Op-ed by Otis Lewis –
In Response to the article: Does Islamic law, Sharia, have a place in American courts?
This article doesn’t address the true nature of Islam. Following are “excerpts” from an article written by Lt. Col. James G. Zumwalt, a retired Marine infantry officer.
Islam is a SCAM. Sharia Law/Islamic Law is a violent cult written over 600 years after the Bible. Interspersed in the Koran are the plagiarized writings found in Mathew, Mark, Luke, John, etc. of the New Testament Bible.
In the fairy tale “Little Red Riding Hood,” a young girl almost gets eaten by a wolf disguised as her grandmother. The moral of the story: Be careful whom you trust.
Learned early by children, the moral isn’t always retained by adults. Scams often victimize those too trusting.
The religion of Islam is such a scam. It lacks tolerance for non-Muslims under a religious/political system of laws known as “Sharia” — so adverse to the U.S. Constitution; supporting one system excludes the other.
Concealed within Islam is a political belief system of superiority (Koran 3:110, “You are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind”), entitling its believers alone to human rights — limited as they are.
Islam’s modern era assault strategy involves three “jihads.” “Stealth jihad,” “Defensive jihad,” and “Offensive jihad.”
“Stealth jihad” is applicable when Muslims find themselves a minority seeking to plant Islam’s seed among a majority non-believer community. It involves the “peaceful” promotion of Islam, assuring the majority of its tolerance to co-exist with other religions. Koran (109:6) says, “You shall have your religion and I shall have my religion.”
As did the so called Prophet Muhammad, Muslims plot victory over non-believers, pretending to be friendly but lying about Islam’s true intentions. Lying is a sin for Christians but isn’t for Muslims under “taqiyya,” allowing deception to further Islam’s influence. This term “taqiyya” is cunning.
Stealth jihad’s endgame is to intimidate the majority into feeling guilty Muslims are victimized — guilt allayed by then granting Muslims protected status over other religions.
“Defensive jihad” follows, allowing Muslims to violently defend any attacks–whether military or verbal.
“Defensive jihad” attacks by claiming the non-believers “attacked” Islam by rejecting it. Islam uses assassins or terror to silence critics.
America must have an awakening before it is– too late! — The Islamic seed growing in United States will become a vine choking the rights of the majority as Sharia imposes Islam upon them, opening the door for the final jihad.
Given a majority with political power, Muslims employ “offensive jihad” by aggressively focusing violence upon all non-believers, including those who protected them earlier and even those who had never attacked. Koran 9:73 states, “Strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them.” Despite non-believers’ non-aggression, Islam finally reveals its true colors as a non-peaceful religion declaring (Koran 3:151), “Soon shall We cast terror into the Hearts of the Unbelievers.”
The tolerance Muslims espouse now as a minority will vanishes when they become a majority. Demanding non-believers submit to Islam by paying a tax or converting. This is observed today as most Muslim countries ban non-believers, prohibiting them from practicing their own faith.
Transitioning from stealth to offensive jihad, the Koran changes tunes. Allegations of Muslims’ false victimization give way to real victimization of non-Muslims to “convert or die.”
Islam is built upon a platform of hypocrisy, deception, human rights rejection for non-believers and violence (demanding death for non believers, contrary to any other religion’s practices).
The chameleon changes color to deceive predators. Islam changes color to deceive non-believers.
Little Red Riding Hood proved capable of sensing such deception.
Islamic/Sharia Law must be rejected at every level and Islam exposed for what it is. Our liberal courts need direction. The true nature of Islam must be understood! Clearly our courts don’t!
“Scotus all you want, the courts are liberal. The courts don’t understand or are in cahoots with Islam. We need to resist the scourge of Islam and and every way we can.”
There is no way you could ever prove that statement. Why, because to do so would be to try and prove that law belongs to one political party or another.
Law may be interpreted by one group as one thing, depending on the circumstances in the case decided, and by someone else as something completely different.
Courts however do not depend upon personal feelings or convictions in interpreting law. Why? Because to do so would end up finding a case where it could be overturned.
Law for example is not interpreted by Political pundits, nor even by Legislators. That job is constitutionally reserved for who?
And as I had to tell Peter Lagois this week, no judge in the world will ever guess what one side or the other means or wants to mean, such ideas must be explicitly presented. And that includes what is expected in the outcome.
One does not have to look very far to see what can happen. Varnum v. Polk County is a prime example. Upholding the Constitution of both Iowa and the U.S. is “liberal”?
And when McDonald v. Chicago was decided, there were limitations (just as there were in U.S. v. Miller – 1939). Yet some readers here continued to believe (and commented to that effect) that McDonald had never been decided, and that Chicago still prohibited gun ownership. So in this case, SCOTUS is “liberal”?
Some of you argue here that Free Exercise should not be allowed. SCOTUS says you cannot in Cantwell v. Connecticut from 1940, upholding the Constitution twice. And that’s “liberal”????
Finally, in what I see as the Landmark case for the support of Free Exercise of the First Amendment, Wisconsin v. Yoder gives parents the right, based upon explicit and recognized tradition, to remove their children from school. So supporting the freedom to practice one’s religion is “liberal”?
What if the reverse came true. What if some judge decided YOU cannot practice your beliefs. Is not what is good for the goose, not good for the gander?
Or is this just about some religions? You know the kind that are the same as you (wink wink)? “Them kind if you get my drift!
“Observer missed the first sentence of this article:”
I did not miss it at all. If you will read the basis for my comments, you would understand that. I am not now going to repeat what I said since it is written in simple language.
Observer missed the first sentence of this article:
This article doesn’t address the true nature of Islam.
Islam is more then a religion, it is a form of government. Pretty obvious the the Muslims use their Koran as a Constitution and laws!
Maybe Observer, you don’t need to understand Islam but the rest of the people sure need to understand it.
I too consider Islam a “form of government” expanding all over America under the ruse of religious freedom.
Scotus all you want, the courts are liberal. The courts don’t understand or are in cahoots with Islam. We need to resist the scourge of Islam and and every way we can.
Sharia law is far more then a religious concept!
Maybe you don’t need to understand Islam but the rest of the people sure need to understand it.
I too consider Islam a “form of government” expanding all over America under the ruse of religious freedom.
Scoutus all you want, the courts are liberal. The courts don’t understand or are in cahoots with Islam. We need to resist the scourge of Islam and and every way we can.
Sharia law is far more then a religious concept!
But in the context of the citations in the original article, the considerations were exactly about religion, and their contracts. While in the U.S. the various states have laws regarding marriage, divorce and other domestic relations, the cited cases related to foreign marriages to which state laws have no parallel (specifically as cited, arraigned marriage contracts).
A government should not be involved with the arbitration of a contract, with it’s basis in religious tradition, unless there is a compelling state interest (spousal abuse or fear for the welfare of children).
“Islamic/Sharia Law must be rejected at every level and Islam exposed for what it is. Our liberal courts need direction. The true nature of Islam must be understood! Clearly our courts don’t! “
This will not be a wholesale cut and paste from the works of someone else.
Since the author of this article did not go into detail about what “liberal courts”, it is impossible to understand the context of what the “liberal courts” need as far as direction. It is a very broad statement.
Since this article is in response to Sharia having a place in American Courts (further referenced as the original article), my comment will be exactly what it was before.
No one in the original article said, hinted at, or as far as I can perceive, pointed to replacing the U.S. Constitution with Sharia law.
What the original article referred to was, is it proper for a State to consider International Law, or in the wording of Oklahoma’s amendment, Sharia law, when making a decision in a court case.
The citations in the original article point only to civil cases. Also those comments from SCOTUS were clear, courts may not “interpret religious doctrine or rule on theological matters”. Combined, there is nothing pointing to the usurpation of Constitutional law. No jurist in their right mind would even consider such insanity.
I do not need to understand Islam, just as I have no need to understand Buddhism, or Chinese Folk religion. And our constitution makes it clear, neither can any U.S. or State government.
The Oklahoma State amendment to their constitution however, looked to do just that. In addition, there is a distinct question of exclusion of a distinct group (Muslims) which goes directly against most constitutions, as a result of that amendment.
Again understand, I am not suggesting that replacement of current legislative acts that fall under the umbrella of our Constitution. I am saying there are legitimate cases where the consideration of religious traditions can be a deciding factor in cases which call into question the appropriateness of those traditions. (Yoder v. Wisconsin)
Our First Amendment is so well crafted, that it should never be toyed with. The Government shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
Observer – “Our First Amendment is so well crafted, that it should never be toyed with. The Government shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
The real crux of the matter is the exploitation by Islam of our system under the umbrella of the “free exercise thereof” clause. Their “free exercise” of what they call “religion” can spill over into the circumvention of ones’ civil rights as defined here in the US.
While we can dance all around the issue but Islam still is a brutal medieval system that seeks to control all within its purview including kaffirs. They teach violence as an acceptable route to achieve their goal of domination and openly threaten and kill those that “insult” their beloved Koran and Mohamed. We are all familiar with their willingness to terrorize by blowing up people they consider to be their enemy. Violence over the centuries has been Islam’s primary mode of expansion.
Islam deserves to be opposed and blocked at every opportunity.
LBS can’t even pay attention. Your comment is about as appropriate for this article as your ass is to improving your brain function. Islam doesn’t belong in the U.S. government and neither does any other religion. Why don’t you move to the middle east and improve each country’s IQ by 30%.
LBS is DECEPTIVE!
She understands the moral of the story, “Little Red Riding Hood”, she/he is on a mission to harm the American way of life. Lying/political correctness is your tool of deception. Shame on you!
I have learned to pay no attention to your ramblings.
LVS is right. Radical Islam continues to be by far and away the biggest threat to our country.
Just more BS propaganda that is trying to say Christians good, Islamist evil. Same crap we’ve heard from Christians for hundreds of years.
How about you religious nut cases argue with yourselves and leave the rest of us out of it.
No religion is any better than any other. STOP THIS CRAP of my religion is better than yours. You’re all idiots. Even Spock who is a Vulcan can see it.
@Not to smart-did you even read the article before you shot off your big mouth. It is not about Christians versus Muslims. It is about Muslim law versus our constitution and the fat that Muslims will KILL anyone who is not a Muslim. Hell, they even kill eachother because they don’t belong to the same sect. Read before you post and why don’t you go live with them if you don’t like it here. It would be a big favor to the rest of us.
@not to smart LBS-you are probably still so STONED from last night to be able to understand what you read.
LBS – You are guilty of the “equivalency” viewpoint of many. You assume both are “religions” and therefore equivalent in their impact on society. You could not be more wrong.
So to you I would say STOP THIS CRAP of delusional politically correct thinking and actually look at what is happening in the world at the hands of Islam.
Who’s the idiot??
Excellent article. I have said it before and I meant it. Muslims just want to kill us and try to control our lives. Anyone who thinks they are our friends is crazy. Some of the milksop liberals will say they are just like us but they are not. Send these people back where they came from and the blow them to hell before it is to late. Wake up people. Almost every terrorist attack against us has been by Muslims and now we have a closet Muslim in the White House.