Does the First Amendment Protect the Religious Duty of Jihad?

Source: The Tennessee Council 4 Political Justice

The First Amendment protects our freedom of religion and speech. Does our Constitution also protect preaching the duty of jihad to Muslims?

The certified English translation of codified Islamic sharia law is “Reliance of the Traveller, the Classic Manual of Sacred Islamic Law.” The compilation was authenticated by both the Fiqh Council of North America (FCNA) and Al Ahzar University in Cairo, the preeminent teaching center of sharia law.

Islamic sharia law says that both the greater and lesser jihad are mandatory for believers. Islamists call violent jihad the “lesser jihad” and the spiritual struggle the “greater jihad.” But according to the Reliance of the Traveller, Section o9.0 the discussion of “jihad” begins this way:

Jihad means to war against non-Muslims and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion…”

“Details concerning jihad are found in the accounts of the military expeditions of the Prophet…,including his own martial forays and those on which he dispatched others. o9.0

Sharia law imposes a communal obligation regarding this “lesser jihad” recounting that “[i]n the time of the Prophet jihad was a communal obligation after his emigration (hijra) to Medina.” (o9.1). Is the law’s emphasis on the violent jihad because it was Mohammed’s violent Medinian jihad (the offensive jihad), that helped spread Islam? Is it because every Muslim has a religious duty to convert “non-believers” either by persuasion or force?

If Mohammed is the perfect Muslim that all Muslims are to emulate and an imam in a mosque preaches jihad and a worshipper then commits jihad, is the imam’s speech protected religious speech or speech that incites violence which may not be protected by our constitution? For example:

former Islamic Center of Tennessee Imam Abdullah al Ansari directed his listeners (at 5:12), that “He [Allah] told us to fight the Jews and Christians. Fight them until they give jizya.  They give this protective tax from their hands and they are humiliated and subdued. If Islam, true Islam and true Muslims do not rule there will never be justice.” (almost word for word Koran 9:29; Reliance o9.8 – Objectives of Jihad p.602

Boston Imam Abdullah Faarooq exhorted the listening worshippers that “[y]ou must grab on to this rope, grab on to the typewriter, grab on to the shovel, grab on to the gun and the sword, dont be afraid to step out into this world and do your job.”

In 2009, the FBI estimated that “Imams preach jihad and extremism in 10 percent of the 2,000 mosques in the United States.” A 2011 random survey of 100 mosques by the Terrorism Research Initiative, found that 80% of the mosques preached jihad either through sermons and/or materials.

The California based Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America (AMJA) issues fatwas,(authoritative religious rulings that guide Muslims living in the West) on issues such as condoning death for apostates, marital rape and female genital mutilation.  AMJA also hosts an annual Imams training conference.

Regarding the instigation of offensive jihad in America, an AMJA fatwa translated from Arabic states that the Islamic community does not possess the strength to engage in offensive jihad at this time. With our current capabilities, we are aspiring towards defensive jihad, and to improve our position with regards to jurisprudence at this stage. But there is a different discussion for each situation. Allah Almighty knows best.

Memphis Imam Yasir Qadhi is a frequent speaker at the AMJA imams training conference. Shaykh Waleed Basyouni, the vice-president of Qadhi’s AlMaghrib Institute, is also on the AMJA fatwa committee.

In Incitement in the Mosques: Testing the Limits of Free Speech and Religious Liberty, University of Baltimore Law professor Kenneth Lasson explains that according to the U.S. Supreme Court’s Brandenberg case on free speech, “…the government could limit speech that is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action that is likely to incite or produce such action.”

He notes that the First Amendment does not protect what he calls “camouflaged incitement” – “…language that can be considered coded speech, guns for hire, inducement by simulation or supplying how-to plans are all suspect.” He suggests that clerics deliver sermons with the intent to “encourage action… Religion moves followers to act on their beliefs.”

Bill Warner’s “Statistical Islam” shows that 98% of the Hadith and roughly three-quarters of the Siras references are to jihad of the sword (the “lesser jihad”).

So, against the backdrop of violent jihad like 9-11, the Boston marathon bombings, the Chattanooga murders, the Fort Hood killing spree, the murder of Pvt. Andrew Long by Abdulhakim Mohammed, is it incitement to violence when imams read from the Quran, the Sira and Hadith, and claim that Mohammed is the example for all Muslims to follow? Or press believers to follow Islamic sharia law? So, how close in time does the violent jihad have to be to be considered “imminent”? And last but not least, should these imams be protected by the First Amendment if they preach the religious duty of the “lesser” jihad?

****

Law professor Kenneth Lasson gives a pragmatic answer: “[t]errorism creates a kind of permanent imminence. When messages advocating murderous violence are heard by large numbers of people, the government should have the authority to stop the speakers. There is no democratic value in protecting clerics who exhort their listeners to kill Jews and Americans wherever you can find them.” [END]



More on the misconception of a lesser and greater jihad…from Islamic sources:  Jihad: The Highest Peak of Islam

Jihad an-Nafs

Some have attempted to justify their stance on this concept with what is apparently intended as a daleel (Islamic evidence), and so have used a narration to justify this concept of Jihad an-Nafs or dealing with all the political and military problems we face by becoming introspective or looking inwardly as opposed to looking at the Ahkam Shari’ah and seeing what Allah (Subhanahu Wa ta’ala) has demanded from us.

So they use what they claim is a hadith, or saying of Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), “We have returned from the lesser Jihad to the greater Jihad, that is the struggle against the evil of oneself.” This is in fact a fabrication and is known as Mawdu’ (spurious). Hafidh al Iraqi and Ibn Hajar al Asqalani, who were hadith masters and muhaditheen, who memorised one hundred thousand hadith by Isnad and were qualified to scrutinise hadith and their authenticity, stated that this was not a saying of the Messenger of Allah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) but was in fact a statement that was made by someone in the later generation named Ibrahim ibn Abi Yabla. Hence, this is not considered an evidence in the Islamic Shari’ah.

To elaborate further, it is in contradiction with the subject matter of Jihad that has been elaborated in over a hundred ayat of the Qur’an that have come with the meaning of Jihad being Qitaal, which means to slay or to kill or to fight. This was how the Prophet (Sallallahu Sallallahu “>Alaihi Wasallam) and the Sahabah (ra) understood it. To give an example from the Seerah that was narrated by Ibn Majah with a source in Bukhari, woman came to the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) and asked “O Messenger of Allah! Is Jihad obliged upon the women?” To which he responded, “Yes, a Jihad without Qitaal (fighting), it is the Hajj and the Umrah!”

This clearly demonstrates that Jihad is Qitaal i.e. Jihad is undertaking the physical fighting and this is how it was understood by the woman and the Prophet (Sallallahu Sallallahu “>Alaihi Wasallam), as explained in the Prophet’s (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) answer i.e. Jihad in Islam means fighting.

It’s long but worth the time to see what Muslims teach each other.

Texas: Muslim refugee, former Army interpreter who joined ISIS gets 4 years

He should get an immediate deportation. But no mention of that in the article. So what happens when he is out in a year or two? How many jihadis will he recruit and train in prison? At the mosque after his release? Source: Man Who Admitted To Lying To FBI About ISIS Sentenced To 4 Years In Prison « CBS Dallas / Fort Worth

The Mesquite man who pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his travels to fight with ISIS has been sentenced to four years in prison and three years supervised release.

Bilal Abood told FBI agents he intended to travel to Iraq two years ago to visit family when his real intentions were to go to Syria and take up arms.

I.e., wage jihad…to create an Islamic state…governed by sharia law.

Abood never made the trip, because he was stopped before boarding a plane at Dallas Fort Worth International Airport. But weeks later he got on a plane in Mexico City, traveled to Syria, then Turkey, and fought alongside the terrorist group ISIS. He later pledged his allegiance to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of the Islamic State.


From a previous post, this Muslim refugee was formerly an interpreter for the U.S. Army.

Abood pledged allegiance over social media to the leader of ISIS and forwarded propaganda from the terrorist network, prosecutors said. He also traveled to Syria, against the warning of the FBI, according to prosecutors.

He was stopped at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport and in San Antonio the first two times he tried to travel abroad but later crossed into Mexico and traveled to Syria through Turkey to fight with the Free Syrian Army, authorities say.

When the FBI questioned him in March 2013 about his travel plans, he told agents he was going to Iraq to visit family.

A week later, FBI agents asked whether he was going to travel to Syria to fight. Abood denied that at first but later “admitted that his intent was to go to Syria to fight [Syrian President Bashar] Assad’s regime,” documents show.

But the FBI said Abood’s real reason for trying to travel abroad was to fight jihad and die a martyr.

In July 2014, the FBI searched Abood’s computers and found that he pledged an oath to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of Islamic State.

The search also found that he had been viewing Islamic State propaganda, such as beheadings, and had used his Twitter account to share information about al-Baghdadi. Prosecutors said the material could be used to recruit others to the ISIS cause.

Abood, who came to the U.S. in 2009 from his native Iraq, has no family in the U.S. but was living with his girlfriend in a Mesquite apartment since 2010, according to court testimony. He is a former security guard who’s been unemployed for the past two years.

He worked as an interpreter for the U.S. Army in Iraq during the Gulf war and took advantage of a benefit that’s offered for that work to emigrate to the U.S. and gain citizenship here.

Abood went through the U.S. Army’s basic training but did not end up a soldier for some reason. The government said his military training in weapons, communications and other areas made him a threat.

More from the link above:

The fact the 37-year-old made it out of the country, returned, and then wasn’t arrested until two years later is not what former Dallas FBI chief Danny Defenbaugh would expect. “I’m extremely concerned, but I’ve been concerned anyway,” he said. “You look to your southern border and it’s still completely porous, even after what 14 years with them knowing [what happened on] 9/11/2001.”

Defenbaugh says the crime of Making a False Statement to a Federal Agency is an old charge that is gaining new traction. “At one time it is very rarely used, now I think that they’re [federal officials] using it greatly because you get a lot of these individuals who are going to make false statements and think that they can get away with it.”

According to court documents, Abood is a naturalized U.S citizen who immigrated to the United States from Iraq in 2009.


This case covers several, but not all, key reasons why banning Muslims is imperative:

  • the military can’t vet them
  • the FBI can’t vet them
  • they will lie during the vetting process anyway (taqiyya)
  • the FBI can’t prevent them from going to wage jihad nor track them after they go and wage jihad
  • they use U.S. military training as jihad training
  • they probably cannot be trusted as interpreters
  • judges won’t deport them even after they are caught red-handed
  • they will recruit and convert others to wage jihad

Shall we go on? Are these they types of translators that Congress cut U.S. Veterans’ Benefits to Pay for Muslim Immigrant Visas?

PS: Ted Cruz’s state is a top destination for Muslim immigrants and refugees and the list of jihadis caught there is growing. Houston in particular.

Muslim Congressman (D – Caliphate) Bullies Muslims Who Don’t Want Terrorists in the US

Remember, there is no freedom in Islam, only submission. Keith Hakim X. Ellison (D – Caliphate) is doing his best to remind Muslims who prefer to keep Muslim terrorists out of the U.S. that should not think on their own. Ellison presides over the top Muslim terror recruiting hotspot in the U.S. and has done nothing but aid and abet the recruiters and those who have gone overseas to wage jihad. Yet he verbally bullies and attempts to intimidate Muslims who support Donald Trump.

 

ellison-thug

Source: Dem Rep Ellison: ‘Muslims Who Support Trump Is Like Chickens for Colonel Sanders’ – Breitbart

Tuesday at an event at the National Press Club, the first Muslim elected to the U.S. Congress Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) took aim at Muslims who support presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, likening them to “chickens for Colonel Sanders” of Kentucky Fried Chicken fast food restaurant fame.

Ellison said, “Muslims who support Trump is like chickens for Colonel Sanders. You know what I mean? You think that you are going to be the chicken who doesn’t get fired up?  Well I think you better guess again.”


So, what do you call a Muslim congressman who supports Muslim terrorists? 

ellison-jihadis

Keith Ellison petitions Congress for jailed Muslim Brotherhood member

Muslim Congressman Keith Ellison Introduces Bill to Import More Muslim “Refugees” Faster

Muslim Congressman Ellison doesn’t want investigation into Muslim radicals

Keith Ellison’s Stealth Jihad

 

Arizona: Somali Muslim tried to run over Border Patrol agents at checkpoint

h/t Jihad Watch who asks:

Why is a Somali citizen trying to cross into the U.S. from Mexico in the first place?


Source: Documents: Somali citizen tried to run over border agents in southern Arizona – ABC15 Arizona

A Somali citizen tried to run over Border Patrol agents in southern Arizona after a high speed pursuit, according to federal investigators.

In April, investigators say Ahmed Elni Abdalla drove up to a checkpoint near Amado. When agents approached Abdalla’s car, he drove through the stop sign and tried to get away at a “high rate of speed.”

The high-speed pursuit continued up to Green Valley where agents were able to box in Abdalla’s car.

However, Abdalla allegedly refused to get out. When agents tried to break his car window, Abdalla drove right at agents who had to “jump out of the way in order to avoid being hit,” according to federal paperwork.

In December, another Somali citizen was detained by Border Patrol agents. Investigators say Omar Haji Mohamed was paid to help sneak people across the U.S. Border.

New York: Muslim who tried to enter UK charged with supporting ISIS terrorists

via DOJ: New York Man Arrested for Attempting to Provide Material Support to ISIS

Sajmir Alimehmeti, aka Abdul Qawii, 22, of the Bronx, New York, was arrested today for attempting to provide material support to the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), a designated foreign terrorist organization, as well as for making a false statement in an application for a U.S. passport.  Alimehmeti is expected to be presented later today before U.S. Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein of the Southern District of New York.

“Alimehmeti was charged for his attempt to provide material support to ISIL by assisting a person who he believed was traveling to Syria to join ISIL,” said Assistant Attorney General Carlin.

“As alleged, Sajmir Alimehmeti, a Bronx man and an ISIL sympathizer, took steps to travel overseas to support ISIL’s terror campaign,” said U.S. Attorney Bharara.  “As the complaint alleges, Alimehmeti also bought military-type weapons and helped someone he believed to be a fellow ISIL supporter get travel documents, equipment and encryption technology purportedly to get to Syria to fight with ISIL.  Alimehmeti is charged today with actions that show a clear intention to support a terrorist organization that is hell-bent on murder and mayhem.  For that, thanks to the incredibly dedicated work of the FBI-NYPD Joint Terrorism Task Force, Alimehmeti is under arrest and facing federal criminal charges.”

“The subject in this case was allegedly having a hard time getting overseas to fight with ISIL,” said Assistant Director in Charge Rodriguez.  “But when he couldn’t leave, he allegedly seemed more than willing to help others tread the same path to join an insidious and deadly terrorist organization.  Cases like this keep the FBI JTTF and our partners at the NYPD going day in and day out, protecting our city from individuals who plot to help murderers.”

“As alleged, Alimehmeti continued his quest to support ISIL’s deadly terrorist agenda, after being denied entry into Europe with a bag full of military gear,” said Commissioner Bratton.  “When he returned home, to the Bronx, he allegedly turned to helping others join the terrorist organization as he built his own arsenal of weapons.  Today’s case is the latest example of collaboration at its best, a case worked through the Joint Terrorism Task Force with undercover officers from the NYPD’s Intelligence Bureau.”

As alleged in the criminal complaint, unsealed today in federal court:

In October 2014, Alimehmeti attempted to enter the United Kingdom but was denied entry after U.K. authorities found camouflage clothing and nunchucks in his luggage.  In December 2014, Alimehmeti was again denied entry into the United Kingdom, this time after U.K. authorities found that his cellphone contained images of ISIL flags and improvised explosive device attacks.  Further forensic examination of images on the cellphone and Alimehmeti’s laptop computer showed numerous indications of Alimehmeti’s support for ISIL, including a picture of Alimehmeti with an ISIL flag in the background, pictures of ISIL fighters in the Middle East, a picture of Alimehmeti making a gesture of support for ISIL and numerous audio files relating to jihad and martyrdom.

After returning to the United States, Alimehmeti continued to express his support for -ISIL by displaying an ISIL flag in his apartment in the Bronx, among other things.  In meetings with undercover law enforcement employees, Alimehmeti played multiple ISIL-related videos on his computer and his phone, including videos of ISIL decapitating prisoners.

Over the last 11 months, Alimehmeti made multiple purchases of military-style knives and other military-type equipment, including masks, handcuffs, a pocket chain-saw and steel-knuckled gloves.

In October 2015, Alimehmeti applied for a new U.S. passport, claiming his previous passport had been lost.  However, Alimehmeti later told an undercover law enforcement employee that his prior passport had not been lost and, instead, that he was applying for a new passport because he believed rejection stamps on his old passport, including rejection stamps from his attempted entries into the United Kingdom, would make it difficult to travel.

In May 2016, Alimehmeti attempted to assist an individual who was purportedly traveling from New York to Syria to train and fight with ISIL but who was actually an undercover law enforcement employee (UC).  On May 17, 2016, Alimehmeti met with the UC in Manhattan, New York, where the UC was purportedly en route to John F. Kennedy International Airport to take an overseas flight later that night in order to join ISIL.

Alimehmeti agreed to help the UC with several tasks before the UC went to the airport, including by locating stores so that the UC could purchase supplies to use while traveling to and fighting with ISIL, including a cellphone, boots, a compass, a bag and flashlight, among other items.  Alimehmeti provided the UC with advice and suggestions on the best boots to purchase and on which items to purchase.  The defendant also advised the UC on the use of different kinds of encrypted communications apps, including an app that Alimehmeti stated was currently being used by “the brothers,” and downloaded three encrypted communications apps onto the UC’s new cellphone.

Further, Alimehmeti assisted the UC in traveling from Manhattan to a hotel in Queens, New York, so that the UC could purportedly meet with an individual who was preparing travel documents that the UC would use to travel to Syria (document facilitator).  Alimehmeti, who had repeatedly expressed his own desire to travel to join ISIL, gave the UC a piece of paper with his name and contact information so that the UC could provide that information to the supposed document facilitator.  In voicing his interest in joining ISIL, Alimehmeti stated, excitedly, “I’m ready to . . . go with you man . . . you know I would.  I’m done with this place.”  After leaving the hotel in Queens, Alimehmeti brought the UC to Kennedy International Airport via public transportation.

The charges contained in the complaint are merely accusations and the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

If convicted, Alimehmeti faces a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison for providing material support and a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison for making a false statement in an application for a U.S. passport.

Alimehmeti Complaint

U.S. Veterans’ Benefits Cut to Pay for Afghan Immigrant Visas

Source: Legislative Update: 5/24/2016

In last year’s National Defense Authorization Act, Congress cut benefits to veterans by increasing co-pays for prescriptions. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the increased co-pays saved the federal government approximately $1.5 billion. (See CBO Estimate FY2016 NDAA) However, it now appears that $336 million generated from the veterans’ cuts was used to pay for 3,000 additional Afghan interpreters to be resettled in the United States.  (The Daily Caller News Foundation, May 16, 2016)

Known as the Special Immigrant Visa (SIV), this program was created by Congress in 2009 for Afghan employees and contractors who were employed by the U.S. government in Afghanistan any time after October 6, 2001, and who experienced an ongoing serious threat as a result of that employment. (See P.L. 111-8; 8 U.S.C. § 1101 note 26) Initially, the annual cap on SIVs issued was 1,500 but it was increased to 4,000 in the Fiscal Year 2015 NDAA before being increased again in the Fiscal Year 2016 NDAA to 7,000. (See FAIR Legislative Update, Dec. 9, 2014; Department of State SIV Guidelines)

While Afghan translators serve an important function in the ongoing war on terror, it is poor public policy to cut benefits to American citizen veterans to pay for these visas. “Military families shouldn’t be paying for the SIV program. The program should be funded outright because of the service our interpreters rendered,” said former Army combat veteran Alex Plitsas. (The Daily Caller News Foundation, May 16, 2016) There’s no reason to put veterans’ benefits on the chopping block, especially since there is overlap in jurisdiction with the State Department’s control of visa programs. (Id.)

Outrageously, it appears that several Senators want to cut veterans’ benefits again in the Fiscal Year 2017 NDAA to pay for even more SIV. An unnamed GOP Senate aide told the Daily Caller, “I’ve been told by multiple sources that they’re trying to use the co-pay hike to pay for the visa increase again this year.” (Id.) “With so much wasteful government spending that should be cut, it is befuddling how some in Congress are so eager to put military and veteran benefits on the chopping block.” (Id.)

The Senate is working on the Fiscal Year 2017 NDAA this week. Both Chairman John McCain (R-AZ) and Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) have expressed a desire to increase the SIV cap but neither has explained how it would be paid for. (Id.)

100% of Syrian Refugees Admitted to US So Far in May Are Muslim

Taxation for Islamization.

islam-refugee-invasion

Source: Record 499 Syrian Refugees Admitted to US So Far in May Includes No Christians

The Obama administration has admitted 499 Syrian refugees so far this month, with no Christians among them.

Of the 499 admitted in May, 495 are Sunni Muslims and the remaining four are described simply as “Moslem” in State Department Refugee Processing Center data.

Since FY2016 began on October 1, a total of 2,235 Syrian refugees have been resettled in the United States. Of them, 10 (0.44 percent) are Christians: three Catholics, two Orthodox, one Greek Orthodox and four refugees identified simply as “Christian.”

Christians make up the biggest non-Muslim minority in Syria – about 10 percent before the civil war erupted.

Meanwhile the State Department figures show that 2,170 (97 percent) of the 2,235 Syrian refugee newcomers in FY2016 are Sunni Muslims. The rest are made up of 17 Shi’a Muslims, 27 other Muslims, 10 Yazidis, and one refugee identified as “other religion.”

This marks the first time the fraction of Christians admitted during any given month in FY2016 has fallen below half a percentage point. Last October, it was 2.1 percent. By year’s end it had dropped to 0.9 percent, and over the ensuing months it has edged down to 0.8, 0.7, 0.5 and now 0.4 percent.

With another week still to run, May already accounts for the highest monthly tally of Syrian refugees admitted since the civil war began in the spring of 2011. The 499 admitted so far in May also exceeds the total number admitted during the first three years of the conflict.

After this month the next highest monthly admission numbers were recorded in April 2016 (451), September 2015 (389) and March 2016 (330).

The pace has picked up noticeably since last February, when the State Department opened a special refugee “resettlement surge center” in Amman, Jordan to speed up processing.


And it’s getting worse by the day:

The State Department admitted 80 Syrian refugees on Tuesday and 225 on Monday, setting a new single-day record, as President Obama surges to try to meet his target of 10,000 approvals this year — sparking renewed fears among security experts who say corners are being cut to meet a political goal.

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 56,201 other followers

%d bloggers like this: