CAIRing For Sharia

CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations) quickly filed suit in Oklahoma as 70% of Oklahoma voters agreed that Sharia Law should not be a basis for U.S. judicial decisions, as was the case in New Jersey earlier this year.

CAIR has bounded to the defense of all things even mildly perceived as some manner of affront to Islam.  CAIR’s agenda is and has been to “defend” and “explain” Islam as the religion of peace despite evidence to the contrary.  CAIR has deflected deeper questions about Islamist beliefs and its connections to those Islamist beliefs.  They have been able to do so based on the pursuit of situational circumstances limited to manageable specifics. 

CAIR’s ties to Hamas, The Muslim Brotherhood and a wide variety of U.S. based Islamist organizations are beyond question including CAIR’s status as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation case, the largest U.S. terror financing case to date.

CAIR may have engaged a bridge too far in challenging Oklahoma’s constitutional amendment banning the application of Sharia.  CAIR’s position is that Sharia is a “dynamic legal framework derived from scripture and analytical reasoning”.  This “dynamic legal framework”, was essentially frozen in the 10th century, deemed to have been ‘perfected’.  The “analytical reasoning” must, by Islamic definition and legal tradition, look back to that 10th century point of perfection.  “Analytical reasoning” occurs only within the preexisting framework of Islam and is limited to reasoning based on a unquestioned religious belief system.

CAIR has now positioned itself to defend Sharia in depth.  The short question is whether a 10th century interpretation of society, law and religion is defensible in the 21st century; in a country founded on Judea-Christian ethics?

Multiple marriages, spousal abuse, pedophilia, stoning, honor killing, legal opinion that assigns women half the value of a man.  A theology based in large measure on the behavior of the Prophet Mohammed who is considered to have led a life of near perfection as the only true prophet of God.  Mohammed’s early versus later life is bereft with contradictions, which life will CAIR defend as the foundation of Islam?  Will CAIR admit that the earlier, more peaceful, utterances of the Prophet were abrogated by later more violent and aggressive teachings?  Which Islam will CAIR defend?

Will CAIR defend the proposition that Islam is the final perfection of Judaism and Christianity, or the idea that this “dynamic legal framework”, authorizes subjugation, slavery and violent Jihad?  Ijtihad, which allows innovations in Islam, was cast aside nearly 1,000 years ago disabling reform in Islam based on changing circumstances.  Can that be effectively defended?

Can CAIR defend more “modern” interpretations of Islamic jurisprudence?   Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi is generally recognized as the leading intellectual force behind today’s Islamism and a critical part of The Muslim Brotherhood intellectual infrastructure. The Sheikh has some interesting things to say.  Sheikh Qaradawi supports suicide bombings, wife beating, punishment for female rape victims, random murder of Jews, female suicide bombers and terrorism.  The Holocaust was “divine punishment for the Jews” according to the Sheikh who hopes the next Holocaust will be at the hands of the “believers”.

Will CAIR defend the Sharia based mission statement of The Muslim Brotherhood exposed in the Holy Land trial;

The process of settlement is a ‘Civilization-Jihadist Process’ with all the word means. The Ikhwan (Brotherhood) must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim’s destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who chose to slack. But, would the slackers and the Mujahedeen be equal.”

As Islam and Sharia are unequivocally one must CAIR defend the entire scope of Islamic beliefs in their law suit?  More critically will the other side in the suit insist that they be held to a fully contextual defense? 

In reality this suit will never gather steam.  CAIR will realize that their suit has created an untenable position.  CAIR will slow roll the process until it fades away, take what propaganda benefits they can manufacture and go quietly.  While CAIR claims status as a “civil rights organization” this set of circumstances could expose them as ideologically Islamist and fully engaged in politically correct propaganda as their true mission. The absence of an aggressive pursuit of the Oklahoma law suit will tell us all we need to know!

  • Bill Hedges

    Well Landreaux

    You are bound and determined to open my mind up to new horizons. Is that good ? Feel like the weekly reader was handed out in grade school today. Instead of photos of ancient Egypt artifacts being covered by dam waters, there is boring this. Just kidding. May need a job from you if America sinks.

    Am on a high sold my stock yesterday for a nice capitalist profit, today would have been a loss instead. Timing and stock involved. Essential. Especially for risk takers like me.

    How to tie to article ? As a bug once said, “let it be”.

    I will buy a stock, sort of WET MY FEET. Not at record lows but near normal lows. If it drops or rises I get on the train and ride. Called COST AVERAGING. Can this be applied here ? Are they WETTING THEIR FEET ?

    In 3 trades I bought 4,000 shares of nichol stock. Not penny/cheap stock. A little higher price stock. Sharia Law has been introduced here for some time. Just a little. Now getting more serious. Still, ready to bail and cut loses if need be. BUT, possibility to profit BIG exist. That after all is my incentive. To make money on my money.

    Those espousing Sharia Law intend to win… In New York, Oklahoma, maybe Virginia. Doubt Texas.

    Do you know why there are so many dead Armadillos down south on the roads. When scared they jump. Stick the Sharia Law head up too high and a bus might take it off. Don’t mess with Texas. You hear…

  • Landreaux


    New Horizons are usually good, when approached with honest intention.

    Last paragraph says it all!

  • Landreaux

    ( –
    In February, the Figh Council of North America, a group of Islamic scholars, issued a fatwa, or religious ruling, that full-body scanners violate Islamic law.
    “It is a violation of clear Islamic teaching that men or women be seen naked by other men and women,” the ruling states. “Islam highly emphasizes haya (modesty) and considers it part of the faith. The Qu’ran has commanded the believers, both men and women, to cover their private parts.”

    CAIR endorsed the fatwa, according to a Feb. 21 article in the Detroit Free Press.
    The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has issued a travel warning to Muslim airline passengers on U.S. aircraft in response to the Transportation Safety Administration’s “enhanced pat down” policy that went into effect in late October.

    CAIR said Muslims who object to full-body scans for religious reasons should know their rights if they are required to undergo a pat-down, including asking for the procedure to be done in a private place. In addition, CAIR offered a “special recommendation” for Muslim women who wear a hijab, telling them they should tell the TSA officer that they may be searched only around the head and neck.

    In the “special recommendations for Muslim women who wear hijab,” it states: “Before you are patted down, you should remind the TSA officer that they are only supposed to pat down the area in question, in this scenario, your head and neck. They SHOULD NOT subject you to a full-body or partial-body pat-down.”

  • Bill Hedges

    I heard the body scan might be STOPPED in good old trusting U.S.A.

    So, women must walk home to Mid East ???

    What women would not place a bomb around the head and neck area. Sounds reasonable to me.