So what about al-Taqiyya?

Bukhari:V4B52N270 “Allah’s Messenger said, ‘Who is ready to kill Ashraf? He has said injurious things about Allah and His Apostle.’ Maslama got up saying, ‘Would you like me to kill him?’ The Prophet proclaimed, ‘Yes.’ Maslama said, ‘Then allow me to lie so that I will be able to deceive him.’ Muhammad said, ‘You may do so.’”

Posted by: Celsius at May 24, 2007 5:22 PM

What happens when the veracity of a witness in brought into question because of a muslims "right" to lie. Another law suit to quash such statements?

Posted by: KAOSKTRL at May 24, 2007 5:55 PM

Welcome to "Anilorac Htron" ("North Carolina")

A new state called Anilorac Htron in the county Ekaw,("wake")
has been born after a judge ruled "Bizarro".
In the Bizarro world of "Htrae" ("Earth" spelled
backwards),
Society is ruled by the Bizarro Code which states;
Us do opposite of all Earthly things!
Us hate beauty! Us love ugliness!
Us sware truth on book that tells us to lie!

.

Posted by: Joe Schmoe USA at May 24, 2007 6:03 PM

Yet another example of what happens when the court system of the US neglects to understand the enemy. Everyone pats themselves on the back and we are all supposed to feel so good about the delusions of multi-culturalism. I don't know about anyone else, but if I was sitting on a jury and someone swore on the koran I would not beleieve a word they were saying.

Posted by: never_submit at May 24, 2007 6:27 PM

Someone in North carolina needs to protest this, on the substance of the Koran, which permits lying, and take it to their Surpreme Court.

And ultimately to the U.S. Supreme Court, since this issue is fundamental to what kind of documents are allowed to be sworn upon.

Could a Satanist swear on the Devil's Bible?

Could a Santorian swear on sacrificed chicken?

Could a Wiccan swear a sprouting acorn?

The legal geniuses involved in this decision have just blindly permitted what they have not seriously investigated.

It is intellectual hara kiri and judicial seppuku.

I guess the Constitution IS a suicide pact in North C.

Posted by: profitsbeard at May 24, 2007 6:33 PM

So now any Muslim can commit perjury, and according to North Carolina law any third rate lawyer could probably get him acquitted of that charge. Simply because the court allowed him to swear on a book that says it's permissible to lie. Hell, I could get him his walking papers and I have no legal experience. In this one short paragraph I have already presented a defense that will win his case based on this dumb ass law they just put on the books. Go figure dhimmis!!!

Posted by: Infidel One at May 24, 2007 6:47 PM

So now you can take an oath on a book that permits lying?

Curious

Posted by: MoBlows at May 24, 2007 7:44 PM

"It would elevate form over substance."

This is the kind of thinking that plagues the West today. This “enlightenment” is ignorance and bliss by ignorance.

Posted by: ofcourse at May 24, 2007 8:30 PM

As an atheist car enthusiast, feel the need to swear in on a 1966 Sunbeam Tiger owner's manual. No lies contained within.

I'm serious here, really.

Posted by: Charles Bogle at May 24, 2007 9:29 PM

Good, you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but on a piece of rubbish that allows you to lie.Makes sense/sarcasm off.

As a homemaker I am thinking, should the need arise, I may use one of Martha Stewart's magazines! At least her home tips make sense!
And even if she "did time" she is more honest than the prophet ever was!

Posted by: Gramfan at May 24, 2007 10:09 PM

And perjury can now become commonplace in our courts since Muslims are sworn to deceive the infidels by dint of Islamic law taught in the Quran ("taqiyya"). Americans are 99% "infidel."

There is no excuse for the US government's ignorance in this matter. None.

What kind of idiots do we have running our judicial system anyway? This really makes you wonder...

Posted by: pythagoras at May 24, 2007 11:15 PM

Taqiyya and kitman a word used to descibe their feeble excuse to lie! On the name of religion of all things! Ironic I just started using this word and here it is.- pg80 PIG to Islam

Posted by: MZ at May 24, 2007 11:43 PM

You people make good points! Again I am sure the white house has not thought of this. They don't know about islam. The same reaction I get. Respect it! Respect it? I say!-they lie! Then to take a oath! How are you to know?

Posted by: MZ at May 24, 2007 11:48 PM

This is interesting. I believe this shows the muslims islamist working from the 1st humanity. Jesus had to die to restore this that was lost.
quote-Rev;
It is the heart and not the brain that to the highest doth attain. The heart and the brain are not separate units in a person. It is the believing heart guided by the truth that to the highest doth attain Rom 12:2.Truth, to the truth seeker, is the most sacred thing in the universe. Truth is in the actual reality of the thought.
Many peple argue that the moral issue has nothing to do with nature. Only the human race is responsible for actions so considered as right and wrong. Morality or immorality according to them has no effect (so thought) upon the elements of the natural world.
The people of faith in God have it necessary to face this issue. Are the predictions of the prophets valueless? Is there a right of sin?

Posted by: MZ at May 25, 2007 12:39 AM

With great respect Robert, this is an overly pedantic argument. Muslims should be able to be sworn in on the Qur'an. Allowing Muslims to do this is not some form of great capitulation that will lead us down a slipperly slope. The reality is, most Muslims are ignorant of Islam. Ordinary Muslims, generally arent aware of taqiyya or kitman as religious doctrines.

Posted by: Haidon at May 25, 2007 12:42 AM

Very disturbing news. You all remember when the lone muslim congressman (Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) insisted on being sworn in on the Koran instead of the Bible. Dennis Prager called attention to this, acting the part of the canary in the mine shaft. CAIR jumped all over Prager, and Ellison got his way. The idiot MSM thought to add that Jefferson had a copy of the Koran, so what's the problem? What they didn't tell us was WHY Jefferson had a Koran ... he was trying to understand the enemy, at the time, the muslim pirates in Tripoli.

So now we have an idiot judge in North Carolina who lets the Koran into the courtroom, conferring equality with that vile document and the Holy Bible.

We are on the slippery slope that Britain is so perilously further along. Over there they are allowing collateral Sharia courts to operate alongside their traditional courts.

All cultures are not equal, and if your god says its ok to subjugate, convert against my will, or kill me when I don't convert to your religion, we are not worshipping the same God, either.

Multi culturalism and pc are robbing us of the moral clarity we need to fight the global jihad.

Posted by: Paleologos at May 25, 2007 1:02 AM

Professor Carl Ernst, who came to Islam via an interest in "Sufism" which bespeaks some form of the Spiritual Search, must be very proud. Too bad that in those formative years he did not try stamp collecting, or chess, or Morris Dancing, or Moral Rearmament, when he was first tempted by Sufism, which in turn leads some not to stop with the Love Poems to the Universe of Rumi, but onward to the full frontal (lobe) submission to Islam? Why, for chrissake -- as Holden Caulfield spelled it -- embrace the "life of the mind" (as it is complacently called) and become an enthusiast for a total belief-system that promotes the habit of mental submission?

And will the courts of North Carolina be using the unexpurgated Qur'an for swearings-in, or just the "Lyrical Suras" as presented by Michael Sells -- the same carefully bowdlerized version that Ernst helped make compulsory reading for entering freshman at the University of Chapel Hill beginning a few years ago?

One wonders.

Posted by: Hugh at May 25, 2007 1:08 AM

'The reality is,most Muslims are ignorant of Islam. Ordinary Muslims,generally aren't aware of taqiyya or kitman as religious doctrines.'
Haidon
Are Infidels supposed to be reassured by this or marvel at ignorance of 'most Muslims' who know so little of this horrible Death Cult they want to either shove it down our throats[or slit our throats according to Allah inspired Mo]??
And just what attraction does character of Mohammed have for converts? Apart from 4 wives,sex with children and 72 virgins in Allah's
Brothel-for males??

Posted by: Morgane at May 25, 2007 3:30 AM

Swearing on any holy book should be stopped in a secular state.

Posted by: FreeSpeech at May 25, 2007 4:56 AM

The world is dying a slow death...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at May 25, 2007 5:50 AM

FreeSpeech, the law in NC allows and allowed affirmation without a holy book; but your sentiment is not conducive to creating a society that has a sense of communal meaning. Sorry, but our insistent secularism does not reflect the practice of 1789, does not reflect what is required by the American constitution. And that insistent secularism is destructive, partly because it leaves us open to a creed, Islam, that insists on meaning and, by its predatory aggression, enforces that meaning.

As to the court case... will there ever be an appeal that not only affirms the Bible, but seeks to de-legitimize Islam? The first is more likely than the second, though it would be good if people came to understand how ridiculous it is to give credence to testimony sworn on a book that affirms lying.

The ruling will stand. At least when someone perjures himself, we will not hear a successful defense to the effect that, "I testified in accordance with the requirements of Sharia." We might not hear that defense at all, because it puts the Koran in ill repute.

Posted by: StillBreathing at May 25, 2007 5:54 AM

If North Carolina wants to set precedent by allowing practitioners of a certain religion swear on the holey word of their pedophile prophet, who are we to protest?

As long as the oath before the court includes an affirmation to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth," any lying or ommission of the whole truth will be just as damning to the author.

Since neither the press, nor ministers, nor our government are willing to take on who YAHWEH is and Mo and allha aren't, we are forced to pay lip service to the 'one god' mantra that births abominations like this one.

I would hope that North Carolina would also require these same affirmants to read aloud some of the lewd and offensive prounouncements of this same 'inspired' profit just to make sure the rest of the court understands what religious teaching the affirmant's oath is rooted in.

Posted by: BurkasforHitlery at May 25, 2007 10:00 AM

So I guess you all would want Mohammedans to swear on the Bible, which would be as significant to them as requiring me to swear on "Dianetics: The New Science of Mental Health," by L. Ron Hubbard?

Or maybe your point is that Mohammedans aren't competent to give testimony at all in court, since nothing they say can be trusted?

Posted by: Seamus at May 25, 2007 10:17 AM

Let's see what happens the first time a white supremacist decides to swear in on Mein Kampf.

-XRDC

Posted by: XRDC at May 25, 2007 10:20 AM

Seamus-

No one is required to swear on anything. They can "affirm" to be truthful.

The central point of this topic is not about forcing anyone to swear upon something that they do not believe in, but is about preventing a book that encourages the deception of infidels (i.e.: all who support our secular system of government) from gaining legal credence in court. (Which, in itself, negates the entire meaning of the oath to be truthful.)

We just don't want a blind approval of lying- as recommended by the Koran's injuction not to take infidels as friends and to deceive them as necessary to promote Islam- given legal sanction.

The courts should have read the Koran, first.

(But, like all Pollyanna multiculti fools, they accept the deceptive popular notion that it is "just like the Bible", proving that they practice bad judgment.)

The Koran needs to be exposed, not proposed.

Posted by: profitsbeard at May 25, 2007 11:35 AM

profitsbeard,

I was going to respond to Seamus that he missed the point, but you have admirably accomplished that. Well stated.

The simplistic argument that this all boils down to a "my religion is better than your religion" argument misses the core values issue that is driving the entire clash of civilizations ... and yes, John Edwards, peek through your $400 haircut and smell the taqiyya.

My whole education on this started with the thought ... "Well, just what is in the Koran, anyway, must be like the Bible, right?, ... what's the harm in that?" ... and then I started reading actual Koran passages and realized what a snake we Americans are taking into our bosom.

Posted by: Paleologos at May 25, 2007 11:51 AM

Will Muslims soon also be able to slay the infidels, as the Kuran mandates them to do, in our courtrooms, too?

How long will it be before we get to that point? Or are we almost there?

Posted by: pythagoras at May 25, 2007 2:05 PM

how about administering those oaths of office in the bathroom....to give it the proper atmosphere...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at May 25, 2007 4:26 PM

A parallel track to this discussion is over at HotAir-

http://hotair.com

Click on the North Carolina Red Meat image.

Posted by: profitsbeard at May 25, 2007 11:07 PM

I have to go all the way to N.Carolina so I can swear on the Koran? damn!

Posted by: MZ at May 26, 2007 2:27 AM

Really what about their doctrine of taqiyya? Which
they done it so long they don't realize they are doing it all the time!

Posted by: MZ at May 26, 2007 2:31 AM

:( - North Carolina - Say it isn't so.

"The decision represents a victory for the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina, which sued the state after two Guilford County judges rejected an offer from an Islamic center to provide county courthouses with free copies". (from above post)

War on terror? I'm becoming more afraid of special interest groups.
Welcome to Amerabia :(

Posted by: pigtails not veils at May 26, 2007 5:10 AM

Posted by: Haidon

With great respect Robert, this is an overly pedantic argument. Muslims should be able to be sworn in on the Qur'an. Allowing Muslims to do this is not some form of great capitulation that will lead us down a slipperly slope. The reality is, most Muslims are ignorant of Islam. Ordinary Muslims, generally arent aware of taqiyya or kitman as religious doctrines.

Quite true, a great many muslims are unaware of the fine points of Taqiya and Kitman, but the hate towards infidels is till inherent. They are also even more ignorant of the bible, which in turn does not inhibit them from lying through their teeth.

It is like driving a car, you can drive without the knowledge of the mechanics, the same as muslims can lie without the knowledge of religious doctrines

The point is lying is condomed within Islam, thus muslims are not breaking a golden rule,instead they are breaking an islamic rule when telling the truth, where as non-muslim are breaking a golden rule when they lie.

You have not been in Indonesia long enough to understand the racial implications of "Mr." and "Tourist", which no doudt you have heard many times by now.

When an Indonesia adresses you as "OM" or "Pak" he is showing respect.

Posted by: shiva at May 26, 2007 6:37 AM

There are two type of Koran in the World Officate one approve by than Islamist Org and unofficial one written by people who hated Islam and so they write falsely about Islam. I read the Offical Koran and it doesnot say Muslim can lie to non-muslam. Saying of the Prophit cannot be expect as legit when they condict the Koran. So goto than Islamist Center and get than Officate Koran. The two jufge read the officate Koran to reach this ruleing.

Posted by: DefenderofIslam at May 27, 2007 2:55 AM

Posted by: DefenderofIslam

So goto than Islamist Center and get than Officate Koran. The two jufge read the officate Koran to reach this ruleing.

You mean a koran like this

http://illustratedpig.blogspot.com/2007/02/sick-at-touba-9111-loosers.html

Posted by: shiva at May 27, 2007 12:22 PM

So, in order to get the truth out of a Muslim, he has to be strung-up and beaten with canes, Sadam Hussein style.
Is that what works?

Posted by: crusader rabbit at May 27, 2007 12:22 PM