Saturday, April 7, 2012

Center for Security Policy Community Alert on ICNA


The Center for Security Policy (CSP) has issued the below alert in regards to a campaign by the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) to promote Sharia in the United States.

http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/p18956.xml

The president and founder of CSP is Frank Gaffney.

Below is ICNA's announcement of the drive.

http://www.icna.org/national-shariah-education-campaign-launched/

ICNA, in my view, is one of the more insidious of the so-called mainstream Muslim organizations in America. This is the same outfit that held that so-called charity dinner in Yorba Linda in February 2010 that drew a large protest. The ICNA speakers were Siraj Wahhaj, who has implicitly called for giving uzis to black ex-cons and turning them loose in the neighborhoods, and Amir Abdel Malik Ali, who has made dozens of incendiary speeches on California campuses in support of suicide bombers, Hamas, Hizbollah, Islamic Jihad, as well as  suicide bombers who commit terror against Israel. He has insulted Jews in many of his speeches. These men are both anti-American jihadists. No truly moderate and patriotic organization would have them as speakers.

So now comes this propaganda campaign to convince gullible Americans that sharia law is, as Muslim leaders Abdul Faisal Rauf and Muzammil Siddiqi assure us, perfectly in conformance with the US Constitution.

Wrong.

Killing homosexuals is not in conformance with our Constitution.

Killing apostates or those who criticize any aspect of Islam (blasphemy) is not in conformance with our Constitution.

Wife beating is not in conformance with our Constitution.

Honor killings and stoning women is not in conformance with our Constitution.

Any denial of women to equal rights with men is not in conformance with our Constitution.

Denying women equal weight in court testimony is not in conformance with our Constitution.

Yes, there are aspects of sharia that are innocuous, however, it is the legal code of Islam and governs all aspects of a Muslim's life and sets out punishments which include death. It does not respect separation of the state from the religion.

Yes, they will tell you that Muslims living in a non-Muslim country are to obey the local laws-as long as they do not contradict Islam. However, as the Muslim percentage of the population increases, thus do the demands for accommodation. You need look no further than Europe to see where this is heading.

It is a long-range plan. Contrary to groups like al Qaida, many realize that bringing about a world-wide caliphate under Shariah law is a long term project, which can be achieved peacefully through immigration, demographic change, Da'wa (outreach) and finally, if necessary when Islam holds the power, forced conversions or violence (jihad). Today, in almost every predominately Muslim country, religious minorities are being persecuted.

ICNA is nothing more than another arm of the Muslim Brotherhood and Jamaat e Islam. Like other organizations, such as CAIR, they are engaged in in a massive taqiyya campaign of deception. In addition, they are indoctrinating the jihadists of tomorrow and making sure that Muslim youth in America stay within the fold rather than assimilate and become full-fledged Americans. What is sad is there are Muslims who came here to escape the stifling lives they led in their countries of origin. Now they see an effort right here at home to bring that stifling control here to America. We cannot let that happen. To allow sharia within the US is to tell Muslims that they cannot enjoy the freedoms to change religion, be gay, live your sex life as you wish, leave a marriage (if you are a woman), and other rights that we take for granted.

It is true that so many Muslims in America remain silent out of fear. Unfortunately, that makes them irrelevant to the debate. It is Muslims like Zuhdi Jasser, Stephen Schwartz, Tawfik Hamid, and others who dare to speak out and expose the threat in our midst. Yes, there are painfully few of them, but they deserve our support.

But to the 5th column at ICNA, ISNA, CAIR, MPAC and MAS, we must stand up and say no to sharia. If they want to live in sharia, they know where they can go back to.








3 comments:

  1. Killing homosexuals is not in conformance with our Constitution.

    Killing apostates or those who criticize any aspect of Islam (blasphemy) is not in conformance with our Constitution.

    Wife beating is not in conformance with our Constitution.

    Honor killings and stoning women is not in conformance with our Constitution.

    Any denial of women to equal rights with men is not in conformance with our Constitution.

    Denying women equal weight in court testimony is not in conformance with our Constitution.


    All true statements. Therefore, it logically follows that Muslims who find Sharia consistent with the United States Constitution do not find any of the above to be required by Sharia.

    No doubt some Muslims believe these things ARE required or condoned by Sharia. Those are probably not the Muslims who find Sharia consistent with the U.S. Constitution. They are more likely to be the Muslims who denounce the U.S., its constitution, and all its works as "The Great Satan."

    What does it take to earn Fousesquawk's annointing as official "Good Muslims"? Everyone who tries to conform the practice of their faith to the U.S. Constitution is denounced in your posts as a liar.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Siarlys,

    I am taking issue with the propagandists who tells us that sharia is in conformance with our Constitution. It is a lie.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Gary, you haven't the slightest idea what Sharia is. Therefore, you are in complete ignorance of whether the statement in question is a lie or not.

    I don't believe I know what Sharia is either, mostly because I know of no reason to believe that there IS a single comprehensive definition. Sharia is whatever a given Muslim says it is.

    For those Muslims who choose to abide by the Constitution, and find that consistent with their faith, Sharia is consistent with the constitution. For those who do not, it is not.

    Is kashrut consistent with the Constitution? That depends on whether a given Jewish person believe that kashrut imposes upon them a duty which conflicts with the constitution.

    Is Roman Catholic canon law consistent with the Constitution? That depends on which canon lawyer you ask, and how seriously he takes the notion that in order to be saved, it is necessary to be in subjection to the Roman pontiff.

    Your one-liners are fervent, but partake of the banality of evil, and display no grasp on undisputed facts.

    ReplyDelete