Political News & Info

Judge Mark Martin —now infamous for presiding over the “ Zombie Muhammad ” case —was incorrectly identified by me as a self-professed Muslim, based upon a faulty audio recording of the court proceedings (see blogs here and here by Andrew C. McCarthy for the audio sleuthing, and clarification). Nevertheless, the salient points remain: Martin’s alarming deference to Islam’s Sharia-based understanding of blasphemy —a non-existent “crime” in American constitutional law—and his concurrent warped misinterpretation of the First Amendment led him to behave as a de facto , albeit non-Muslim, kadi . The “Zombie Muhammad” which sparked the case decided by Judge Martin Moreover, before ever again belching forth uninformed, pious platitudes about Islam in his court room, I suggest Judge Martin read and ponder this sobering account written by Col. Felix A. Mathews, July 20, 1879. Mathews was an American consul to Morocco, serving in Tangier, from 1869-1893. What follows are extracts from Mathews’ unsparing analysis of the Sharia—Islam’s religio-political quintessence—and the consequences of its administration as “law,” based upon his intimate firsthand experience, after an entire decade in residence. There is no code of laws in the Empire of Morocco, but instead of a civil they have a religious code. The practice of jurisprudence is reduced to the application of certain principles to be found in the Koran, and is the practical knowledge of the precedents established in the various jurisdictions. There are kadis and governors in the cities and countries for the administration of justice and notaries or talbes to certify deeds, and all which relates to the security of property. The laws of the Koran admit no evidence but from those professing the Mohammedan religion . [ Parenthetical note: One could argue Judge Martin, assuming the role of de facto Kadi, did nearly the same in rejecting the video evidence of the atheist plaintiff! ] The kadis or judges are appointed by the Sultan, with a salary barely enough for subsistence…Pillage, extortion, corruption and injustice are universal, so with the almost unpaid kadis or judges, the longest purse invariably prevails. Justice is not administered; it is sold. Even the police are unpaid or receive only a slender allowance, which is supplemented by what they can extract from those who come within their clutches. The judgments of the governors are always arbitrary, and generally consist in distributing the bastinado with equal liberality to the guilty and innocent, committing them to some days’ imprisonment, whence they are released by money. The rich, therefore, rarely suffer any great punishment, though they should have been concerned in criminal affairs. To this wretched system of administration the chronic state of disorder which always exists is in greater part to be attributed. Three quarters of a century later, Robert H. Jackson (1892-1954), an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court (1941–1954), who also served as the chief United States prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials, made these more expansive, complementary observations in his foreword to a treatise on Islamic law: In any broad sense, Islamic Law offers the American lawyer a study in dramatic contrasts. Even casual acquaintance and superficial knowledge—all that most of us at bench or bar will be able to acquire—reveal that its striking features relative to our law are not likenesses but inconsistencies, not similarities but contrarieties. In its source, its scope and its sanctions, the law [i.e., Islamic Law, Sharia] of the Middle East is the antithesis of Western Law…Islamic law, on the contrary, finds its chief source in the will of Allah as revealed to the Prophet Muhammad. It contemplates one community of the faithful, though they may be of various tribes and in widely separated locations. Religion, not nationalism or geography, is the proper cohesive force. The state itself is subordinate to the Qur’an, which leaves little room for additional legislation, none for criticism or dissent. This world is viewed as but the vestibule to another and a better one for the faithful, and the Qur’an lays down rules of behavior towards others and toward society to assure a safe transition. It is not possible to separate political or juristic theories from the teachings of the Prophet, which establish rules of conduct concerning religious, domestic, social, and political life. This results in a law of duties, rather than rights… Judge Martin’s demonstrated inability to grasp these stark differences between the totalitarian, basic human rights-abrogating Sharia and US constitutional law renders him unfit for the bench.

Originally posted here:
Judge Martin, Sharia, and Islamic Kadi ‘Justice’

Ron Paul, who has consistently engaged in anti-Semitic nonsense over the course of the past few decades, has largely attempted to hide his anti-Semitism throughout his campaign. No longer. Ron Paul has issued this Arabic-language flyer outside the Islamic Center of America in Dearborn, Michigan: The flyer actually has two sides . The English side promotes Paul’s “Plan to Restore America” and touts his deficit cutting prowess and dislike of the Federal Reserve. The Arabic side, however – the side shown above – is far less subtle. It says that Paul will cut foreign aid, and specifically mentions only foreign aid to Israel as the target of cutting. And that’s the point. Paul’s appeal to the Muslim community is strictly and completely based on his opposition to Israel. Paul’s anti-Semitism is well-documented; see his section on Zionism in Paul’s book Liberty Defined (better titled All The Weird Things Ron Paul Believes ). His CYA maneuver, stating that he wants to cut all foreign aid, then determine to whom American should restore aid, is just that – a CYA maneuver. His real target is and always was Israel. I don’t see Ron Paul supporters handing out Hebrew flyers at my synagogue proclaiming his desire to cut off aid to Egypt, Libya, and the Palestinian Authority. The Islamic Center of America, by the way, is a “moderate” establishment run by Imam Hassan Qazwini, who has refused Saudi funding for his mosque. He’s also hosted Louis Farrakhan,                                    who according to Debbie Schlussel , took the time to call Jewish Americans “forces of evil” with a “Satanic mentality,” and according to Schlussel, has expressed support for terrorist groups including Hezbollah and Hamas. So it’s no surprise that Paul sees his parishioners as rich ground for recruits.

Read more:
Ron Paul Panders to Anti-Semitism in Michigan

An American Muslim judge in Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania imposed Shari’ah on a man who dressed as “Zombie Muhammad” in a Halloween Parade last year.  He was accosted by a Muslim man who was offended by this display of disrespect of the Prophet Muhammad. The video of the hearing can be accessed here (hat tip: Atlas Shrugs). We are seeing Shari’ah becoming more “accepted” in America, usurping the Florida Constitution and the Constitution of the United States of America in the decisions of judges in our courts. We have Shari’ah-compliant mortgage financing. We have seen a Palestinian woman, Fatima Abdallah , brutally beaten to death in Tampa, her murder swept under the carpet so as not to offend Muslim sensibilities. Please encourage Florida lawmakers to support legislation titled Application of Foreign Laws in Certain Cases (HB 1209, SB 1360). This legislation would prohibit certain provisions of foreign laws, including Shari’ah law, from being considered by Florida courts if they do not afford the same liberties, rights and privileges guaranteed by the Florida and US Constitution. The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Criminal and Civil Justice Appropriations Chair has scheduled SB 1360 for consideration on Tuesday, February 28, 2012. Thus far, three committees have approved this legislation with only one dissenting vote. To read the full details at Florida Family Association click here . There is a link to write to the Florida legislature to express your support for this bill. This legislation has passed all of the assigned committees in the Florida House and is ready to be heard by the full house of representatives. However, this legislation must pass in this senate subcommittee. Ahmed Bedier of United Voices for America will be in Tallahassee on February 28th to fight this bill. The group is inviting Muslims to Tallahassee on the same day for the fourth annual Florida Muslim Capitol Day. The proposed bill would in no way diminish the ability of the Muslim faithful to peaceably practice their religion. It merely seeks to affirm the Florida Constitution and the Constitution of the United States of America as the Supreme Law of the Land.

View post:
Creeping Shari’ah in America Must Be Stopped

Afghanistan has imploded once again. Riots swarm epicenters, people have been injured, and now reports of deaths unfold. Islam’s most holy book, the Quran, has been desecrated, and US forces have been deemed the culprits. The real culprits in today’s complex situation in Afghanistan are not the US-led coalition–rather, a few select prisoners who successfully brought masses of locals together. This tactic was achieved from inside prison cells. Amazingly, without any assistance from the outside world, a bunch of prisoner’s activities fueled battle against the United States. Prisoners desecrated the Quran by utilizing the holy book for coded messaging. This act is a very old and historic tactic utilized in many past conflicts among prisoners. While the Quran may or may not have been used in the past, religious books, which are mandated by law to be available to prisoners, have been utilized for communication purposes. US forces intercepted these covert communications and rapidly disrupted them. The holy texts were confiscated and destroyed. Unfortunately, the initial defacing of the texts caused by prisoners was never revealed to the local indigenous population through a proper psychological operations (PSYOP) campaign.   Had a proper PSYOP campaign occurred, the current effects of riots and protests would likely have never evolved. For years, astute military advisors pushed the idea of incorporating Islamic principles in PSYOP campaigns. Some military leaders understood the need however many did not. For those who refused to listen to their advisers, only one reason comes to mind—political correctness. The majority of Afghans believe the US-led coalition are comprised of “people of the book.” This means that they understand we are not followers of Islam. They also realize how intelligent we are in doing everything in our power to study their culture, values, and religion. One mistake can cause chaos, and we often must walk on our tippy toes when interacting with the local populace. One wrong move and all hell could break loose, as observed currently. Of course, we have made many wrong moves in the past ten-plus years in Afghanistan, but we have done much more good than bad ,and most Afghans know this. General Allen did his best to ease the situation, but that was not good enough. The State Department also did their best, yet that, too, wasn’t enough. Reactionary actions are never enough. We must be proactive when dealing with the Afghan people. A proper proactive tactic would have been to launch nationwide messages showing how un-Islamic many prisoners are. We cannot do this, however, because as a whole, American political correctness has socially conditioned us to never discuss religion with those who believe differently. Richard Brodie states in his book Virus of the Mind , “The meme is the secret code of human behavior, a Rosetta stone finally giving us the key to understanding religion, politics, psychology, and cultural evolution. That key, though, also unlocks Pandora’s box, opening up such sophisticated new techniques for mass manipulation…” Psychological operations are truly meant to serve as meme warfare. With sound PSYOPs, an entire nation-state’s population can catch a mental virus. That virus spreads rapidly, causing people to behave in ways we desire. Our enemy in Afghanistan has perfected the meme warfare tactic while we have failed time and again. There is a reason why the war in Afghanistan has prolonged itself. That reason doesn’t necessarily entail poor rules of engagement, a stronger enemy force, or lack of numbers. One of the main reasons Afghanistan has been a blunder is because the United States and our partners have been manipulated and we simply do not know how to counter Afghan manipulation practices. The Afghan enemy loves to manipulate anyone they can, and we have become perfect targets. We listen, do what is asked, and pay the price. This is not the first time an incident involving the Quran unfolded, and it will likely not be the last. Until we learn how to properly mitigate future uproar due to similar incidents through sound PSYOP campaigns, local reactions will be the same. Kerry Patton, a combat service disabled veteran, is a senior analyst for WIKISTRAT and owner of IranWarMonitor.com .  He has worked in South America, Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and Europe, focusing on intelligence and security and interviewing current and former terrorists, including members of the Taliban.  He is the author of Sociocultural Intelligence: The New Discipline of Intelligence Studies and the children’s book American Patriotism .  You can follow him on Facebook .

Read the original here:
Quran Burning a PSYOP Failure in Afghanistan

Embracing your nation’s enemy used to be treason, but among Hollywood elites, it is good P.R. Jane Fonda was pictured on the tank of the Viet Cong. Sean Penn cozies up to Hugo Chavez while Gisele Bundchen and Johnny Depp sport Che Guevara fashion. Sonja Henie, a Norwegian-born Hollywood star, loved Hitler. Lincoln Steffens, the progressive journalist, visited Stalin’s Russia, boasting ”I have seen the future, and it works.” It didn’t work, and Steffens, to his credit, later denounced. Such introspection seems unlike nowadays, though. Backing Iran seems to be Sean Stone’s bailiwick. The controversial director’s son converted to Shia Islam in Iran on Valentine’s Day and met with members of the dictatorship, including its dictator, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and spoke about it with Bill O’Reilly last night. Watch the latest video at video.foxnews.com The Hollywood Reporter typed up a transcript: “Why should it influence Israeli policy in regards to the Palestinians, in regards to the Middle East? That’s always been his point on that matter,” Stone says. “There’s no room for Holocaust denial, of course, I would never agree with that. But I just think that it’s simplistic to say that he’s a fanatic.” O’Reilly asks: “You okay with Iran having a nuclear weapon?” “I am, because it’s a Republic and there are factions. And it’s very much like this country. There’s a lot of unrest.” Logic would suggest that “unrest” is a big enough reason not to let Iran get the bomb. After all, we worry about Pakistan having the bomb, but we seldom worry about France or Britain’s nuclear capabilities. Why? Because not all governments are created equal. Iran isn’t a “republic” because a republic depends on the consent of the governed, a consent that Iran forfeited when it gunned down its citizens peacefully assembling in protest in 2009. That not all governments are equal seems to be what Stone and much of Hollywood fails to understand. The character of a regime matters, and Iran’s regime has awful character. It hangs homosexuals; it stones women who commit adultery. Stone, who now calls himself a “Jewish Christian Muslim” (whatever that is), doesn’t understand that it is criminal to proselytize Christianity in Iran. Stone claims that Islam is not a religion of violence and that it is tolerant and that he came to those views based upon his reading of the Koran (he must have missed those passages calling for Jews to be killed). And how will the new Muslim Stone deal with his father, Oliver Stone, allegedly a practicing Buddhist? The Koran is quite clear with how to deal with people not of the Book: kill or enslave them. Before he was finished saying “There is no God, but God,”  he’s now claiming to be a victim, according The New York Post : I didn’t realize I would be so vilified. It is almost like I am a criminal for having accepted Islam. I didn’t realize Islamophobia was that deep. People have speculated that I have done this because I am from a spoiled family or that I am lost and trying to find myself. That is ridiculous. I don’t care if I get criticized. If I can open up a debate about religion and create some understanding, then it is worth it. But Iran isn’t interested in having that debate. That debate can only take place in a country that recognizes religious pluralism, and the only countries interested in religious pluralism, by and large, are Western, Judeo-Christian ones. Not even the post-Christian societies allow discussion of religion. Witness the persecution of Mark Steyn in Canada for daring to criticize Islam. But now Stone, like so many Muslims who have been politicized through the Council on American-Islamic Relations, seems to believe that he is being persecuted by the Jews of Hollywood. Stone continued with  The New York Post : I’ve already experienced the reverse of anti-Semitism, having people within the film industry express a reluctance to work with me now that I have said a simple prayer, “There is no God but God, and Mohammed is his messenger.” I am sure I have [bleeped] off some powerful people. That this was said in Barrio 47 , a trendy West Village New York restaurant famous for its cocktails, compounds the silliness of his conversion. In Iran, it is a crime to possess alcohol, much less enjoy it in one of New York’s hip new restaurants. Moreover Stone’s belief that he is encountering the “reverse of anti-Semitism,” whatever that is. It’s a confusing idea from a confused young man. But if Stone really wants to tick off some powerful people–which is what this supposedly about–he would do well to follow the leadership of Salman Rushdie, who dared to criticize the Prophet. But then, criticizing the Prophet might get him a death sentence and might not be so profitable for a young man whose career has been, by and large, trading in on the success of his father.

Read the original here:
Oliver Stone’s Son Embraces Islam, Iran

The controversial contraception, abortifacients and sterilization mandate has quickly become a national debate unlike the country has seen since the passage of Obamacare. Regardless of how the White House is currently positioned to accommodate potentially injured religious parties, Accuracy in Media discovered an alarming narrative developing in the mainstream press. Pundits and reporters have chosen to apply the debate to the horse-race for the GOP nomination, or another battle in the culture war for reproductive rights. Unfortunately a larger, constitutionally intrinsic question is being overlooked: will this pending mandate forever endanger our religious liberties for the sake of public policy? Accuracy in Media sat down with Fr. Joseph Gonzales, Imam Johari Abdul-Malik and Rabbi Charles Feinberg to discuss how this precious balance can be maintained in the 21st Century.

Go here to see the original:
AIM Video – Imam, Priest, Rabbi: Religious Liberty and the Abortion Pill Mandate

From the Army Times : Lt. Colonel Daniel Davis An Army officer is fed up with “rosy official statements” that paint Afghanistan as a picture of progress, and he is demanding military leaders come clean about the “absence of success on virtually every level.” “How many more men must die in support of a mission that is not succeeding and behind an array of more than seven years of optimistic statements by U.S. senior leaders in Afghanistan?” Lt. Col. Daniel Davis asked in a four-page essay titled “Truth, Lies & Afghanistan: How military leaders have let us down.” “No one expects our leaders to always have a successful plan. But we do expect — and the men who do the living, fighting and dying deserve — to have our leaders tell us the truth about what’s going on,” Davis wrote. Here is an excerpt from Colonel Davis’ piece: Much of what I saw during my deployment, let alone read or wrote in official reports, I can’t talk about; the information remains classified. But I can say that such reports — mine and others’ — serve to illuminate the gulf between conditions on the ground and official statements of progress. And I can relate a few representative experiences, of the kind that I observed all over the country. ISAF in Afghanistan In January 2011, I made my first trip into the mountains of Kunar province near the Pakistan border to visit the troops of 1st Squadron, 32nd Cavalry. On a patrol to the northernmost U.S. position in eastern Afghanistan, we arrived at an Afghan National Police (ANP) station that had reported being attacked by the Taliban 2½ hours earlier. Through the interpreter, I asked the police captain where the attack had originated, and he pointed to the side of a nearby mountain. “What are your normal procedures in situations like these?” I asked. “Do you form up a squad and go after them? Do you periodically send out harassing patrols? What do you do?” As the interpreter conveyed my questions, the captain’s head wheeled around, looking first at the interpreter and turning to me with an incredulous expression. Then he laughed. “No! We don’t go after them,” he said. “That would be dangerous!” You can find Colonel Davis’ essay here .  The full version of this Army Times piece is here .

Follow this link:
Lt-Col Challenges The Official Rosy Version Of Events In Afghanistan: ‘Absence Of Success On….Every Level’

The right to speak and publish freely is currently under assault in all Western democracies. In some countries, and especially in the European Union, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is now interpreted to mean that religious freedom includes the right not to be insulted by statements about one’s religion. At the instigation of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, national constitutions are being rewritten or reinterpreted to allow exceptions to the right to free speech when the “defamation of religion” is involved. Free speech is being actively suppressed in Western Europe, where those who criticize immigration and Islamization are frequently harassed, fired from their jobs, arrested, charged, prosecuted, convicted, and fined. In the near future we can expect that someone in Europe will go to prison simply for expressing his opinion about the Religion of Peace. Britain, Sweden, the Netherlands, France, and Austria are actively vying to see who can be first to incarcerate a Counterjihad dissident. Notwithstanding the protections afforded by the First Amendment, the United States of America is well on its way down the same evil path. Christians who proselytize on the streets of Muslim neighborhoods have discovered to their dismay that existing statutes concerning incitement, intimidation, disorderly conduct, and breach of the peace can be utilized to arrest and remove infidels who insult Muslims, even if the charges are later dismissed. To make matters worse, a direct assault on the First Amendment is on the horizon, with Hillary Clinton’s promise to the OIC that the United States will work to implement the UN resolution requiring member states to pass laws that criminalize the “defamation of religions”. An end run around the Constitution may also be available in the recently-passed National Defense Authorization bill , which permits the president to order indefinite military detention of American citizens, even within the United States. The rationale is that we are in a “time of war.” The war, however, has never been declared, and the enemy is unnamed — except, of course, as “extremism.” And we all know who Barack Hussein Obama considers to be the “extremists.” The NDAA does not bode well for tea-partiers, Islamophobes, Ron Paul supporters, and other “right-wing extremists.” If nothing else, the feds will be forced to detain a few of us just to prove they are not engaging in “profiling.” This is the state of free speech in the Western world ca. 2012. The current plight of free expression, like so many other rights, is a reminder of the old admonition: Use it or lose it. *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   * Free speech is the most important of a constellation of rights that also includes the following, among others: The right to keep and bear arms. The right to be secure in one’s person and property. The right to assemble peaceably without hindrance. The right not to be detained without due process in an open court of law ( habeus corpus ). The right, when accused of a crime, to be tried by a jury of one’s peers. These rights form the collective basis for what we generally consider the Rule of Law. They serve to check the excesses of the power-hungry State. In the United States and the rest of the British diaspora, these rights ultimately derive their legitimacy from the ancient precepts of the English Common Law. They are not granted to citizens by the state, nor to subjects by the monarch. They are God-given rights . They are the gift of the Creator to His Creation. They may be — and often are — usurped by a tyrannical State, but such usurpation can never gain legitimacy, no matter how long it persists. It is the right — and even the duty — of conscientious and morally aware individuals to band together and overthrow any system that revokes these rights, and re-establish the Rule of Law. This is what the Declaration of Independence proclaimed in 1776 and what the Constitution attempted to secure in 1788. It is clear that we are moving into an era in which the Rule of Law no longer applies to citizens of the Western democracies who have long been accustomed to its benefits. *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   * The denial of any or all of the rights described above is a violation of what I call the sovereign autonomy of the individual . The genius of European Christianity lay in its identification of the individual as an autonomous source within God’s creation. From this insight arose the concept of Natural Law, whose precepts explicate and codify the rights of the individual within a secular polity. The individual may be said to possess a sovereign autonomy , since he recognizes no one but his Creator as a source of permanent authority. While exercising their sovereignty, individuals may grant their government authority over themselves, but only on a temporary and contingent basis. We who are experiencing the current usurpation of the Rule of Law would do well to keep our sovereign autonomy in mind. The most important fact to remember is this: The State may harass you and impoverish you. It may incarcerate you. It may even kill you, but it cannot take away your sovereign autonomy . Many courageous souls have borne witness to their sovereign autonomy, even amidst the horrors of imprisonment in Nazi concentration camps. Committed dissidents such as Andrei Sakharov, Alexander Solzhenitsyn, and Vaclav Havel endured Communist tyranny and the gulag by refusing to surrender their sovereign autonomy. Whether copying out samizdat literature, or helping other dissidents escape the agents of the state, or simply speaking out clearly when to do so could mean torture and death — these brave people remind us that our God-given rights are always present, ready to be exercised, until the moment our lives are extinguished. Sovereign autonomy cannot be taken away from any conscious individual — it can only be given away. It is difficult to affirm one’s sovereign autonomy when the vast majority of one’s fellow citizens are passively surrendering their own. Being the first to speak out is a thankless task, as Geert Wilders, Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, and Jussi Halla-aho have discovered. Although a majority of the rest of the population may secretly support a vocal dissident, its silent passivity makes his dissent a lonely occupation. These conditions are slowly changing, however, as the forces of repression converge with global economic hardship. The more people who feel they have nothing left to lose, the more who are likely to speak up. The harder the repression, the greater the public awareness of what has been lost. The habit of free speech has been ground out of us over the last forty years. It will require a conscious act of will to reassert it. We must have the presence of mind to say, “I am endowed by my Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are…” Over and over again. In as many ways as possible. It is understandable that many people may decline this option. There is so much to lose — wealth, employment, friends, freedom — and so little to gain. Those with small children or aging parents will rightfully choose the more pressing imperative to take care of their own. Yet some dissidents may be willing to risk everything for the sake of preserving their sovereign autonomy. For the sake of the cause, some of us may decide to “pledge to each other our lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor” to the struggle for freedom of speech. There comes a time when one’s own integrity requires taking a stand, no matter the consequences. As Christ reminds us (Matthew 16:26): “For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?” The usurpation of the Rule of Law is a soul-destroying process for all who decide to submit to it. Those who refuse to submit must speak up loudly, clearly, and frequently. Those who decide to reclaim their sovereign autonomy must also be mentally prepared to bear the temporal consequences for their actions. They may have to surrender the world, but in doing so they will regain their souls. *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   * In closing, some words of wisdom from Lao Tsu ( Tao Te Ching , Chapter 13): Accept disgrace willingly. Accept misfortune as the human condition. What do you mean by “Accept disgrace willingly”? Accept being unimportant. Do not be concerned with loss or gain. This is called “accepting disgrace willingly.” What do you mean by “Accept misfortune as the human condition”? Misfortune comes from having a body. Without a body, how could there be misfortune? Surrender yourself humbly; then you can be trusted to care for all things. Love the world as your own self; then you can truly care for all things.

Go here to read the rest:
In Face of Islamic Censorship, U.S. Citizens Must Cling to Sovereign Autonomy

In August 2011, a Marietta, Ga. 7 th grade teacher gave a three-page homework lesson from InspirEd Educators Inc. of Roswell, Ga. to students to help them discuss pros and cons of school uniforms. “Women in the West do not have the protection of the Sharia as we do ,” declared a letter from a Saudi wife named Ahlima included in the lesson. “If our marriage has problems, my husband can take another wife rather than divorce me, and I would still be cared for.” She’s glad that Saudi women “have the Sharia.” When parents objected to the assignment’s pro-Islam stance, the school district changed the curriculum. In 2010, Act for America compiled research from former assistant education secretary Diane Ravitch, American Textbook Council and Textbook League on how 38 public school texts handled Islam; last month, Christian Action Network launched a national campaign warning of bias. While school assignments sugarcoat sharia, the doctrine requires “defense” of community and permits “ payback ” against perceived enemies like U.S. servicemen and all Israelis , according to influential Muslim Brotherhood jurist Yusuf Qaradawi . Thus, a naturalized Kosovo man arrested in Florida Jan. 9 planned an attack to “ die in the Islamic way .” The Council on Islamic American Relations (CAIR) has long warned members not to aid the FBI and Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) agents seek more “ hate crime ” studies — but eliminations of solid counter terror strategies. Some 22 states and U.S. territories currently maintain central textbook “adoption” standards to either recommend or require specific textbooks for public schools. Textbook adoption originated during Reconstruction to ensure that the Civil War narrative included Confederate views in southern states. In the public free-for-all that ultimately developed, minorities apparently appropriated undue influence. Thus, texts often downplay European history but include material unrelated to the U.S. Some books , for example, tout Mali’s medieval Islamic ruler Mansa Musa and his 1324 trip (with thousands of slaves) to Mecca. But they provide no connection to U.S. history — as none exists. In the last two decades, sanitized Islamic history and dogma crept into broad use in U.S. public school books thanks largely to Shabbir Mansuri; to advantage Muslims, he maximized the minority role in textbook adoption (and falsely claimed to be a USC-educated chemical engineer ). In 1990, he founded the Fountain Valley, Ca. Council on Islamic Education to promote Islam in textbooks and curricula, which he calls a “bloodless” revolution inside American junior high and high school classes. Mansuri derived the idea in 1988, after seeing a textbook disparage physical aspects of Muslim prayer, he says. Independent review agencies affirm that CIE —deceptively renamed in 2006 as Institute on Religion and Civic Values (IRCV)— powerfully influences U.S. textbooks via state standards it helped to write . Susan Douglass For advancing “change” in school standards and curricula, CIE can largely thank Muslim convert Susan Douglass , who for 10 years wrote CIE lesson plans , advisories , guidelines and pamphlets to soft peddle Islam in public schools. Central is the Teacher’s Guide to Religion in the Public Schools that this author exposed shortly after its 2003 publication, purportedly as an interfaith “First Amendment” plan. CIE bedfellows include North American Muslim Brotherhood affiliates. CIE shares MB goals , as its former chief Mohammed Akram outlined in a strategic May 1991 MB “Explanatory Memorandum.” Sound Vision Foundation pushes “ dawa ” (proselytizing) in public schools from MB offices in Bridgewater, Ill., for example. CIE joined efforts with Arab World and Islamic Resources Group (AWIRG), a.k.a. Dar al Islam or land of Islam—a remote N.M. non-profit founded in 1979 by the late Saudi King Khaled ibn Aziz. AWIRG had CIE help forming its speakers bureau and until a 2005 press inquiry , listed CIE as its “secondary schools” associate. CIE has old ties, too, to the extremist Islamic Networks Group , and “ collaborated extensively ” with Ali al-Mazrui, an ex-trustee of an MB organization founded by incarcerated, Eritrean MB terrorist financier Abdurahman Alamoudi. While probably unaware of their carefully staged genesis, parents for years have vocally opposed such Islamic instructions in public schools and texts as: In 2005, Scottsdale, Ar. schools shelved Across the Centuries , only to introduce more offensive Islamic propaganda in TCI’s History Alive! The Medieval World and Beyond . In 2008, a Seminole County, Fl. school let Muslim women co-opt a “ family dynamics’ ” talk. A Houston middle school sent students to a class on Islam during a period reserved for phys ed . California parents have repeatedly rejected curricula and texts (including TCI’s History Alive ) that sanitize Islam or teach its pillars . In Sept. 2010, a Wellesley, Ma. school “field trip” to a Saudi-funded Roxbury mosque taught kids how to pray like Muslims . In early 2010, Minnesota’s ACLU sued St. Paul’s public k-8 Tarek ibn Ziyad Academy for breaching the ban against government religious advocacy. Massachusetts schools adopted a Notebook by Abiquiu, N.M.’s Saudi-funded AWIRG. Pushed by Harvard’s Middle Eastern Studies Center, it claims Muslim explorers discovered the New World and Native Americans had Muslim names. (In 2005, the center had received $20 million from Saudi prince Alwaleed bin Talaal, who later boasted he could control global TV news .) In Sept. 2010, the Texas Board of Education endured heavy criticism after issuing a textbook resolution asking publishers to fix the “pro-Islamic/anti-Christian half-truths, selective disinformation, and false stereotypes” that riddled textbooks. The board included four pages of notes to document “pejoratives” targeting Christians and “superlatives,” Muslims—e.g. brutal conquests of Christian lands were called “migrations” of “empire builders.” Books listed Crusaders’ massacres, but not the Muslim Tamerlane’s 1389 Delhi murder of 100,000 prisoners or his 1401 Baghdad massacre of 90,000 Muslims. Whether named CIE or IRCV, Islamic forces spent decades stealthily cultivating influence over our nation’s public schools and curricula through “minority” channels afforded by “textbook adoption.” Other “adoption state” authorities should perhaps now add teeth to their own Texas-like counter-efforts. FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Alyssa A. Lappen is a U.S.-based investigative journalist, with a focus on the Middle East and Islam. A former Senior Fellow of the American Center for Democracy (2005-2008), she previously covered the economy, business and finance, as a Senior Editor at Institutional Investor (1993-1999), Working Woman (1991-1993) and Corporate Finance (1991); and an Associate Editor at Forbes (1978-1990). She contributes regularly to Family Security Matters , the Terror Finance Blog and International Analyst Network and her work appears frequently in Pajamas Media , Front Page Magazine , American Thinker , Right Side News , the Washington Times and many other Internet and print journals. Ms. Lappen is also an accomplished poet, whose work has won several awards and honorable mentions, and appeared in dozens of books and (print and online) literary journals, including the 2007, second edition of Blood to Remember: American Poets on the Holocaust and issues of Wales ‘ notable Seventh Quarry: Swansea Poetry Magazine .

See more here:
Pro-Sharia Textbooks Creeping Into Curricula Nationwide

An outrage! This will only encourage more acts of jihad. From Germany’s Thelocal.de: Arid Uka, 21, who was born in Kosovo but grew up in Frankfurt, “wanted to make his personal contribution to the holy war” but not knowing how to get to Afghanistan to fight alongside the Taliban, opted to act closer to home, the federal prosecutor told the court. He should serve at least the usual maximum sentence in Germany of 15 years, argued prosecutor Jochen Weingarten, saying the case involving two charges of murder and three of attempted murder was a particularly severe one. Defence lawyer Michaela Roth did not contest Uka’s guilt but argued extenuating circumstances, describing the difficult background of the “shy, quiet and well meaning” young man who had never previously been aggressive and was “without future prospects.” The March 2 attack took place at Frankfurt airport, where Uka allegedly opened fire on a group of US soldiers on their way to fight in Afghanistan. Airmen Nicholas Jerome Alden, 25, and Zachary Ryan Cuddeback, 21, were killed. Two more soldiers were wounded. Uka remained silent with his eyes lowered or closed at Monday’s hearing. You can read the full story here .

More:
German Jihadist Who Killed Two US Soldiers Will Get Maximum 15 Year Sentence; Defense Says He Is ‘Well Meaning’