Texas: Imam of sharia court refuses to back bill affirming American law

via Irving City Council backs state bill Muslims say targets them | Dallas Morning News.

IRVING — The intense national spotlight on Islam has shifted to Irving, where Mayor Beth Van Duyne has accused mosque leaders of creating separate laws for Muslims and the City Council voted Thursday to endorse a state bill that Muslims say targets their faith.

The dispute has made Van Duyne a hero among a fringe movement that believes Muslims — a tiny fraction of the U.S. population — are plotting to take over American culture and courts.

“It fuels anti-Islamic hysteria,” said Zia Sheikh, imam at the Islamic Center of Irving. “Her whole point was to rile up her supporters. … The problem is we become the whipping boys.”

The mayor stands by her statements, including an interview with former Fox News host Glenn Beck last month, when she said Sheikh and other imams were “bypassing American courts” by offering to mediate disputes among their worshippers according to an Islamic code called Shariah.

The mediation is advertised as voluntary, nonbinding and in harmony with the law.

But it has led Van Duyne to back a bill by state Rep. Jeff Leach, R-Plano, that would forbid judges from using foreign law in their rulings.

While the bill does not mention religion, Leach has singled out the Islamic mediation panel as a “problem” it will solve. The wording is largely identical to that in a previous bill pitched by another lawmaker as a way to stop the influence of “large populations of Middle Easterners.”

Muslims in hijabs, burqas and business suits packed City Hall on Thursday, voicing protests before the council endorsed the bill in a 5-4 vote.

“This bill does not reference Shariah, Islam or even religion. It has nothing to do with preventing any tribunal,” Van Duyne told the crowd. “Why anyone would feel this is hatred or bigotry is absolutely beyond me.”

The Islamic Tribunal, a panel of Dallas-area imams, offers to mediate disputes between Muslims for a fee.

Catholic dioceses and Jewish synagogues have run similar tribunals for centuries. But the Muslim version is portrayed on websites as the country’s first “Shariah court.”

“This is how it starts,” a Breitbart.com writer warned, conflating the service with “vicious, misogynistic, and brutal” systems in other countries.

While the tribunal is headquartered in Dallas, blog posts around the country pegged its home as Irving: the purported ground zero in a Muslim takeover of the U.S. legal system.

Irving’s perceived link went viral with a February Facebook post in which Van Duyne vowed to contact state legislators and “fight with every fiber of my being” if the group was violating basic rights.

She had not spoken to any of the tribunal’s organizers at the time, nor before her half-hour interview on Beck’s Internet show.

“Equal treatment under the law doesn’t seem to exist,” Van Duyne told Beck. “I think you need to put your foot down and say this is America, we have laws here already. If you want to consult, if you want to arbitrate, that is well within our law. … I’ve got no problem with it. But setting up a separate court, setting up separate law is not anything — .”

Beck cut her off at that point: “This is an actual court?”

“Correct,” Van Duyne said.

Van Duyne later told The Dallas Morning News she based her comments on the Islamic Tribunal’s website, which referenced religious courts in Islamic history and called the imams “judges,” but clearly advertised itself as “a mediation and nonbinding arbitration firm.”

The mayor’s stand against the tribunal made her a celebrity in online circles. Her Facebook page filled with praise and links to headlines like “Texas Mayor Shuts Down ‘Shariah Court’ in Heroic Way.”

Worried residents flooded City Hall with calls.

“I was responding to rumors about a Shariah court in Irving,” Van Duyne said. “My response was to answer questions brought up by a number of my constituents.”

The mayor finally met Muslim leaders late last month. Van Duyne brought Texas House members Rodney Anderson, R-Grand Prairie, and Matt Rinaldi, R-Irving, with her.

The mayor said Sheikh asked for an apology and retraction of her Facebook post. Sheikh said he simply “asked her to clarify a statement … which seemed very Islamophobic.”

“She flat-out refused,” he said. “She said, ‘My statement wasn’t inflammatory in any way, shape or form.’”

Rinaldi then asked the imam to support American Laws for American Courts.

“He said, ‘If you support this bill, it will ease a lot of tensions [and assure people] you are not here to change the system. You’re not here to change the constitution,’” Sheikh said.

But it was the imam’s turn to refuse. “We don’t care about the bill,” Sheikh said. “It’s not going to affect us in any way, shape or form. The bottom line is the foundation of this bill is anti-Islamic.”


Previous posts on one of the sharia courts in Texas here, and below watch two of the sharia court judges discuss their desire to apply sharia amputations in America:

Go here for a Call to Action for those living in Texas

12 thoughts on “Texas: Imam of sharia court refuses to back bill affirming American law

  1. I reckon anti-islamic means pro-American; if they can’t understand that and assimilate to the American laws; then to hell with them and they can ride out on the camel they rode in on

  2. I’m getting sick and tired of these damn muzzies acting as some of them do. On these muzzies who don’t go along with U S laws, we need to take their shariah and shove it where the sun don’t shine and then dispose of them. Time to bring back the old days and start playing cowboys and muzzies.

  3. Islamist always feel that they are offend that they are above the Law and should be compensated by everyone who does not believe in their Islamic Male dominated ideology of death and enslavement.

    If these Muslim’s are so disgruntled, so distressed, so tyrannized by their depraved Islamic Male Dominated countries??

    Why the overt haste to come to our civilized countries in order to destroy our culture(s), our ethnic heritage, our religion(s), and our very way of life that we all hold so dear??

    • drdias–becaus their goal is to take over every country they immigrate to. That’s what it’s all about’ Most Americans refuse to believe it! Shame.

  4. Because they can’t stand the shit holes where they come from. Come and ruin our society, our culture and poison our minds but liberals keep helping them sell that evil. Go back….I don’t want your country and I won’t give you mine

  5. All anyone has to do is take a close look at what Europe looks like today and what it looked like 3 decades ago before the Muslims were invited in. The no-go-zones didn’t happen over night. The populations in all European countries have totally lost their right to free speech if they dare to complain they are called bigots can be taken to court fined you name it. I don’t know how the refugees from these war torn countries can ever be stopped from being allowed to immigrate to the US but they need to be helped in their own countries or more help given to the refugee camps where they are living. We can’t take in the whole planet every time a war breaks out somewhere or the US population will be the one looking for a country to escape too.

  6. Here’s the meat of sharia courts. When a woman wants a divorce, her family insists she follows sharia law, or they will not recognize the divorce. So she goes in and pays to meet with this person, who asks her why she wants a divorce. No matter what this woman says, if her husband opposes the divorce she’s got a real problem. No matter the reason, she’s told to back to her husband and try to work things out. She’s told to be a better wife and then he won’t beat her, or cheat on her, or whatever. It’s always her fault that the marriage is failing. It’s never her husband’s fault. So obediently, and because she’s given no other option she returns home. No matter how many times she returns to court, she’s told she hasn’t tried hard enough. On and on it goes. No matter how dangerous things may get at home, she’s trapped without a sharia divorce. No one in the family will support her and because our court system isn’t recognized by these people if she tries to leave, her husband can honor kill her and even her parents will go along with it.
    We have states that do allow sharia courts, but unfortunately no one understands the ramifications.

  7. ALAC makes it illegal to base judicial decisions on a body of law that conflicts with the Constitution and is deleterious to the rights and privileges of citizens. It does not mention Islam or Shari’ah. The way Muslims react to it speaks volumes.

    Go to Amazon and get a copy of Reliance Of The Traveller. Read Books o, m & n. A divorced Muslima gets no support or alimony beyond the three month iddah. If she remarries, she loses child custody. A Muslim can compel his pre-pubescent virgin daughter to marry. He can kill her without retaliation. The indemnity for accidental death of a Muslima is half that paid for a Muslim. She inherits half as much as he does. Apostates do not inherit if a parent dies intestate.

  8. Pingback: Texas: Uncle of infamous Clock Boy bomb-hoaxer running for Irving city council |

If sharia law continues spreading, you'll have less and less freedom of speech - so speak while you can!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s