Newt Gingrich Misses the Mark on Islam & Shari'ah
Newt Gingrich Misses the Mark on Islam & Shari'ah News Gingrich swerves dangerously close to the truth, but veers away at the last moment. Thanks and a tip of the hat to Pulp Ark, who posted a link on Facebook. I viewed the video and read the accompanying article at Huffington Post.
The amateur transcript which follows will not be perfect, but should be close enough. I have highlighted some major points which I will consider below. Q: Now you mentioned that the founding fathers have said that we are all created equal as men and also you have unquestionable support for Israel, obviously. My question is on foreign policy--you've mentioned through the campaign theat the Palestinian people were invented people. What do you suggest should happen to them, should they become Israeli citizens, or should they just... what do you suggest should happen to them? The other question is: I know this is South Carolina, I am from South Carolina, but ...is 60% Evangelical Christians and with a strong support for Israel, but also my question is, you know, the governor of the state is, you know, of Indian heritage, her parents came from India, and we have a Catholic running for President, a Mormon running for President; would you, as Newt Gingrich support a Muslim American running for President, would you endorse, at one point in the future, in American history, that a Muslim American could possibly be running for President given that we had a woman running for President in Hillary Cl8inton and we had a Jewish American in Joe Lieberman running for Vice President, thank you very much? A: I think it would depend entirely on whether they would commit in public to give up Shari'ah. I am totally opposed to Shari'ah law, being accepted by any court in the United States, in fact I favor a federal law that preempts it and says Shari'ah law will not be used in any court in the United States and this is a very fundamental question. I mean, people who are truly moderate ...we have a friend in Arizona who served in the U.S. Navy, who is a medical doctor, who is Muslim but he is a totally modern person trying to find ways to bring Islam into modernity. When you realize it was said last night that a rising Islamization of Turkey has been accompanied by a 1400% increase in women being killed; when you look at the actual implementation of Shari'ah in places like Iran, when you look at churches being burned in Nigeria and in Egypt...the decline of Christians in Iraq from 1,200,000 when Americans arrived to about 500,000 today; It depends entirely on the person: If they are a modern person integrated into the modern world, and they are prepared to recognize all religions, that's one thing, on the other hand, if they are the Saudis, who demand that we respect them while they refuse to allow either a Jew or a Christian to worship in Saudi Arabia, that's something different. and I think we need a President who stands up, tells the truth and rejects any kind of effort to impose on us a sense of guilt because we believe in our religion and we're prepared to tell the truth and I am totally opposed to the State Department meeting a week ago with the Organization of Islamic Countries who are seeking to censor any comment about Islam because I think it is a fundamental violation of our right of free speech as Americans. But within that framework, a truly modern person who happened to worship Allah would not be a threat. A person who belonged to any kind of belief in Shari'ah, any kind of effort to impose that on the rest of us, would be a mortal threat. Now, the Palestinian question is a good one. I think if HAMAS and the PLO would recognize Israel's right to exist, and if they meant it; if they would hunt down and stop the terrorists and the bombings, I would favor peace with the Palestinians; I would favor an independent state, I would an ability of them to become prosperous and live in safety and have the right of property rights. But, in Novemeber, eleven missiles were fired into Israel; that's not a peace process, that's war, and I think this idea... and HAMAS's official position is the extinction of Israel...we don't have negotiations with somebody who says lets sit down and negotiate while I figure out how to wipe you out. and I think that we have tolerated for too long terrorist activities disguised as diplomatic behavior, and i think the Palestinian people should throw out the folks .who want to destroy Israel and should say "Ok, we accept Israel's right to exist, if Israel will accept our right to be prosperous, have the rule ... of our property... and candidly, that means giving up the 'right of return', and the reason I talk about it that way is no natural right of return. Greeks have no right to return to Turkey, East Germans have no right to return to Poland, Poles have no right to return to Russia, and we;ve had all sorts of changes in territorial boundaries in the last 200 years, and the only place where it's propped up is against the state of Israel and the purpose of propping it up is to destroy Israel and we are to say 'fine, that's over; there is no right of return, now lets negotiate the future. '.
give up Shari'ah
Including that phrase in a conditional clause is either a token of irony or ignorance. I am not sure which applies in this case. Abandonment of Shari'ah is an act of apostasy, one of twenty such acts listed in Reliance of the Traveller, Book O8.7.
-14- to deny the obligatory character of something which by the consensus of Muslims (ijma`, def: B7) is part of Islam, when it is well known as such, like the prayer (salat) or even one rak'a from one of the five obligatory prayers, if there is no excuse (def: u2.4);
-19- to be sarcastic about any ruling of the Sacred Law;
Allah's permissions, prohibitions 7 imperatives, expressed in the Qur'an, are the primary source of Shari'ah.
Only Allah has the right to rule
truly moderate
That phrase defines a hypocrite [47:20], not a believer. Believers are only those who engage in jihad, killing others and being killed fighting in Allah's cause [9:111].
Newt appears to imply that he would endorse the candidacy of Dr. Zuhdi Jasser if he seeks high office. I find Dr. Jasser to be an exemplar of cognitive dissonance because, while professing to be Muslim, he asserts that Islam can be modernized or reformed; that it is compatible with our Constitution & Republic, which it clearly is not. You will not catch me knowingly voting for a Muslim, including Dr. Jasser!
bring Islam into modernity
Dr. Jasser might as well try to fly by jumping off his roof and flapping his arms like wings. Islam is perfected and immutable.
depends entirely on the person
Is the person a Muslim in name only, or is he a zealous Muslim concealing what he believes to avoid offending potential voters? In one of his books, President Obama said that the would "side with the Muslims" if things turned ugly. Who did he side with in the "Arab spring"? Who is he siding with on the issue of censoring critic8ism of Islam? Is he exemplifying his belief or is he practicing al-Taqiyya?
[...](unless you indeed fear a danger from them) meaning, except those believers who in some areas or times fear for their safety from the disbelievers. In this case, such believers are allowed to show friendship to the disbelievers outwardly, but never inwardly. For instance, Al-Bukhari recorded that Abu Ad-Darda' said, "We smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them.'' Al-Bukhari said that Al-Hasan said, "The Tuqyah is allowed until the Day of Resurrection.'' [...]
A Muslim's oath of office can not be trusted. 66:2 is in the context of marital disputes and 9:1 is in the context of breaking the hudna with Mecca to facilitate conquest. But the hadith collected by Muslim shows us that Muslims have a break your oath free card from Moe. This dispensation vitiates a Muslim's oath.
Abu Huraira reported: A person sat late in the night with Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him), and then came to his family and found that his children had gone to sleep. His wife brought food for him. but he took an oath that he would not eat because of his children (having gone to sleep without food) He then gave precedence (of breaking the vow and then expiating it) and ate the food He then came to Allah s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and made mention of that to him, whereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace he upon him) said: He who took an oath and (later on) found something better than that should do that, and expiate for (breaking) his vow.
recognize all religions
Islam is declared to be perfect, final & superior. Allah declares Jews & Christians to be the "worst of living creatures" Allah, his angels and Muslims curse Jews & Christians. The religion with Allah is Islam, and nothing else will be accepted. A Muslim who tolerates other religions is either ignorant, deceptive or an apostate.
a President who tells the truth
Yes, we need a truthful President. First, we must find truthful candidates who will acknowledge the fact that Islam is the existential & irreconcilable enemy, with whom negotiation is fruitless. It is Islam, not Wahhabism, 'radicalism' or 'extremism'. Islam's perpetual enmity and aggression are functions of the core doctrines of Islam, having nothing to do with nationality or sect.
modern Muslim
There is no moderate Islam. There is no modern Islam. Islam is what Moe preached and practiced 1400 years ago, not what you wish it to be. Islam is defined by the Qur'an, which is immutable because the text forbids editing and Moe's sunnah, which does not change because he is dead.
Shari'ah
If Allah or Moe said it or did it, it is Shari'ah. A Muslim who abjures Shari'ah signs his death warrant for believers to execute. Because Shari'ah is primarily derived from the Qur'an, it is impossible to abjure it without abjuring Islam.
mortal threat
If one is a Muslim believer, one is a mortal threat to every person who is not a Muslim. Exactly what part of Islam do you not comprehend?
if HAMAS would recognize Israel
If pigs grew wings they could fly. HAMAS is Islam. Allah promised Muslims that they would conquer the world, irreversibly. Allah's judgment is final, there is none to put it back, but Israel recovered some of her territory stolen by Muslims in 638 & 1948. That recovery of territory is the ultimate blasphemy; empirical proof of the fact that Allah is an impotent idol. If you expect Muslims to tolerate that, you need a brain transplant. It has not happened in 63 years, and it will never happen because it ain't possible.
throw out the folks
Brilliant idea, Newt, you found the solution! Expel the Muslims from Israel, including Judea & Samaria. But you must also push them back beyond rocket range.
at
12:28 AM
|
