You are on page 1of 21

Islamic Sharia Law in Brief!

* This commentary is far from brief. But it is one of the most in -depth references on Islamic Shariah Law. Please use this as a great educational tool.

Many thanks to:

The Australian Islamist Monitor

Syed Kamran Mirza 2/6/11

Cynicism of the Islamists to promote barbaric Sharia-based Islam in the west is going on uninterrupted due to the utter ignorance of the westerners about Islamic ideology in general, democratic convenience, and also by the politically correct nonsense spewed by many western politicians by their selfishness and forceful ignorance about the inherent danger of Islamic Sharia. Many hypocritical western residing Islamists are trying relentlessly to soft-sell Islam through their speeches and write-ups and so called interfaith nonsense only to fool the westerners. All the se Islamists are portraying Islam being compatible with western values. Using cynicism and soothsaying techniques, they are trying hard to convince the westerners that Islam is democratic, Islam is tolerant of other faiths, Islam encourages the pursuit of religious freedom, etc. They conveniently ignore/hide the fascism in Islam that originated from the primary (Quran) and secondary (Hadith) texts in the form of Sharia (Islamic law). The barbaric laws and rules of Sharia are causing the Muslims to suffer the most. Fact of the matter is, these so called Allahs laws are nothing

The barbaric laws and rules of Sharia are causing the Muslims to suffer the most
but the ancient Arab Paganic ruthless tribal social justice which had been cleverly ingrained in Islam and now causing the humanity to suffer. These Islamists are often bluffing westerners by citing some nonArab Muslim majority nations such as Bangladesh as the proof that there is no inherent discord between Islam and democracy. Many of these countries are nascent western style democracies and are not governed by Islamic Sharia law at all. Outside Middle East, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan has adopted partial Islamic laws and one can see the brutality and barbarism happening there in the name of Islam. To understand Islam, one of the important aspects is to understand the Sharia law. I have written this piece to inform the readers about the Sharia law that can only generate brutality, hatred, and nothing but Islamic fascism.

What is Sharia law?

The term "Sharia" (Arabic ar a; "way" or "path") is the sacred law of Islam. Sharia law literally means religious code of life. It is used to refer both to the Islamic system of law and the totality of the Islamic way of life. Sharia guides all aspects of Muslim life including politics, daily routines, foods, clothing, amusements, sports, familial and religious obligations, and financial dealings. Traditional Muslims (all mullahs, Mawlanas, Muftis, and Islamic scholars) who understand the Quran and the Hadith believe that sharia (Islamic law) expresses the highest and best goals for all societies on Earth. It is the law of Allah and bound to be the best of all. Because of this ardent belief, devout and fanatical Muslims all over the world are in constant struggle (Jihad) with their ruling Government

to establish Islamic Sharia as the countrys only rule by replacing modern secular democracy (Laws made by human).

Sharia and its origin and sources:

The sharia law in all the four Madhabs are esentially the same. The principal sources of Sharia are: the Quran, Hadiths, and Sunnah (the sayings, practices, and teachings of the Prophet Mohammed). The secondary sources are: Ijma (consensus), Kiyas (analogy), Ijtihad (responsible individual opinion), and Istihsan (Juristic references).

There are four main schools of Sharia law:

Hanbali: This is the most conservative school of Shari'a. It is used in Saudi Arabia and some states in Northern Nigeria. Maliki: This is based on the practices of the people of Medina during Muhammad's lifetime. Shafi'i: This is a conservative school that emphasizes on the opinions of the companions of the Prophet Muhammad. Hanifi: This is the most liberal school, and is relatively open to some limited modern ideas. Brief History of Sharia compilations: Muslims consider that, Sharia law was founded on the words of Allah as revealed in the Qur'an, and traditions gathered from the life of the Prophet Muhammad. Sharia continued to undergo fundamental changes, beginning with the reigns of caliphs Abu Bakr (63234) and Umar (63444), during which time many questions were brought to the attention of Muhammad's closest comrades for consultation. Therefore, Quran and Sunnah were the principle guidance to formulate the core issues of Islamic Sharia. Although, Sharia law principally derived from the emulations of early Islamic rules by Prophet Muhammad and his four rightly guided Caliphs , but written format (except some hand-written notes) was not available during the early period of Islamic Caliphates. However, hand-written Sharia formulation was started right from the time of Prophet and continued thereafter during four rightlyguided Caliphs, Umayyad and Abbasid Caliphs until the time of Ottoman Empire. Sharia developed during the long period of: 750-850 CE. Actual Hand-written Sharia booklets were formed and compiled by four schools of Islamic scholars and were used by various caliphs as the constitution of the court and final version of the Sharia was compiled after 150 years of the death of Prophet Muhammad in 632 CE. Modern-day Saudi Courts use most conservative Sharia formulated by Imam Hanbali (Hanibali booklet) and Imam Jafri booklet is used in Iran. (Al-Cistani is the guru of Shiite jurisprudence). Actual paper-backed Islamic Sharia books were prepared during 17th Century King Auwrangazev (Alamgir) of Mugal Empire in India.

Some common laws of Islamic Sharia which are regularly practiced in the Islamically ruled (Sharia -based) nations with some minor variations:
y 1- Jihad defined as to war against all non-Muslims to establish the religion is the duty of every Muslim and Muslim head of state (Caliph). Muslim Caliphs who refuse jihad are in violation of Sharia and unfit to rule. 2- A Caliph can hold office through seizure of power meaning through force. 3- The head of an Islamic State (Caliph) cannot be charged, let alone be punished for serious crimes such as murder, adultery, robbery, theft, drinking and in some cases of rape (Hudood cases) - Codified Islamic Law Vol 3 # 914C of and page 188 of Hedaya the Hanafi manual. 4- A percentage of Zakat (alms) must go towards jihad. 5- It is obligatory to obey the commands of the Caliph, even if he is unjust. 6- A caliph must be a Muslim, a non-slave and a male. 7- The Muslim public must remove the Caliph in one case, if he rejects Islam. 8- A Muslim who leaves Islam (apostate) must be killed immediately. 9- A Muslim will be forgiven for murder of : a) an apostasy b) an adulterer c) a highway robber. Making vigilante street justice and honor killing acceptable. 10- A Muslim will not get the death penalty if he kills a non-Muslim.

y y

y y y y y y y

y y

y y y

y y

11- Sharia never abolished slavery and sexual slavery and highly regulates it. A master will not be punished for killing his slave. Slavery still exists amongst Arab Muslims. 12- Sharia dictates death by stoning, beheading, for sins like killing, adultery, prostitutions; and other Quranic corporal punishments like: amputation of limbs (chopping hands and feet), floggings, beatings and other forms of cruel and unusual punishments even for the sins like: stealing, sexual promiscuity, robbery, burglary etc. 13- Non-Muslims are not equal to Muslims and must comply to Sharia (pay Zizzya: poll tax) if they are to remain safe. They are forbidden to marry Muslim women, publicly display wine or pork, recite their own religious scriptures, or openly celebrate their religious holidays or funerals. They are forbidden from building new churches or building them higher than mosques. They may not enter a mosque without permission. A non-Muslim is no longer protected if he commits adultery with a Muslim woman or if he leads a Muslim away from Islam. 14- It is a crime for a non-Muslim to sell weapons to someone who will use them against Muslims. Non-Muslims cannot curse a Muslim, say anything derogatory about Allah, the Prophet, or Islam, or expose the weak points of Muslims. However, Muslims can curse, criticize or say anything derogatory they like to the religions of others. 15- A non-Muslim cannot inherit from a Muslim. 16- Banks must be Sharia compliant and interest is not allowed. 17- No testimony in court is acceptable from people of low-level jobs, such as street sweepers or a bathhouse attendant. Women in such low level jobs such as professional funeral mourners cannot keep custody of their children in case of divorce. 18- A non-Muslim cannot rule even over a non-Muslims minority. 19- Homosexuality is punishable by death. January 2011, 5:26pm) - Two young men who filmed themselves having sex with a 17-year-old have been sentenced to death by stoning in Iran (click on image for full story)

y y y y y y y y y y y y

20- There is no age limit for marriage of girls under Sharia. The marriage contract can take place anytime after birth and consummated at age 8 or 9. 21- Rebelliousness on the part of the wife nullifies the husbands obligation to support her, gives him permission to beat her and keep her from leaving the home. 22- Divorce is only in the hands of the husband and is as easy as saying: I divorce you and becomes effective even if the husband did not intend it. 23- There is no common property between husband and wife and the husbands property does not automatically go to the wife after his death. 24- A woman inherits half what a man inherits. Sister gets half of what brother gets. 25- A man has the right to have up to 4 wives and wife has no right to divorce him even if he is polygamous. 26- The dowry is given in exchange for the womans sexual organs. 27- A man is allowed to have sex with slave women and also with women captured in battle (concubines), and if the enslaved woman is married her marriage is annulled. 28- The testimony of a woman in court is half the value of a man; that is, two women equal to one man. 29- A woman looses custody if she remarries. 30- A rapist may only be required to pay the bride-money (dowry) without marrying the rape victim. 31- A Muslim woman must cover every inch of her body which is considered Awrah, a sexual organ. Some schools of Sharia allow the face and some dont. 32- A Muslim man is forgiven if he kills his wife caught in the act of adultery. However, the opposite is not true for women since he could be married to the woman he was caught with. 33-It is obligatory for a Muslim to lie if the purpose is obligatory and is known as Taqiyya (Islamic Deception). That means that for the sake of abiding with Islams commandments, such as jihad, a

Muslim is obliged to lie and should not have any feelings of guilt or shame associated with this kind of lying. The above are clear-cut laws in Islam decided by great Imams after years of examination and interpretation of the Quran, Hadith and Mohammeds life. y y 34. The perpetrators of genocide, mass rape and plunder will not be punished if they repent Codified Islamic Law Vol 1 # 13. 35. To prove rape, a woman must have 4 male witnesses. Womens testimony is not accepted - Pakistans Hudood ordnance 7 of 1979 amended by 8B of 1980. Thousands of raped women and girls in many countries have been charged with Zena (physical relations outside marriage) and punished by Sharia courts for want of witnesses. 36. All modern music including sexually explicit music of any kind is strictly prohibited and punishable by Islamic Sharia code of justice. Only Islamic songs are allowed.

The above are the most important parts of Islamic Sharia law which were devoutly practiced by the early Islamic rulers (Holy Prophet and his four rightl y guided Caliphs) and also by the Caliphs of Ummyad and Abbasid Dynasties ruled from Baghdad (Todays Iraq) and later by Ottoman Empire with very little variations.

Islamic Taqiyya vs. Reality of Islamic Sharia!

Caution! Islam permits devout Muslims to lie, cheat, and deliberately bluff non-muslims to protect or promote his religion of Islam, anytime, anywhere. And this tactic is know as Islamic Taqiyya (read: Islamic deception), and was originally used by the Prophet of Islam to fool, and later subjugate and destroy enemies of Islam. As Prophet of Islam repeatedly asserted: War is a deception and with this holy-tactic, Prophet of Islam established his most intolerant religion of violence (by 80 plus bloody battles) which he later named as: religion of peace!

Gallery of some influential Australian taqiya masters (left to right): Abdullah Saeed, Ikebal Patel, Pete Lentini, Amir Ali, Waleed Aly Therefore, todays Islamists will follow the holy path of their Prophet and will deny thatSharia is really Islamic law! They will try to cheat by saying that, all these Sharia laws that are practiced in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Sudan, and elsewhere are not true Islamic, and they have been distorted. They also will try to fool people by saying: Saudi Arabia is ruled by King (Monarch) and Islam does not permit Kingship etc. But, their dishonest assertion is furthest from the truth. Ancient Caliphs of Islam were nothing but the kings of ancient Islamic nations having supreme despotic and dictatorial authoritative rulers. In fact, ancient Islamic caliphs were more despotic and brutal rulers than the present day Saudi King.

Gallery of assorted international taqiya masters (left to right): Mustafa Ceric, Tariq Ramadan, Yusuf Islam, Reza Aslan No one should be fooled to believing that these harsh and draconian laws were invented out of any wishful imagination of the so called Islamic radicals/extremists who came long after Muhammad. Actually, these harsh and barbarically cruelest laws came directly from the founder of Islam in his Quran and in his example in the hadith. Almost 98% of the above samples of Sharia justice can be traced-backed to Quran and Sunnah positively. In fact, Prophet Muhammad himself actually practiced them and deliberately laid down these corporal punishments and policies to rule the ancient Islamic Caliphate. Modern Kings and Presidents of todays Islamic nations are doing exactly the same to emulate Islamic Prophet and those ancient rightly guided Caliphs. Honorable readers can peruse the article in the reference # 8 to learn more about Islamic Taqiyya. Some Quranic verses and Hadiths which can be directly attributed for draconian sharia justice: Readers can check following Quranic verses to understand the sources of the corporal punishments as per Sharia Justice:[Quranic Verses: 4:34, 4:15-16, 24:2. 5:38, 5:45, 5:33, 98:6, 9:111, 9:29, 3:85, 4:89 , 3:90, 4:11-12, 4:176, 8:1, 43:18, 33:61, 4:16-20, 2:282, 2:230, 4:3, 4:11-12, 9:28, 2:96, 9:30, 3:28, 16:106-107, 2:223, 8:12-14, 8:65, 47:4, 9:39, 2:96, 9:30, 2:191, 2:216, 48:20, 5:33, 9:73, 3:85, 9:113, 9:80-84, 33:21].For space limitations, it is not possible to cite exact physical verses here; but readers can open the Quran and verify the verse numbers I have provided above only to discover thatthese verses are the nucleus from which most of the above corporal punishments and practices of Sharia law have been originated. Please mind that, the verse #s I have cited here are only some examples and never exhaustive of the list. Quran is replete with harsh cruel belligerent verses for unbelievers and violators of Islamic Sharia law which very well be the real sources of Sharia justice. . Hadith for corporal punishments of unbelievers and for sex offenders in Islam and who wedged war with Allah and Prophet ( Samples only): Hadith for stoning death: [Bukhari sahrif-vol.8, book-82, No. 817; or, Bukhari: Volume 7, Book 63, Number 196; Also please see hadiths No. 803 to 816 of the same book and volume of Bukhari.] Also please peruse myriads of sahih hadiths for punishments to unbelievers, sex offenders, and all kaffirs by clicking to the URL below:

Please read here some fatwas against Islamic apostates by the most famous Islamic scholar Mawlana Sayyid Abul Ala Mawdudi by clicking HERE

Government under God and Blasphemy!

In those Muslim countries where Islamic Sharia is the official constitution, Quran and Sunnah(the sayings, practices, and teachings of the Prophet Mohammed) are declared to be the sources of the countrys laws. Hence, modern democracy is immediately vanished from the land. Non-muslims are considered second class citizens with very limited rights. Most importantly, citizens in general have no right to criticize anything done by their Government because the rulers only practice Gods law and it is blasphemous to criticize Gods law and thereby it is strictly prohibited, and punishable by imprisonment or even death. Moreover, Gods laws are immutable hence can never be altered or amended by any means. That is why all those strict Sharia-based nations can be taken as the true examples of ancient Islamic nations ruled by Islamic caliphates. Sharia law has been adopted in various forms by many countries, ranging from a strict interpretation in Saudi Arabia, Iran, and northern states of Nigeria, Sudan, al-Qaeda occupied Somalia, to a relatively liberal interpretation in much of Malaysia, Pakistan, Bahrain, Yemen and United Arab Emirates. In those strictly followed Sharia nations such as Saudi Arabiawomen are not allowed to drive, can not go out of home alone, remain under the guardianship of male relatives at all times, and

must be completely covered in public. For long, women education was totally banned in Saudi Arabia, Iran, and many other Islamic nations. Sharia in general are heavily misogynistic and anti-minorities. Women and minorities are the prime victims of Islamic Sharia-based nations. Women and all non-muslims live as the second class citizens in their own country. Rape cases are almost impossible to prove in the court of Islamic nations. It is quite ridiculous to consider that any rapist will do the crime in front of 4 males to observe and enjoy the scene (sexual orgy) so that they can later give testimony in the court! Therefore, it is highly impossible to prove rape case in the court and rape victims in Islamic nations end up being charged with Zena (physical relations outside marriage) and punished (floggings or stoning death) by Sharia courts for want of witnesses. Very recently, Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow, a gang raped 13 years old girl was stoned to death on the orders of a Sharia court in the "Sharia Compliant" country named Somalia.

Appalling brutality - result of Sharia 'Rotan' flogging in 21st Century relatively liberal Malaysia
Family matters such as marriage and divorce are the most significant aspects of sharia law practiced in most Muslim nations. Even in the democratically ruled Muslim nations such as Bangladesh, Pakistan, Indonesia, Turkey etc, family matters (inheritance, marriage, divorce, and child custody etc) are governed by Sahrai law, still today.

Draconian and barbaric corporal punishments of Hudood law:

In all Sharia-based nationscriminal laws are practiced only by Sharia-justice. Quranic corporal punishments are known as Hudood laws. There are five Hudood crimes: unlawful sexual intercourse (sex outside of marriage and adultery), false accusation of unlawful sexual intercourse, wine drinking (sometimes extended to include all alcohol drinking), theft, and highway robbery. Punishments for Hudood offenses ar e flogging, stoning death, beheading, amputation, exile, or execution are routinely practiced in Saudi Arabia and Iran. Honor killings, murders committed in retaliation for bringing dishonor on one's family, are a worldwide problem among the Muslims only. UN estimates thousands of women are killed annually in the name of family honor (National Geographic). Other practices that are woven into the sharia debate, such as female genital mutilation, child-marriages, polygamy, and gender-inequality.

Draconian system of Blood Money!

Islamic Quran (from which Sharia was derived) copied (Plagiarized) draconian code of law from the ancient king Hammurabi King of Babylonia, Mesopotamia (2900 B.C). King Hammarubis revenge/compensation for killing was: life for life, hand for hand, eye for eye, ears for ears, tooth for tooth and wounds equal for equal, and the Islamic Allahs Guidance of compensation in Quranic Ayat: 5:45 (Translation byYousuf Ali): life for life, hand for hand, eye for eye, ear for ear, tooth for tooth and wounds equal for equal. It was from this compensatory concept, the blood money was established in Sharia law. This draconian compensatory justice system is still practiced in Saudi Arabia (details were published in Wall Street Journal, April 9, 2002). Under this system, if a person has been killed or caused to die by another, the latter has to pay blood money or compensation, as follows: 100,000 riyals if the victim is a Muslim man 50,000 riyals if a Muslim woman 50,000 riyals if a Christian man 25,000 riyals if a Christian woman 6,666 riyals if a Hindu (or idolater) man 3,333 riyals if a Hindu (or idolater) woman

That is, a Muslim mans life is worth 33 times that of a Hindu woman! Islam is utterly supremacist and racist religion on Earth!
Devout Muslims do believe that, Islam is the only true religion and all other religions are false and not accepted by the Allah. Therefore, Muslims are the superior human than any other humans on earth. According to Islamic Sharia and Koranic teachingsChristians, Jewish, and all other un-believers (Hindus idolaters etc are the worst) are less humans than Muslims and their rights are not the same as the rights of Muslims. This is the very reason why pure Muslims earnestly believe thatit is the most sacred duty of the Muslims to correct, convert, or killed all non-Muslims/infidels/kaffirs to purify this earth which belongs to only Allah. To this endIslamic Brother-hood, Hamas, Hizbullah, CAIR, and many other Islamic organizations are doing Taqiyya business, and Talibans and al-Qaeda jihadis are engaged in holy business of armed struggle (Jihad) against all kaffirs of the world in general and against American infidels in particular.

Muslims consider that Islamic Sharia is the Law of Allah (God) which is considered divine and immutable and can never be changed or amended by any means! Hence, Islamic Sharia is still clinging to the ancient 7th century barbaric justice system. Because of this fact, almost anywhere this Islamic Sharia is being established as the countrys ruling constitution, world can immediately witness exact face of despotic, barbarian, and totalitarian Islamic rule to all of the Islamic nations. Imposed Sharia law immediately becomes the true nightmare for the general public. In the modern worldall the Islamically (Sharia-based) ruled nations such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, Talibani Afghanistan, Sudan, Northern part of Nigeria, Somalia, Yemen, and some other Arab nations are practicing the same Sharia law (mentioned above) with some minor variations country to country, but basics are the samethey all are ruling their nation by Allahs law. Also, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and some other Arab nations like Kuwait, Qatar, Abu Dhabi, Arab Emirate etc are practicing Sharia in variable status country to country. But, main preambles of Sharia law and their sources remain the same. Therefore, all those false claims by most Muslim scholars and Islamic apologists are plain lies and cheating (practicing Islamic Taqiyya) about the ugly face of Sharia-based modern nations such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, Sudan or Somalia. All these hypocritical western-living Islamic apologists are hellbent to destroy western civilization from within. Gullible westerners and politically Correct western politicians should never be fooled by the utter deceptions and lies routinely and deliberately spewed by all the western-living Islamists.

1. Saudi Arabias constitution: 2.Book titled: Cruel and Usual Punishment; the terrifying global implications of Islamic Sharia law by Nonie Darwish . 3. Books for Sharia laws: Reliance of the Traveller, Sharia the Islamic Laws, Hedaya, and Malik's Muwatta. 4. Book: Stop Islamic Sharia Law: Hasan Mahmud (Director of Sharia law and former president of Muslim Canadian Congress). 5. Islam Sharia Law: A brief introduction: 6. Islam: Governing Under Sharia (aka shariah, shari'a): By Toni Jonson Senior staff writer, Lauren Vriens (Updated: November 10, 2010).

7. Sharia: Wikipedia: 8. Taqiyyah: The Islamic Principle of Holy Deception: By Dr. Radhasyam Brahmachari.

Lee Grabar: Did we just come one step closer to Islamic Law???
U.S., Sharia laws are incompatible Lee Grabar - Rep American - 1/4/11 Is Sharia a religious practice in the Muslim world, or is it a compilation of orders, commonly referred to as Islamic law, that governs civilian behavior? Vicki Miles-LaGrange, a federal judge in Oklahoma, seems to lean toward the former despite the negative image Shar ia carries in the minds of many Americans. Judge Miles-LaGrange acted in two areas. One involved a state law approved by about 70 percent of voters in a referendum that forbids state courts from considering Sharia laws that might be brought up in cases. T he judge ordered that certification of the referendum ballot be put on hold. In her second ruling, the judge issued a restraining order that blocked any application of the ban on Sharia in court cases. This was considered a victory for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which wanted the ban nullified. In making her rulings, the judge seemed to be bothered by what she considered a violation of an individual's civil rights, as guaranteed by the First Amendment to the Constitution. In here 15 -page decision, she wrote: "While the public has an interest in the will of the voters being carried out, the court finds that the public has a more profound and long -term interest in upholding an individual's constitutional rights." CAIR claimed the Oklahoma law violates the First Amendment's freedom of religion. The local head of the organization, Muneer Awad, said Oklahoman's passed the law after a campaign of fear and misinformation about Islam. The judge complimented Awad for making a "strong showing" that the Oklahoma law "inhibits religion and the amendment fosters an excessive government entanglement with religion." Someone is pulling the wool over someone's eyes. Muslims have mosques all over this country. It certainly doesn't seem they are prevented from practicing their religion. CAIR's efforts to make the issue a battle to end the stifling of the Islamic faith is far from justified. State Sen. Anthony Sykes, one of the sponsors of the referendum, said: "The fact that Shariah Law was even considered anywhere in the United Sates is enough for me. It should scare anyone that any judge in America would consider using that as precedent.

The Internet encyclopedia Wikipedia defines Shariah as "the body of Islamic law. The term means "way" or "path"; it is the legal framework within which the public and some private aspects of life are regulated for those living in a legal system based on Muslim principles of jurisprudence. Shariah deals with all aspects of day -to-day life, including politics, economics, banking, business law, contract law, sexuality, and social issues."
(Does any other religion deal with these issues? -BBJ)

Does this sound like the appropriate concerns for a Shariah that supposedly has religion as its major obligation? The truth is Shariah stands for power. Those who set the rules and make the decisions spread their authority beyond the mosque into day-to-day activities.
Consider the case of a young woman in an Islamic nation who goes on an innocent bicycle outing with a male companion. Why did an Islamic panel order she be flogged? And if Awad does succeed in acquiring the use of Shariah in this country, will Americanized Islamic girls and women face flogging for similarly daring behaviour?

How would Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange handle this if the victim filed suit? Will she dismiss the girls complaint under Sharia, or find that maybe, just maybe, the girl's constitutional rights were violated? And what of death penalties by stoning? Lee Grabar writes about state and national politics, government and culture.

Embracing the diversity of Sharia law.

Sharia Law Is Already Here John Bennett 1/4/11 - -Sophisticated liberals have found humor in Oklahoma's recent ban on Sharia law. Along with humor, some have found offense in the bill. U.S. District Judge Vicki MilesLaGrange granted a temporary restraining order blocking the bill. Critics, such as the culturally aware Clarence Page, say that the OK measure is "a solution in search of a problem." Sharia law is not a threat. Page's evidence: There are only 15,000 Muslims in Oklahoma. It doesn't get much more convincing than that. The deep thinkers at are equally informed: As Paul Rosenberg emphatically says, "there is zero evidence of sharia law having any influence on American law." Rosenberg is factually wrong. On the crucial factual matter of whether Sharia has been applied in our courts, he is unaware of what has occurred. Sharia law has been applied in U.S. courts. There are at least seventeen instances of Sharia law being applied in eleven states, as Daniel Pipes has noted. Most notably, a NJ court held that a man did not commit rape because according to his belief in Sharia law, a man cannot rape his wife, since the wife serves him. So Sharia law was applied to the mental state element of the crime of rape. An American court actually adopted this barbaric reasoning:

[The defendant] was operating under his belief that it is, as the husband, his desire to have sex when and whether he wanted to, was something that was consistent with his practices and it was something that was not prohibited. The resulting ruling was that a man was held not responsible for rape, where he would have been convicted without Sharia. DON'T STOP HERE....PLEASE CONTINUE READING. IT GETS WORSE!! It's no comfort to say that a court of appeals overturned the NJ ruling. Judges are open to these arguments, and that is the beginning of Sharia victory if it is not stopped. Liberal judges will become, in their social circles, standard-bearers of enlightenment and cultural sensitivity for embracing the diversity of Sharia law. That is all the incentive they need to continue to use foreign standards to decide what our rights will be. Look no farther than Justice Ginsburg's incredible willingness to latch on to foreign precedents that confirm her preconceived policy preferences. If there is one multicultural lemming in a robe willing to betray our freedoms, that's one too many -- and we can be sure that there are many more who want to. Every day, the news is full of examples of just how far Muslims will push. Take the infamous hijab at the Connecticut roller rink. A Muslim woman named Marisol Rodriguez-Colon -soak in that cultural enrichment -- was asked to remove her medieval hood at a skating rink. The rink had a policy of no headgear because hats and scarves could cause injury on the floor. She claims that she needed to wear her hijab for "religious reasons." The "religious reasons" argument is the tip of the iceberg. If Muslims get to impose their practices and norms for "religious reasons," then they will reshape Western societies in their own medieval image. Consider what else Muslims could demand at a roller rink for "religious reasons": For "religious reasons," males and females are to be separated from each other in public much of the time. For religious reasons, there must be no modern music to offend traditional ears. For religious reasons, there should be no pork products at snack bars. For religious reasons, homosexual skaters should be killed in one of many colorful ways -- a belief being taught to British Muslims. If Marisol Rodriguez-Colon can force the roller rink to change its policy on headgear based on religious reasons, then why can't she change every other policy inconsistent with her creed? There is no way to say that all they want to do is change policy on headgear. There is no limit to what Muslims would force non-Muslims to do for "religious reasons." They want more; the radical leaders will demand the most, and they will take as much as they can get. Those two propositions are obvious. Don't be fooled by cringing sensitivity mantras about how moderates don't want to impose their views. Moderates can't stop multicultural appeasement judges from ruling in favor of radicals. If radicals take as much as they can get, then headgear is one step on the path towards Sharia. There is nothing far-fetched about that prediction. It is the logical consequence of Muslim supremacy combined with Western cowardice. Of course, this does not mean that each person who wants to wear their medieval headgear in public supports Sharia. What it means is that the headgear is the first step towards

institutional acceptance and legal imposition of Sharia law. The same aggressive refusal to assimilate will carry out in other spheres of life. It will not be satisfied by wearing headgear. In fact, if the Muslim supremacists get their way with headgear, that will be a green light to them to make more demands -- demands that are more invasive, requiring even more fundamental changes to our society. That which gets rewarded gets repeated. Most of us thought that we left the dark ages behind us, but a retrograde impulse is growing. We are far from the imposition of Sharia law, but not far enough. The habit of a liberty-loving people is to guard against any step, no matter how small, towards injustice. The first step toward injustice will guarantee a second step, and the zealots will take that step if they aren't stopped. The first step is never an accident or an exception; it's part of an established plan played out many times around the world. England is learning this tragic lesson as Sharia law makes women second-class citizens in divorce and child custody matters, according to a Guardian newspaper column. The only thing stopping Sharia will be the people willing to guard our liberty and culture. Things are best protected when they are jealously guarded. That is something that our founders knew very well. Proactive defense of liberty and prevention of injustice are the reasons why Tennessee and Louisiana have already passed similar measures to Oklahoma's. At least twelve other states are considering such measures. Such policy is rank xenophobia, according to some, who contend that Islam is being unfairly singled out.

Sharia defenders should know that Islam is named specifically because Muslims single themselves out. Their leadership is uniquely comfortable forcing their religious practices and views onto other people. After a fitful two hundred years of protecting religious liberty in America, we have a sect seeking to impose its views in a way we haven't seen in a very long time. We should commend those who resist that imposition in advance. Sharia Law and the US Constitution
This article has been re-printed from: Islam In Action ( ....and we thank you very much!! Sharia Law and the US ConstitutionBy Louis Palme Oct 14, 2009 Americans are among the most tolerant and patriotic people in the world. As a nation of immigrants, there is a certain appeal to the idea of multiculturalism where people of different backgrounds are accepted in our communities. Our nation was founded on the principles of equality and freedom, and we have invested our resources and blood over and over again to defend those principles. Our constitution guarantees not only the freedom of speech, but also the freedom to practice our religion of choice. So it is not surprising that many Americans see Sharia Law as a Muslim religious prerogative which we should support or at least tolerate. Banks have rushed to provide Sharia-compliant banking, and public institutions like

universities and airports have spent taxpayer dollars to help Muslims comply with their religious requirements, providing special foot-baths and prayer rooms for them. If anyone speaks out against Sharia Law, there is often a strong reaction within the Muslim community. This month, Dalia Mogahed, President Obamas advisor on Muslim affairs, complained on British television that the Western view of Sharia was oversimplified and misunderstood. While acknowledging that even Muslims associate Sharia with draconian criminal punishments and laws that seem unequal for women, she stated, Part of the reason there is this perception of Sharia is because Sharia is not well understood and Islam as a faith is not well understood. The London-based Islam Channel panel she was on made repeated attacks against secular man-made Law and the Wests lethal cocktail of liberty and capitalism. Ms. Mogahed described her government role as to convey . . to the President and other public officials what it is Muslims want. (Source) 274387/Obama-adviser-says-Sharia-Law-is-misunderstood.html A similar reaction took place in a recent US Congressional hearing on the dangers posed by political Islam. Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, one of the most prominent Muslim reformers in the United States, testified, I think if Muslims want credibility and we want to be respected equally, we need to stand for reform within our faith of [Sharia] laws that are still in the 15th and 16th Century. He explained that the jihadists will not be defeated until Muslims start to recognize that their ideology is on a slippery slope toward radicalism. In response to this testimony, Muslim Congressman Keith Ellison (D, Mn) delivered a verbal tirade that accused Dr. Jasser of encouraging anti-Muslim bigotry and attempting to censor Islamists. Ellison said to Dr. Jasser, I think you give people license for bigotry. I think people who engage in nothing less than Muslim-hating really love you a lot because you give them freedom to do that. You say, yeah, go get after them. . . Now is somebody going to snatch my 13-year-old daughters hijab off, call her a horrible name, and spit on her because of something you said, Dr. Jasser? I worry about that. (Source ) So, to better understand whether Sharia Law is desirable (or even legal) in the United States, it might be instructive to compare it with the US Constitution. This isnt too difficult for the layman because the US Constitution is only 17 pages long, including its 27 amendments. Sharia Law is well-documented in the 1,200 page Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law, The Reliance of the Traveler by Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri, and published in the United States by Amana Publications. While the original document dates to the late 14th Century, it has been updated in the 1990s and bears the approval of the Fiqh Council of North America as well as the authoritative Al-Azhar Islamic Research Academy in Egypt. The introduction to this manual states, The four Sunni schools of Islamic Law . . are identical in approximately 75 percent of the legal conclusions. . . [T]he authors of the present volume and their positions do represent the orthodox Muslim intellectual and spiritual heritage that has been the strength of the Community for over a thousand years . . to the present day. While this volume of Sharia Law is primarily about the religious practice of Islam, the 800

pages of the manual devoted to rules and regulations also include sections on Trade, Inheritance, Marriage (suitable partners, legal rights, custody), Divorce, and Justice which would fall under civil law in the United States. Those sections comprise 35% of the manual, and are among the most controversial because they impose draconian punishments, authorize jihad, and sanction discrimination on the basis of religion and gender. The summary below highlights the serious disconnects between the provisions of the US Constitution and those of Sharia Law. LEGISLATIVE POWERS

US Constitution Article I - All legislative Powers shall be vested in the Congress. Sharia Law The source of legal rulings for all acts of those who are morally responsible is Allah. (a1.1) It is not a sin to comply with man-made laws that require buying auto insurance or having a photo ID because the authorities are responsible for the sin, not the individual forced to comply. (w42.3 and w50.4) POWER TO DECLARE WAR US Constitution Section 8 Powers of Congress include to levy taxes, to make laws, and to declare war. Sharia Law It is obligatory to obey the commands and interdictions of the caliph or his representative in everything that is lawful, even if he is unjust . . because the purpose of his authority is Islamic unity, which could not be realized if obeying him were not obligatory. (o25.5) The caliph or his representative have the duty of undertaking jihad if their territory borders on enemy lands, of dividing the spoils of battle, and of remitting a fifth for deserving recipients. (o25.9(8)) Jihad is obligatory for everyone when the enemy has surrounded the Muslims. (o9.3) It is permissible in jihad to cut down the enemys trees and destroy their dwellings. (o9.1) PRESIDENT (CALIPH) US Constitution Article II, Section I -- Qualifications of a President He must be a natural born citizen, thirty-five years old, and a resident for fourteen years. The President is elected by ballot by the people (via the Electors) and shall serve for no more than 2 four-year terms. No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

Sharia Law A caliph must be a Muslim, a non-slave, a male, of the Quraysh tribe, etc. (o25.0) The Caliph appoints a group to select his successor among themselves. There is no a term of office. However, the caliphate of someone who seizes power is considered valid, even though his act of usurpation is disobedience, in view of the danger from anarchy and strife that would otherwise ensue. (o25.4(3)) (Note: The Islamic Caliphate was disbanded the Turkish Parliament in 1924.) REMOVAL OF GOVERNMENT OFFICERS US Constitution Section 4 The President and all civil Officers of the United States shall be removed from office if found guilty of treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. Sharia Law (No provision for removal from office.) LEGAL AUTHORITY US Constitution Article VI This Constitution and the laws of the United States which shall be made under it shall be the supreme law of the land, and judges in every state shall be bound by them. Senators and Representatives, legislative officers, all executive and judicial officers both of the United States and the several states shall be bound by a Oath or Affirmation to support the Constitution. Sharia Law The source of legal rulings for all acts of those who are morally responsible is Allah. (a1.1) CIVIL AND RELIGIOUS RIGHTS US Constitution Amendment 1 Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press, or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for redress of grievances. Sharia Law Non-Muslims are obliged to comply with Islamic rules that pertain to the safety and indemnity of life, reputation, and property. Non-Muslims are forbidden to openly display

wine or pork, recite their scriptures, or make a public display of feast days or funerals. NonMuslims are forbidden to build new churches. A non-Muslim may not enter a mosque without permission. The protection for non-Muslims is withdrawn if a non-Muslim commits adultery with a Muslim woman or marries her, leads a Muslim away from Islam, kills a Muslim, or says anything derogatory about Allah, the Prophet, or Islam. (o11.5 through o11.10) US Constitution Amendment 2 The right of people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Sharia Law It is a condition that someone buying weapons be of a people who are not at war with Muslims. (k1.2(f)) Enormities (sins) include selling weapons to non-Muslims who will use them against us. (w52.1(192)) US Constitution Amendment 3 No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner prescribed by law. Sharia Law (Not covered.) However, the Pact of Omar (636 AD) imposed on Christians in Syria, We shall keep our gates wide open for passersby and travelers. We shall give board and lodging to all Muslims who pass our way for three days. US Constitution Amendments 4 8 These amendments prohibit unreasonable searches, require due process according to the law, provide for confrontation of witnesses, impose jury trial on all matters involving over $20, and prohibit excessive fines and cruel and unusual punishments. Amendment 14 provides for equal protection of the laws for all citizens. Sharia Law No testimony may be made by people who have lowly jobs, such as a street sweeper or a bath house attendant, or non-Muslim. (o24.2-3) Testimony regarding fornication or sodomy requires four male eye-witnesses to the act. (o24.9) A womans testimony is worth only half that of a man. (o24.10) (There is no provision for a jury trial under Sharia Law.) Cruel and unusual Islamic punishments include 1) stoning for adultery (o12.2); 2) scourging 40 lashes with hands, shoes, ends of clothes, or a whip for drunkenness (o16.3); 3) severing

the right hand for theft of over $36 and the left foot for a repeat offense (o14.1); and 4) death for apostasy from Islam. (o8.2) Indemnity for accidentally killing a male Muslim is 100 camels or 4,235 grams of gold. (Current value: $144,000.) Indemnity for killing a woman is half that of a man, for killing a Jew or a Christian is one-third of the indemnity paid for a Muslim. The indemnity paid for a killing Zoroastrian is one-fifteenth of that of a Muslim. The indemnity for causing a miscarriage is one slave. (o4.9) There is no indemnity for a killing a non-Muslim at war with Muslims, an apostate, or someone sentenced to death by stoning. (o14.17) Jews and Christians are subject to a poll tax not less than 1 dinar (Current value: $144) per adult male per year. No maximum is stipulated. (o11.4) This is a penalty for remaining in their ancestral religion instead of embracing the religion of truth. (o9.8) A husband may beat a rebellious wife for 1) not allowing immediate sexual intercourse when he asks for it, at home, and if she can physically endure it; 2) answering him coldly; or 3) being averse when she was previously kind. (m5.1 and m10.12) The only limitation is that he may not break her bones, wound her, or cause bleeding. US Constitution Amendment 13 Slavery and involuntary servitude are abolished. Sharia Law The section on Slavery (k32.0) is not translated into English. The provisions remain in Arabic. The editor of The Reliance of the Traveler claims that these provisions are no longer applicable, yet they remain in there in the text of Sharia Law. Elsewhere, the manual states, Originally the status of slave was simply the outcome of having been taken as a prisoner of war. A captive who could not buy his own freedom by means of ransom remained in the possession of the captor until he had earned his freedom by work or until he was granted liberty by his master. (w13.1) US Constitution Amendment 21 repealed prohibition, thereby allowing manufacture, sale, and transport of alcoholic beverages. Sharia Law It is unlawful to sell grapes to someone who will make wine from them. (k4.9) Allah cursed whoever drinks wine, gives it to others to drink, sells it, buys it, presses it for another, transports it, receives it, or eats its price. Enormities (sins) include drinking wine in any form or other intoxicant, even if only a drop as in medicine; pressing out the juice to make wine or other intoxicant; carrying it for purposes

of drinking, or having it carried; serving it to others or having it served; selling it; buying it; having it bought or sold; consuming proceeds from selling it; or keeping wine or other intoxicant. (o16.6 and w52.1(350-361)) So, the next time someone suggests that we should be more understanding of Sharia Law, it would be fair to ask him/her what parts of our US Constitution would he/she be willing to abandon in order to accommodate Sharia Law.

Victory Over Shariah Law

Libel on tour: James Gill By James Gill Within minutes Monday a legislative committee repudiated both Islamic and British law. Neither, perhaps, represents an immediate threat to justice in Louisiana, but it was not entirely an alarmist and xenophobic stunt when the committee approved two bills by Rep. Ernest Wooton, R-Belle Chase. Mostly, but not entirely. One of Wootons bills, which provides that no foreign law shall be applied here if it violates a right guaranteed by the American Constitution, is by any rational measure superfluous. But it is not unknown for immigrant litigants to invoke the tenets of Sharia to which, the committee was told, the Maryland courts deferred in a child custody case. The Louisiana Supreme Court has so far insisted that cases in America are settled according to American law, but the committee figured it was wise to commit future jurists to that sound principle. At least the bill does no harm. Wootons other bill may be largely symbolic too, although it is worth passing just in case. It does not single out the Limeys, but its refusal to enforce foreign defamation judgments that are repugnant to the public policy of this state is clearly aimed at them. Other states have passed, or are considering, similar legislation in response to a libel award rendered in London against the American writer Rachel Ehrenfeld. It must be embarrassing for the British when American legislators lump them together with the avatars of medieval repression, but plenty of them are evidently aware it is fair, at least in the context of libel law. As a general election approaches, all three major parties in the UK promise to reform laws that have created libel tourism on the very island where John Milton wrote the book on press freedom, Areopagitica. That was in 1644, so its about time the government got the hang of it. Instead the law enables large corporations or deep-pocketed individuals to stifle freedom of expression far beyond the shores of Britain, increasingly so in the Internet age, as Ehrenfeld discovered when her book Funding Evil identified Saudi billionaire Khalid bin Mahfouz as a financial supporter of al-Qaida. bin Mahfouz was not about to sue in this country and not just because he would have had to contend with the First Amendment. He has such an unsavory past that he would probably

have been ruled libel-proof in any case. No need to go into detail here. You can take my word for it. He wont sue me. Ehrenfelds book was not even published in Britain but, since a few copies had made their way there through Amazon, bin Mahfouz was able to play the libel tourist and take advantage of laws that so favor the plaintiff that the burden of proof is on the defendant. The costs of defending such suits over there is so high that the mere threat of litigation generally suffices to squelch inconvenient opinions if the slightest grounds exist for British jurisdiction. Thus plaintiffs rush to the British courts on the slightest pretext, as, for instance, when an Icelandic bank took offense to a story in a Danish tabloid. Ehrenfeld declined to attend the proceedings in London and was ordered to pay a hefty sum by Justice Eady, the bete noire of British liberals. Eady has done much to galvanize the campaign for libel reform by ruling against an English journalist who asserted there was no evidence to support the miraculous curative powers claimed by chiropractors over there. Eady is so off the wall he required the journalist to prove that the chiropractors had set out to deceive the public that he was recently overturned on appeal. But Ehfrenfeld is the cause clbre for Americans. New York took the lead in refusing to recognize libel awards from the British courts, and all hail to our legislators for joining in to strike a blow for freedom of expression. Maybe they love the press after all. It wont matter much if the next parliament does indeed reform the antique libel law. But our legislators are not dumb enough to rely on promises made in election campaigns.

Islamic Law, known as "Shariah" The historical pattern of Islam shows us that when a nation gains a sufficiently large Muslim
Shariah is the system of civil law that is based upon the Quran and the Ahadith and the work of Muslim scholars in the first two centuries of Islam. Shariah extends beyond just civil law. Applied fully, the Shariah is a code for living that Muslims should adhere to, including prayers, fasting and donations to the poor. Shariah is the totality of religious, political, social, domestic and privat e life. Shariah is primarily meant for all Muslims, but applies to a certain extent also for people living inside a Muslim society Muslims feel that Shariah has been misunderstood by Christians, who have tended to concentrate on the demands for harsh punishments such as amputation of a hand or foot for theft and public flogging for people caught drinking alcohol. Shariah also places restrictions on what women can wear and whom they can see. It forbids women from wearing jewelry and make-up and from making noise with their shoes when they walk. If a

woman does work outside the home, she is forbidden to sit beside the driver when traveling to and from work. Stylish dress and decoration of women is forbidden. There have been reported cases of the beating female doctors and female medical staff at the hospitals where they worked. The instituting of a national law that incorporates both civil and spiritual laws is one of the principles that makes it difficult for Americans to understand Islamic nations. It is even more difficult for the people in those Islamic nations to understand a government that does not enforce morality as well as civil law. Since they do not understand the principle of the separation of the government from the religion, when people in Islamic nations see Western nations magazines with nudity or near nudity, they believe that what they are seeing is Christianity! After all, they are told that the United States is a Christian nation. When they see a satellite program that originates from Playboy, they think that is Christianity! When they see a television commercial for any kind of alcoholic beverage, they think that is Christianity! They do not understand the separation of government and religion. They cannot understand why those who produce such materials are not punished by the government. Muslims believe that Shariah is not something the intelligence of man can prove wrong, it is only to be accepted by humans, since it is based on the will of Allah. Muslims see their religion and government being ordained by Allah. It is their conviction that Islam is intended to be the religion of all mankind. It is to be the universal religion to replace Judaism, Christianity, and all others. While Muslims may deny it, they are willing to replace other religions first by conversion, then suppression and even armed conflict. In the Philippines, there is a growing Muslim population that is agitating for the institution of Islamic law. They have not hesitated to use violence to try to implement their beliefs.

Muslims claim that there is freedom of religion under Shariah. When Is lam gains a strong representation in the population, they want to impose Shariah on everyone, since they believe that it is the only law that comes directly from Allah.
There is no Freedom of Speech in Shariah. There is no Freedom of Religion in Shariah. There is no Democracy under Shariah. courtesy of

Barbara J. Stock October 19, 2005 Just about every conscious human in the free world knows about Islamic suicide bombers, train bombers, and night club bombers. Everyone knows that Muslims flying large commercial planes crashed into the World Trade Center buildings and the Pentagon on 9/11. Those are the actions of the obvious terrorist side of Islam. It is interesting that those Islamics committing these heinous acts believe absolutely that the Quran orders them to do these things to achieve Mohammed's plan of Islam dominating the world. Yet, all the world hears is the plea from Muslims to understand that Islam is a religion of peace and love. If that is so, does this mean that Islamics who are terrorists use a Quran that is different from the "peaceful" Muslim's Quran? Does the fact that there is no one central power controlling Islam and giving one definitive translation

or explanation for passages from the Quran that causes seemingly diverse interpretations of the Quran? Unless one is willing to look around at what else Islamics have been doing around the world besides blowing people to bits, the uninformed might believe the Islam really is a religion of peace and love, cursed with a few "bad apples." "Peaceful Islam" has been just as busy as the terror wing. Large numbers of Arab-Muslims have immigrated all over the world. European countries are alarmed at the number of Muslims within their borders. The attack on America was like a fire bell ringing, waking other countries up to the growing masses of Muslims in their midst. It was noticed that these Muslims made no effort to blend in with the local population. Instead, Muslims banded together, taking over neighborhoods and eventually driving out the non Muslims. Any acceptance of the local culture and customs was strongly discouraged and often severely punished. These Muslim neighborhoods set up their own legal system of Islamic law, ignoring the laws of the land. Immigrants were encouraged to have very large families to form huge voting blocks to maneuver Muslims into positions of power within the government. Islam in Africa has been much bolder in the power grab of third world countries with uneducated and poor citizens often living under corrupt governments. Again, large numbers of Muslims would move into a country such Nigeria and Sudan. Slowly growing in numbers, Muslims would either create a majority to take control of the government via a legal vote as in Nigeria, or by genocide as in Sudan. In tiny Rwanda, Islam used the war between the Hutu and the Tutsi tribes to convince those fleeing the carnage that Islam would protect them if they converted to Islam and many converted to stay alive. Islam is now the majority in many African countries and in control of several governments. Whether by persuasion, reproduction, or mass murder, Islam is slowly taking control of the African continent. Not satisfied with Africa, Islam has moved swiftly into Asia. The terror arm of Islam has been busy in places like Bali reminding the local population that catering to Western infidels is dangerous business. Both Australia and Canada have had to fend off Islamic attempts to remove Muslim communities from the laws of the land and allow Sharia Law to govern the Muslim population in matters of divorce, marriage, and inheritance. Power grabs in strongly democratic countries has proven to be more of a challenge for Islam and it has regrouped to try again, this time, dropping the words, "Sharia Law" from their submissions for change that would place Islam in control of Muslim communities within democratic countries. The term "Islamic Sharia Law," has become well known and closely associated with the oppression within Islam and the wide disparity between the rights of Muslim men and women. Western cultures want nothing to do with a 7th century view of justice where hands and feet are chopped off and young women who are raped are forced to produce three male witnesses to the crime or be judged as adulterers. Public execution in the form of stoning does not have much support in a democracy. Many Islamic leaders state emphatically that Islam and democracy cannot co-exist. Muslims are expected to have only one master and that master is Islam. Islam dictates every aspect of their lives from birth to death. In America, Islam has had trouble gaining a real foothold. But Islam's dictation to American Muslims is the same as illustrated by Omar Ahmad, the Council on American/Islamic Relation's spokesman, when he publicly stated: "Those {Muslims} who stay in America should be open to society without melting, keeping mosques open so anyone can come and learn about Islam. If you choose to live here, you have a responsibility to deliver the message of Islam...Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth." In an effort to keep American Muslims under the total control of Islam, the Saudi Arabians have spent

billions of dollars building mosques and Islamic schools so that Muslim children can be instructed in the strict laws of Islam. For decades, no one paid much attention to what was being taught in those Saudi-funded schools. Perhaps two generations of American Muslims were taught that Muslims are to be loyal to no country, only Islam. These children were taught that Christians and Jews were the enemy. They were taught that only Islam will dictate how they will live their lives. American children were being brainwashed right under our collective noses. Because of that, American Muslims are often torn between country and Islam and there is no way to know which force will win in the end. Islam has not grown in America as it has in Europe or Africa because of the strong Christian influence and democracy so Imams and Muslim clerics were dispatched to the prison system to scoop up the disillusioned and those in need of something to belong to that claimed it would care about them and for them. In the general population, Islam has a tendency to attract those in need of someone to tell them how to live their lives while assuring them that their lives will be better. It's unfortunate that people don't remember the old saying, "If something sounds too good to be true, it probably isn't true." This is a perfect description of Islam. When convincing people to convert, only the loving side of Islam shows itself. It isn't until it's too late that people become aware of the dark side of Islam. Islam is a shell game. Assisted by the "if it bleeds, it leads" motto of the media, Islam is able to keep the world's attention on the terrorist attacks while "peaceful Islam" quietly goes about the business of taking over entire countries and working its way into the fabric of the legal and governmental systems of others. American Muslims are now petitioning that the call to prayer be blasted over loud speakers five times a day in quiet neighborhoods and towns. This is Islam's first step in using democracy to destroy democracy. Always on the move, the quiet side of Islam is every bit as dangerous as the terrorists. Their goals are the same, only the method varies.