FROM the get-go, it must be shouted from the (virtual) rooftops: There are two sides to the same Islamic coin that aid and abet the imposition of Sharia Law in America. The west in toto.
Sharia is more than stoning or amputating limbs or public beheading – Sharia is a spirit also. Its spirit is against current civilization. Sharia instigates its believers to destroy secular democracy (from within!) and establish so called Islamic State because law is pointless without a state. True that secular democracy is not problem-free but that is the best we have and it is evolving; but even a cursory look into the laws shows that problem with Sharia law is far deeper.
I want to alert the readers about the confusion the defenders of Sharia law create. They hide the violent laws behind sugar-coated sweet words by sidetracking critical issues and hiding facts such as….
ON the one hand, countless non-Muslims tend to swallow the lies of Muhammadans, that is, hook, line, and sinker. It is as if their utterances are akin to gospel. In other words, even though they make sh*t up as they go along (in furtherance of political Islam via the west’s submission to pagan moon-god Allah), most “infidels” are too terrified to stop them in their tracks. On the other, said lying is very much supported by Islamic Sharia Law! Yes, taqiyya, kitman, tawriya, muruna – take your pick. What an unholy mess….
OF course, regular readers are familiar with this topic, and its prominence can be found throughout this site. Most inherently, its barbaric and filthy basis is demonstrated here, here, here, here, here, here, and so on and so forth.
BUT much to America’s peril, their tactical maneuverings have yet to be taken seriously by patriots. On a continuous basis, Islamists insidiously – albeit, seemingly, innocuously – impose Sharia Law on America. Faits accomplis. Mind you, without the left’s back-benching – as accomplices within attendant power centers – Sharia Law’s inroads would be negligible.
AND while said boring within encompasses many entry points, the main targets are inside cultural and educational arenas. Simply, they are the most direct access points to capturing the kiddies, yes, the future of every nation. Hell, even American dolls are in their clutches! Indeed, hijabs are all the rage. Super-heroes alike.
RESULTANT, it is not for nothing that public/charter schools (along with campuses across the nation, mostly, via da’wah proselytizing efforts through the very powerful MSA, the Saudi-backed Muslim Student Association) are key and core. And it is under COMMON CORE’s curriculum that much of the indoctrination is cemented.
THAT said, specifically, it is the hijab (in general, the symbolism of Islamic garb) which bears the greatest scrutiny, even though, by all appearances, they are little more than schmatta-like pieces of apparel. Not so fast.
ENTER, the “hijabi war” on America!
FIRST and foremost, let’s back-track to the stated thesis; the ubiquitous lies told by Muhammadans. As such, a biggie revolves around the so-called “mandatory” wearing of the hijab. Not at all.
ACCORDING to Ibrahim B. Syed, Ph.D., President of the Islamic Research Foundation International, Inc. – The Quran Does Not Mandate Hijab.
We need to distinguish between the tenets of Islam and cultural customs. My intention is to engage in a scholarly discussion and not to ridicule those who oppose my points of view.
Islam does not mandate or prescribe any specific type of dress. Thus, as long as the dresses are not revealing or too tight, cultural variations can add tremendous diversity in the fulfillment of this guideline.
Hijab, a terminology that is NOT to be found in the Qur’an or Hadith in the context of dress code. (Source:http://www.globalwebpost.com/farooqm/writings/islamic/scarf_revel.htm)
A word-for-word translation of the Qur’anic text (Surah 24: 31) will prove my point:
– wal yazribna – and should draw
– bi-khumurihinna – with their head covering
– alaa juyuubihinna – across their bosoms
A Muslim scholar wrote “Surely a female dress covers all of the body except the hair and the face. The verse forcefully commands that these beautiful parts and features should not be displayed to the stranger, but only to the husband and very close relatives.” (Source: Dr. Bashir Ahmad, “Veil/Hijab Becoming a Symbol of American Muslims” in Pakistan Link, August 26, 2005)
The words “except the hair” are the author’s own subjective interpretation which he cannot provide proof as these are the Qur’anic words.
The scholars who read ‘The Message of the Qur’an’ ( published by Dar al-Andalus Ltd, 3 Library Ramp, Gibraltar, 1980) wrote, “Muhammad Asad’s translation and commentary is widely considered the best in the English language, renowned for its intellectual insight and frequent reference to classical commentaries such as Zamakshari. Asad’s interpretation to be the most bona-fide and coherent, it is scrupulously referenced so he does not give his opinion rather quotes some of the greatest scholars after the manifestation of the Qur’an such as Zamakshari, Ibn Kathir as well as Qurtubi to name a few.”
Some Muslim scholars are under the impression that the Arab women used to roam around with their head and bosoms totally uncovered; and the Qur’anic verse (24:31) instructed them to pull their ‘khimar’ from their back onto their exposed bosoms. This assumption is correct as it is based on historical facts.
A Qur’anic scholar should know “Asbab Un-Nuzool” causes or reasons for revelations
(of the Qur’aic verses).
On Surah, An-Nur 24: 31, Muhammad Asad gives the translation “… let them draw their head-coverings over their bosoms.” In his commentary No. 38, he wrote, “The noun khimar (of which Khumur is the plural) denotes the head-covering customarily used by Arabian women before and after the advent of Islam. According to most of the classical commentators, it was worn in pre-Islamic times more or less as an ornament and was let down loosely over the wearer’s back; and since, in accordance with the fashion prevalent at the time, the upper part of a woman’s tunic had a wide opening in the front, her breasts were left bare. Hence the injunction to cover the bosom by means of a khimar (a term familiar to the contemporaries of the Prophet) does not necessarily relate to the use of a khimar as such but is, rather, meant to make it clear that a woman’s breasts are not included in the concept of “what may decently be apparent” of her body and should not, therefore, be displayed.”
The word khumur (singular, khimar), is generally understood to be a head-covering worn by both male and female Arabs at the time of the Prophet. Some Muslims had discussions about whether or not it is permissible to wipe over a head-covering when making ablution for prayer refer to the Prophet wiping over his khimar. (Source: http://www.brandeis.edu/projects/fse/Pages/veilinglink1.html)
“When the pre-Islamic Arabs went to battle, Arab women seeing the men off to war would bare their breasts to encourage them to fight; or they would do so at the battle itself, as in the case of the Makkan women, led by Hind at the Battle of Uhud…….While modesty is a religious prescription, the wearing of a veil is not a religious requirement of Islam, but a matter of cultural milieu.” (Cyril Glasse: The Concise Encyclopedia of Islam. Harper and Row Publishers, New York, N.Y., 1989, p. 156 and p. 413).
My main contention is that covering of hair for a woman is not mandatory as written by many scholars including Shaykh Zaki Badawi. Dr. Zaki Badawi (head of the Muslim Council in London, England and the Chairman of the Council of the Mosques and Imams) wrote, “The hijab veil (which covers all of a Muslim woman’s hair) is also not obligatory” (Source: http://www.mostmerciful.com/Hijab.htm)
Parents have problems in some Gulf countries where the education ministry, the teachers’ union and the students’ union had all fallen under Islamist control. One mother described what happened when she moved her 11-year-old daughter to a new school: “After about three months she said: ‘Mummy, I want to wear hijab’.” The mother, thinking she was too young for hijab, asked her why. A teacher had said the girl’s hair would be burnt on Judgment Day if she did not wear it.
Years of research on hijab (head cover) has convinced me to make a challenge. The challenge is for any one ( Muslim or non-Muslim) to prove that the Qur’an mandates the women to cover their hair.
WELL, that should settle that – or so one would think. Alas, this is not the case in present-day America, nor in countless western countries. Nearing the precipice….
IN this respect, how many (authoritative) legs do Muhammadans have to stand on, when even accepted Islamic scholars admit: The Quran does not mandate that women wear the hijab, never mind the rest of their costume-like (read: niqab and burqa) get-ups! Huh and duh?
NOT only that, when living in Judeo-Christian founded America, since when does Sharia Law get a publicly-backed voice? Intrinsically, what about the rules and regs already in place – those which apply to everyone – when it comes to this or that sport or the like? By extrapolation, who anointed Muhammadans to be above all the rules?
The firestorm over a policy requiring student-athletes to file for a waivers to wear religious garments during school sports continues to grow.
School and elected officials as well as community members stood alongside sophomore Nasihah Thompson-King Friday to call on the Pennsylvania Interscholastic Athletic Association to change its policy that requires students to request permission to alter athletic uniforms for religious reasons.
“Change is coming and it’s coming rapidly,” Thompson-King said at a press conference at Mastery Charter School Shoemaker Campus in West Philadelphia.
Last week during a high school basketball game, a PIAA referee barred Thompson-King from taking the court while wearing her hijab, which the 16-year-old wears as part of her Islamic faith, because she did not have an approved waiver from the state agency.
Thompson-King declined to remove the headscarf and remained on the bench.
Left wing State Rep. Vanessa Lowery Brown (D-190) said requiring religious waivers for students to play in religious garments was a tragedy. “Whatever your religious background is, you should not have to ask for a waiver to be able to worship in the way that you worship,” Brown said. “Some people worship on Sunday, some people worship on Saturday, some people worship everyday, and sometimes their attire reflects the way that they worship.”
Another Left Wing State Sen. Sharif Street (D-3) said he will explore legislative remedies in Harrisburg to mandate the PIAA to alter its policy unless the agency acts. He characterized the PIAA as placing “undue burdens” on religious communities. “This is plan wrong,” he said.
KNOW this: Islamists (and their leftist counterparts) would never fight for the right of Christians and Jews to circumvent the rules, whatever the circumstances. Moreover, their objections relate to signing a waiver, as if that simple rule should be ignored, but only when it comes to followers of Islam! Did you ever??
TO wit, the following must be asked and answered: Why are Islamists fighting so hard to insert (as demonstrably proven) bogus religious dictates (especially, relative to the hijab) into American/western spheres of influence?
SIMPLY put, as always, the overarching goal lies within imposing Islam via Sharia onto America – the lynch pin to western civilization. As such, for now, boring within is the preferred tactic. Believe it or not.
IPSO facto, by overturning rules to “accommodate” Muslims (be they on the job, within sports, or any other non-private sphere in between), sooner than later, civilizational A/K/A cultural Jihad will be a done deal. Hence, the stealth Jihad appendage.
LESSON LEARNED:
PATRIOTS, like it or not, are the guardians of the nation-state. Thus, whenever selective dispensation (relative to satisfying the “sensibilities and sensitivities” of Muhammadans) rears its head, there is no other option – other than to band together to stop the march of Sharia! The alternative is unthinkable. Besides, the powers that be have no intention of protecting American values. In fact, some actively come to the rescue of Muhammadans, while others turn deaf, dumb, and blind.
SO, where do you stand?
{re-blogged at RightWingConservativeNewsBlog.com}
{re-blogged at TheHomelandSecurityNetwork} click “Archives” dated March 1, 2018 to read
{re-blogged at ConservativeFiringLine}
{MEMO: FB’s censors are limiting the sharing of Adina Kutnicki: A Zionist & Conservative Blog! Indeed, the following message from FB’s censors is crystal clear:
MESSAGE FAILED
- This message contains content that has been blocked by our security systems.
- If you think you’re seeing this by mistake, please let us know. Yes, additional “proof-in-the pudding” as to why “BANNED: How Facebook Enables Militant Islamic Jihad” had to be written!}
Adina Kutnicki 