years or the Demoncratic leadership will change their minds as to what is OK to do in war. They might even get the NYT to stop telling everyone what were doing.
Posted by: flowerknife_us
All three are likely.
I half-expected Clinton to pull out of Iraq when he took over in 1993 but he suddenly became very responsible about American military obligations.
So Obama will learn what life is like on the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue.
There are always exceptions but by and large the most dovish Democrats will become downright hawkish if Obama decides he wants to invade Pakistan or [name your country].
The New York Times might have its own road-to-Damascus moment if the Obama administration requests that they keep something quiet.
Stranger things have happened.
Regarding the Hamas story, if NYT had known about it they probably would have kept it under wraps as well. It wasn't until after the election that a Newsweek senior reporter said that Obama won on a cult of personality. You're not likely to see any stories in NYT or WaPo about bugging people if Obama decides to listen in on phone conversations. Can't do anything to jeopardize national security, can we?
Posted by: PMK at November 11, 2008 5:43 PM
Can't do anything to jeopardize national security, can we?
Posted by: PMK at November 11, 2008 5:43 PM
Who knows, maybe someone will yet issue a REAL birth certificate to the "president-elect" so he can become a REAL American before January 20th?
Better yet, maybe we can just scrape the Constitution altogether and avoid an embarassing swearing in ceremony.
Can't seem to figure out which is lower -- the collective IQ of the American people or that of George Bush.
George is about as bright as a 5 watt light-bulb under a dark lamp shade but right now, his paltry 5 watts is looking mighty brilliant.
Posted by: witness at November 11, 2008 5:59 PM
Everything Robert says in this article makes perfect sense. Bush and most others in Washington are "Globalists". They do not see the USA as a soverign country. They are "above" all that kind of "small thinking". Leaders of multinational corporations see things the same way. Unfortunately, we are the peons in that world view. Whether we are Islamic peons or Catholic peons makes little difference to the "Globalist", as long as they can stay above it all and control things.
The public senses this and that is why BHO was not shown the door by the American people. He is unknown and claimed to want to help the middle class and bring "Change". He used vague terms and we are left with nothing but a question mark.
Robert and others need to watch the unfolding of this story very carefully.
at November 12, 2008 8:12 AM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)