Muslims Living Under Sharia, Not What Is Portrayed In The Media

Go to Mobile Site
Home   |   Articles   |   News   |   Blog   |   About   |   Mailing List   |   Resources   |   Prominent Islamists   |   Middle East Forum   |   Keep Us Informed   |   Donate
Islamist Watch Blog   Latest Posts  |  Archive  |    Life Under Sharia by Marc J. Fink  •  Jun 21, 2012 at 4:21 pm Share62 Brutality and Injustice Islamist Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum, defends the freedoms and liberties of  Western society against "stealth jihad," a campaign by Islamists to slowly and methodically  implement a Sharia-compliant theocracy in the West. Sharia is Islamic law, based on the  Koran and the teachings and personal actions of Mohammad (known as The Sunnah,  noted and reported in Hadiths). Below, very personal examples of life under Sharia in Islamist societies. The intolerance,  the brutality, the inhumanity. The extreme lack of religious pluralism, women's rights,  free speech and equality under the law. 1. Sudanese Woman Lashed (Video) 2. Saudi Woman Harassed in Mall By Sharia Police for Wearing Nail Polish (Video) 3. Woman Stoned to Death Along Pakistan-Afghanistan Frontier (Graphic Video) 4. Turkey Indicts World-Famous Pianist for Atheist Tweet 5. Kuwait Man Receives 10 Years In Prison for Anti-Mohammad Tweet 6. Homosexuals Executed in Iran (Graphic Photos) 7. Tunisian Demonstration Demands Death for Man Accused of Heresy (Video) 8. Tunisian Islamists Slaughter Convert to Christianity (Extremely Graphic Video) _________________________________________________________________________________ 1. Sudanese Woman Lashed (Video) A Sudanese woman is lashed by uniformed policemen at a Khartoum police station. The crowd  of men gathered around laugh at the process. Following the spectacle is an interview with  Khartoum Governor Dr. Abd Al-Rahman Al-Khadhr, which aired on Blue Nile TV on December 12, 2010. Under Sharia law in Sudan, it is illegal for women to wear pants in public. The penalty: 40 lashes. Source: Middle East Media Research Institute, TV Monitor Project. Please see, memritv.org  and memri.org Excerpt from interview: Gov. Abd Al-Rahman Al-Khadr: What was aired was the implementation of an Islamic  punishment. … We should consider the more important issue in this case – our penal  code is in keeping with Islam, and the Shari'a is the main source of our  legislation. Islamic punishments are carried out to purge the perpetrator. INTERVIEWER: This is not a case of a woman wearing pants, is it? Gov. Abd Al-Rahman Al-Khadr: No, it is not. I did not mention the nature of the crime, because I do not want to slander her. It has to do with immoral activity and prostitution. _________________________________________________________________________________ 2. Saudi Woman Harassed in Mall By Sharia Police for Wearing Nail Polish  (Video) A woman caught the attention of Saudi Arabia's feared Sharia Police at an upscale shopping  mall in Riyadh. Contrary to the strictly enforced Sharia law, she was wearing lipstick, nail  polish, and a few strands of hair were visible under her veil. The agency that zealously enforces Sharia law in Saudi Arabia is called the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue  and the Prevention of Vice. This very brave woman stunned the Sharia Police – who are used to absolute obedience – by putting up a public protest and recording the incident with her camera phone. The State  Police were eventually called in. It is not known what eventually happened to this woman, who lives in a closed society with no civil liberties. Since the video was posted on YouTube,  it is reasonable to assume she survived – at least for the short-term. Source: Middle East Media Research Institute, TV Monitor Project. Please see, memritv.org and memri.org Excerpt from video: Woman: None of your business! I'm free to put on nail polish if I want to. … I'm not getting  out! What are you gonna do about it? … You are not the boss of me, and you can't tell me  not to wear nail polish! _________________________________________________________________________________ 3. Woman Stoned to Death Along Pakistan-Afghanistan Frontier (Graphic Video) A lot has been written about women being stoned to death under Sharia law. But rarely has  it been seen. The cell-phone video below shows a woman being stoned to death, allegedly by the Taliban in Pakistan, along the Afghanistan border. Watching it is very upsetting, but  necessary to serve witness to the brutality of Sharia law. The woman is ruthlessly killed in a slow form of execution by having stones thrown at her again and again. Her "crime": allegedly being seen out with a man. Below, ABC News shows a heavily edited and sanitized version of the video in a Sept 24, 2010 report by Brian Ross: Below, an unedited version, as originally shown by Al-Aan TV in Dubai: See also, Memri's translation of the Al-Aan TV segment. ________________________________________________________________________________ 4. Turkey Indicts World-Famous Pianist for Atheist Tweet World famous concert pianist Fazil Say is considering never returning to his native Turkey  after a Turkish court accepted an indictment against him for allegations of insulting Islam.  After decades of secular rule, Turkey has recently fallen to the forces of Islamism. Say's  offense? A tweet: The openly atheist Say wrote a tweet mocking the muezzin, a person who leads the call to prayer in a mosque. "The muezzin finished the azan in 22 seconds. What's the ush? A lover? A raki table?" he asked. He also retweeted a verse attributed to the 11th-century poet Omar Khayyám: "You say rivers of wine flow in heaven, is heaven a tavern for you? You say two houris (beautiful young virgin women) await each believer there, is heaven a brothel to you?" Say is known for his electric performances of Beethoven. Great art that will never be heard where Sharia reigns. ________________________________________________________________________________ 5. Kuwait Man Receives 10 Years In Prison for Anti-Mohammad Tweet A Kuwaiti man was sentenced to 10 years in prison for allegedly sending "disparaging"  tweets about the Prophet Mohammad. Hamad al-Naqi was found guilty of "endangering  state security" – whatever that means. Mr. al-Naqi is actually lucky. Shortly after being arrested for his "crime," Kuwait's parliament approved a law imposing the death penalty on any Muslim who insults God,  his prophets, messengers, Prophet Mohammad's wives or the Koran, in any form of expression, if they don't repent. ________________________________________________________________________________ 6. Homosexuals Executed in Iran (Graphic Photos) Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad infamously told an audience at Columbia University that there are no homosexuals in Iran. If that's true, it's because they are being  murdered under Sharia law. Four Iranian gay men are due to be executed for sodomy under their nation's Sharia law, according to recent stories in the Huffington Post and Jerusalem Post. The four men --  identified by the Human Rights Activist News Agency in Iran as Saadat Arefi, Vahid  Akbari, Javid Akbari and Houshmand Akbari -- are set to be hanged after their guilty  verdicts were approved recently by "high court" judges. A recent study found homosexuals in Iran are comprehensively and systematically  brutalized by the Islamist regime, which exposes them to horrific punishment, bullying and risk of suicide. The first detailed report on Iran's homosexual community has found that its members live under social and state repression, with some being persecuted, forced into exile or even sentenced to death. A series of photos from 2005 shows the hanging of two terrified teenage Iranian boys, allegedly for their "crime" of homosexuality. The photos are of Mahmoud Asgari, 16, and Ayaz Marhoni, 18. The Washington Post reported on the controversy surrounding the photos and the difficulty in verifying the "crimes" of these two teenagers in the closed, totalitarian  Islamist society of Iran. ___________________________________________________________________________________ 7. Tunisian Demonstration Demands Death for Man Accused of Heresy (Video) The following is footage of an Islamist demonstration held in Tunisia in response to  statements made by an unnamed Tunisian expat deemed heretical to Islam. The footage aired on the Al-Jazeera network on June 8, 2012. Translated by Memri. Excerpt from video: Tunisian cleric Mokhtar Jbeli: That man had the audacity to affront us and all that is  sacred to us. He does not respect the Tunisian people. He must be punished. We demand that he be placed on trial and punished. Interviewer: Even if he apologizes? Mokhtar Jbeli: Anybody who affronts the Prophet Muhammad must be punished  by death, even if he repents. The punishment for heresy must be imposed upon him.  Even if he repents, he must be killed, because it is the decree of Allah. Crowd: Allah Akbar. Allah Akbar. Mokhtar Jbeli: Islam will be victorious, whether the atheists, the infidels, the secular, and their ilk like it or not. Tunisian cleric Shihab Al-Din Tleish: Let everybody know that for the sake of the  Prophet Muhammad, we are willing to sacrifice our fathers, our mothers,  and ourselves. We will be slaughtered for your sake, oh Messenger of Allah. We will not allow the Messenger of Allah to be cursed. ___________________________________________________________________________________ 8. Tunisian Islamists Slaughter Convert to Christianity (Extremely Graphic Video) According to the Encyclopaedia of Islam, the most authoritative reference work on Islam  in the English language, "there is unanimity that the male apostate must be put to death." WARNING: The video below of a brutal beheading is EXTREMELY GRAPHIC. It is highly  recommended that you do not view. It is posted here only to serve as an historical witness to the brutality of Sharia law – the barbarity of Islamist societies can not be denied. For  those who prefer not to view it, a full textual summary can be found here. The "crime": converting to Christianity and refusing to renounce it. By Raymond Ibrahim, Gatestone Institute, June 4, 2012 Liberal talk show host Tawfiq Okasha recently appeared on "Egypt Today," airing a video of Muslims slicing off a young man's head off for the crime of apostasy -- in this instance, the crime of converting to Christianity and refusing to renounce it. A young man appears held down by masked men. His head is pulled back, with a knife to his throat. He does not struggle and appears resigned to his fate. Speaking in Arabic, the background speaker, or "narrator," chants a number of Muslim prayers and supplications, mostly condemning Christianity, which, because of the Trinity, is Then, to cries of "Allahu Akbar!"— Allah is greater!"—the masked man holding the knife to the apostate's throat begins to slice away, severing the head completely after approximately one minute of graphic knife-carving, as the victim drowns in blood. Finally, the severed head is held aloft to more Islamic slogans of victory. More. [Please "like" this article on Facebook and share with your contacts. Share buttons are at the top of the article.] Related Topics:  Censorship, Demonstrations, Entertainment / Media, Free Speech, Gender Relations, Government, Head Coverings / Dress, Honor Crime, Islamic Law (Shari'a), Leaving Islam, Marriage, Mosques / Imams  |  Marc J. Finkreceive the latest by email: subscribe to the free islamist watch mailing listThis text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete and accurate information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL.

Follow The Money--Dems Get Most Of The Campaign Contributions From---Islamists! Why?

Islamist Campaign Donors Overwhelmingly Back Democrats

Key figures at six of America’s most prominent Islamist organizations have favored Democrats over Republicans by a ratio of 12 to 1 since the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

by
DAVID J. RUSIN

Bio

October 31, 2014 - 12:01 am

Share on facebookShare on twitterShare on emailShare on pinterest_shareMore Sharing Services23

 

An analysis of federal campaign contributions finds that key figures at six of America’s most prominent Islamist organizations have favored Democrats over Republicans by a ratio of 12 to 1 since the 9/11 terrorist attacks. This trend began with multiple donations to Cynthia McKinney dated September 11, 2001, reversing a previous pattern that had seen Islamist officials spend slightly more on Republicans. Their preference for Democrats has solidified during the past 13 years and shows no signs of waning. What does this say about the politicians who benefit from Islamist largesse?

Islamist Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum, recently launched Islamist Money in Politics (IMIP), to monitor Islamists’ influence in the halls of power, inform the public about which politicians accept their tainted money, and hold accountable those who do. IMIP’s inaugural data release focuses on the national organizations of six Islamist entities— the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), Muslim Alliance in North America (MANA), Muslim American Society (MAS), and Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) — as well as CAIR’s many local chapters.

Names of important personnel, both current and former, were mined from the groups’ Internal Revenue Service filings and/or website listings, some going back more than a decade. The Federal Election Commission’s online database, which spans the late 1990s to the present, was then searched for donations to candidates, joint fundraising committees, relevant political action committees, and parties. IMIP employed biographical information to select only those contributions that could reasonably be attributed to the individuals of interest, rejecting ones likely to have been made by unrelated persons who share their names. See IMIP’s description of methodology for details and a discussion of the challenges.

As of now, the IMIP database tabulates nearly $700,000 in donations. Surely many more people and contributions remain to be added, but the data already constitute a large and representative sample that is sufficient for an initial pass at quantifying Islamists’ political affinities.

First, who contributes? Major donors tend to be board members rather than staffers. While many of the biggest contributors maintain relatively low public profiles, several are quite familiar. With outlays totaling $56,800, the most generous funder of politicians in IMIP’s database is Kenny Gamble, who goes by Luqman Abdul Haqq in his position on MANA’s governing body. An Islamist-aligned music and real estate mogul, Gamble is tied to the “Islamic paramilitary boys group” known as the Jawala Scouts and has been accused of working to build a self-contained “black Muslim enclave” in South Philadelphia. Also among the top 20 donors are CAIR executive director Nihad Awad, who has contributed under numerous variants of his name; former MAS president and current CAIR national board member Esam Omeish, who resigned from a Virginia immigration panel in 2007 after a video emerged of his speech touting the Palestinians’ embrace of “the jihad way” against Israel; and Zead Ramadan, the CAIR-New York board member who unsuccessfully ran for New York City Council in 2013.

With regard to recipients, the Democratic Party dominates. Leading the all-time list by vacuuming up close to one in every five dollars is Keith Ellison, the Islamist-leaning Muslim congressman from Minnesota who has a long history of collaborating with Islamist groups. Barack Obama, whose policies have been popular with Islamists, comes in second when direct contributions are combined with those sent to joint fundraising committees associated with his 2008 and 2012presidential campaigns. Third is Cynthia McKinney, the far-left former congresswoman from Georgia who peddled conspiracy theories and harsh critiques of U.S. foreign policy in the wake of 9/11; that she ranks so high despite the fact that most donations to her were collected during a one-year, post-9/11 window testifies to Islamists’ endorsement of her adversarial stance at the outset of America’s military response to Islamic terrorism. Fourth is Indiana’s André Carson, thesecond Muslim congressman to be elected; he told attendees at the 2012 ICNA–MAS convention that educators should model American schools after Islamic madrassas. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee rounds out the top five.

However, Democrats did not always prevail in the battle for Islamist cash. According to IMIP’s current data, Republicansactually received about 15 percent more Islamist-related contributions than Democrats did over the several years prior to 9/11. The Islamists’ favorite Republican of that period was Californian Tom Campbell, who contested a Senate seat in 2000. Campbell’s warm relationships with radical Muslims, such as terror operative Sami al-Arian, are thoroughly documented. Further, although IMIP features only a handful of entries from the 2000 presidential race, there is more money for George W. Bush than for Al Gore. This is not a surprise because Bush won the backing of the American Muslim Political Coordination Committee, an Islamist-heavy coalition.

But 9/11 and the subsequent Republican-led war on terror changed everything, even the destination of Islamist money. IMIP detects the first hints of a sharp left turn in the form of donations to Cynthia McKinney from three Islamist figures, including Nihad Awad, on September 11, 2001 — undoubtedly before the Bush administration had a chance to do much to upset the self-proclaimed guardians of the Muslim community in the post-9/11 era. IMIP records no other contribution to any recipient within two weeks in either direction, making the date seem less coincidental. Many more donations would be routed to McKinney from Islamists’ wallets in the months to come. Over the 365 days that followed the 9/11 attacks, IMIP measures an 8-to-1 ratio of contributions in the Democrats’ favor. A majority of them flowed to McKinney.

This pro-Democratic tilt has continued to the present. Based on contributions now cataloged by IMIP, Democrats outraised Republicans by a factor of 4.8 from 2003 to 2006, 29.7 from 2007 to 2010, and 17.5 from 2011 to 2014. The two most recent blocks reflect the impact of Islamist enthusiasm for Obama’s White House runs. As for the last three Republicanpresidential nominees, IMIP has located no contributions to Bush’s 2004 campaign, none to John McCain’s in 2008, and just one to Mitt Romney for $1,000 ahead of the 2012 primaries. Overall, the people in IMIP’s sample have donated 12 times as much to Democrats since September 11, 2001.

Islamist-affiliated individuals presumably support Democrats for the same reason that other subsets of Americans throw their weight behind certain politicians and parties: they expect Democrats to support them, at least at the level of providing the best political landscape in which to pursue their objectives. But as Daniel Pipes points out, we are not dealing here with professionals attempting to “tweak the tax code” to their advantage or even a minority population striving to secure equal rights. Islamists intend to alter the fabric of the liberal democratic system, a goal characterized by the Muslim Brotherhood, in a memorandum outlining its North American strategy, as “a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within,” culminating in Islamic rule.

Each of the six groups analyzed by IMIP is connected to the Brotherhood or its dream of institutionalizing Shari‘a. ICNA, ISNA, and the Islamic Association for Palestine, CAIR’s immediate predecessor, appear on the Brotherhood’s 1991 “list of our organizations and the organizations of our friends.” Both CAIR and ISNA were designated as unindicted co-conspirators in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation, a charity convicted of bankrolling Hamas, the Brotherhood’s Palestinian wing. Prosecutors classified CAIR among the “individuals/entities who are and/or were members of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee and/or its organizations”; they named ISNA as one of the “individuals/entities who are and/or were members of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood.” Furthermore, according to a brief filed by the government in a separate case, “MAS was founded as the overt arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in America.” Two Muslim Brothers alsoformed MPAC. Finally, MANA is helmed by radical cleric Siraj Wahhaj, who has spoken of replacing the Constitutionwith Islamic law.

Because the various board members and staffers researched by IMIP have participated in defining and executing the ideological agendas of the above groups, their campaign contributions are a matter of concern. This is not to suggest that the dollar amounts uncovered thus far — quite small by American standards — are tipping any elections. But even in modest quantities, money can purchase political access and open the doors of influence. When it comes to the agents of radical Islam, these doors must be barred shut.

No remotely mainstream politician would knowingly accept, let alone get away with accepting, contributions from a leader of a white supremacist organization. Why should it be any different for a leader of an Islamic supremacist organization? Those who represent the American people or seek to do so, especially in federal offices that oversee counterterrorism and foreign affairs, need to begin saying no to funds from these problematic sources. Islamist Money in Politics is a first step in nudging candidates and parties toward the right decision — and, where that fails, empowering voters to make informed choices of their own about politicians who wittingly or unwittingly legitimize, enable, or embolden America’s enemies.