In this she purposefully ignored the fact that ISNA, CAIR and the Muslims Students Union are all organizations founded by the Muslim Brotherhood.
She also blithely dismissed the dangers of Shari’ah, by suggesting that efforts to import Shari’ah only relate to matters of family disputes and inheritance rights. If that were so, no one would care about Shari’ah, likening its presence in the US to Jewish Halacha adjudication and Catholic Canon courts’ judging on the annulments of marriages.
It is precisely Shari’ah teaching about Jihad, the killing of apostates and Ridda blasphemy laws as well as the definition of Democracy as blasphemy that raises the most profound concern. These violations of our Bill of Rights, along with others, are what make Shari’ah incompatible with a representative free Democracy and our constitution, but these were not even hinted at in the lecture.
She attempted to define what constitutes Muslim racial and civil rights profiling, giving examples of harassment of Muslims “flying while brown.” Of course, Muslim racial profiling flies in the face of reason as she herself had acknowledged, because Islam represents a culture not a Race.
She went on to define Islamophobia as an irrational fear of Islam, as if it weren’t a real concern. It’s real enough to Hindus, Jews, Coptic Christians, Maronite Christians, Sudanese and Nigerian Christians etc. How is Islamophobia irrational, as we daily read about murderous attacks on innocent populations?
Just this past Feb 25th, 2014, fifty-nine children were hacked to death and burned in Nigeria. And what about Sudanese, Egyptian Lebanese, Syrian, Iraqi and Libyan Christians, all of which have suffered extreme oppression, from sporadic massacres to outright genocide?
Lecture number three was by a Muslim women’s lawyer, Fatina Abdrabboh Esq., experienced in Arab civil rights violations by Muslims against other Muslims, in the Arab Muslim community and out of that community. She, somewhat uncomfortably, spoke of the many violations within the community against women, without making the connection that the violations often appear to be a result of the conformity to Shari’ah Law within Muslim society.
Our fourth and final lecture was by Professor Ramzi Kassem, defender of prisoners’ rights in Guantanamo Bay and in other “black sites,” where jihadists are interred without due process, by renditions. He painted a picture of the US as a Stalinist state where the organs of internal security were violating every Muslim’s privacy rights by the recruiting of informers and fishing expeditions.
Professor Kassem decried the use of classified evidence that, if fully released to the defense counsel, would have identified intelligence assets, instead twice mentioning an unidentified Israeli agent as being the witness against a particular detainee. This, of course, was code for US investigations working at Israel’s direction. Needless to say, he did not mention that the majority of Gitmo detainees that have been released have gone right back to the battlefield as jihadists and terrorists. Many have subsequently died in these actions. So we were listening to a smooth, well mannered, handsome lawyer, who in fact is in the business of representing terrorists and duplicitously dealing in Taqiyya and Kitman.
In sum, the conference presenters described Islamic concepts of Justice in an almost Marxist model of oppressors and the oppressed. Because Muslim concepts of justice exist only under Shari’ah, satisfying their requirements would necessitate legalizing Shari’ah in America. We believe that the presenters were, therefore, at best engaged in Political Correctness, or at worst in Stealth Jihad in America.
Shari’ah Law and its compelling actions originate primarily from the Qur’an, with influence from other Islamic dogma and doctrine. Shari’ah is expected by Muslim authorities to be central to a Muslim’s existence. This BBC program is an example of da’wa-jihad.