Frank Gaffney
Gaffney has also warned that Grover Norquist is somehow trying to promote the Muslim Brotherhood agenda within conservatism. Think Progress:
“I belive the conservative movement is being subjected to a concerted Muslim Brotherhood infiltration effort,†Gaffney told us, adding that Norquist began his insidious effort in the 1980s. Norquist’s wife is Muslim.
Poor Suhail Khan, who’s been a loyal waterboy for conservatism for several years, faced hostile questioning from attendees who were certain he had to have ties to radicalism because, well, he’s Muslim. The take-away from the conference is that Khan is covering for the Muslim Brotherhood, at least.
And all Muslims are radical according to the conventioneers —
At a well-attended Friday event paid for and sponsored by Geller and Spencer, accusations that the conservative conference has been infiltrated by the Muslim Brotherhood were tossed around with abandon — and concerns about Islam itself as a faith were openly voiced by both audience members and panelists.
“For 10 years, people have been asking for moderate Muslims to speak up,†said Spencer. “We’re going to be waiting for those guys until doomsday.â€
“Moderate Muslims don’t exist,†said one audience member at the Geller and Spencer event. “Muslims are not able to be moderate — or they are speaking against what is written in the Koran.â€
Geller herself attacked CPAC and its organizers — the American Conservative Union, calling for the ouster of several ACU executives.
“This is the problem with CPAC. It’s corrupted and compromised by the Muslim Brotherhood,†Geller told the audience at her panel, saying CPAC’s leaders were either “clueless or complicit†to the threat posed by Islamists.
This is alarming —
“One of the things we have to do is not let sharia creep into our own legal system,†said Jim Woolsey, former CIA director under President Bill Clinton.
He was CIA director under Clinton?
Word is that Ron Paul was a big hit with most of the crowd, but the Young Americans for Freedom voted him off their advisory panel, anyway, saying that Paul is “off his meds.” Paul countered that he is now associated with Young Americans for Liberty. Seriously. See also Steve M.
Gee, are they as concerned about the influence Roman Catholic Canon law or Jewish Beit Din proceedings. And those two traditions have longer histories being considered in civil law and arbitrations.
As for Pam Geller, well, we really need to show her some pity.
She hasn’t been the same ever since that house landed on her sister.
And as far as Gaffney and the rest of these idiots, way to reach out and get support from the Muslim community there guys!
Is there anyone who’s not white and over 50 that you haven’t pissed off? And, I’m white and over 50 and, let me tell you, you piss ME OFF! So, you’re kind of painting yourselves off a cliff, not that I mind that at all – I just don’t want to have to follow you off of it, that’s all.
I wonder who they want to run for President?
Johnny and Edgar Winter?
And are even THEY white enough?
Tinfoil ain’t enough anymore apparently.
I’ve got an idea – I’m going into business making hats made of Kevlar, steel, reinforced concrete, and the tiles from the Space Shuttles.
I have a business opportunity for anyone who can make neck-braces strong enough to support my hats.
I’m just wondering, how much f*cking crazier they can get? I mean, what’s left except mass murdering everyone who doesn’t agree with th…?
Oh my!
It was apparent to me years ago that Gaffney and Woolsey were a few freedom fries short of a happy meal, but I guess the “Islamophobia” thingie got a bunch of people worried about hajies under their beds.
I just saw an interview; Bill-o with Beck, even Bill-o was having a hard time swallowing Beck’s postulate that the “communists” are aligning with the “Muslims” to take over the world.
Remember the comment I made whan Obama won that we were doomed to spend the next several years trading recipes and exchanging photos of our cats?
‘Almost as bad as the day at Mammoth Mountain when I told a bunch of snow bunnies that Madonna was a one hit wonder.
I hope the CPAC’ers rip each other apart.
Frank Gaffney’s ancestors probably murdered my American Indian ancestors and stole our land. I also can name a moderate muslim–Kareem Abdul Jabbar (the best Center ever in basketball).
Also, have you noticed that the person who seems to be worried about sharia law creeping into our law is usually a white man (stupid goes without saying). A white man, who apparently has forgotten about how women of America fought for the rights that we have and rights that were not given to us without a knockout, dragout fight with non-muslim men. They seem to be blissfully ignorant about the power the American women have and how these men do truly need to be slapped up the side of head for even thinking we, the American women, will allow sharia law into our law. Won’t happen while I am alive and have a pen.
Man, imagine how strange it would have been if someone HAD put some LSD into the conference’s drinking water… as Stephen Stills wrote in a different context, “Paranoia strikes deep, into your life it will creep.”
What will they do to top this next year? Will we see Gaffney trying to rip the simulated skin off someone in an attempt to prove they are one of the lizardy space aliens from the TV show V?
That the former head of the CIA is now wandering around worrying about the threat of creeping sharia law says a lot about why our foreign intelligence system is so bad these days. Sigh.
“He was CIA director under Clinton?”
Yes.
Because Clinton(both Mrs. and Mr.), just like Obama, is not a Democrat at all, but really a Moderate Republican And so is the rest of the Democratic Leadership.
The sole purpose of the Democratic Party today is to betray the Democratic voting base so very badly that the GOP gets back into power. And so the cycle goes since the days of Jimmy Carter: the GOP screws up the nation and gets voted out, the Dems come in and make the GOP look good again.
That is why no Democrat ever fights back. I don’t mean Little People, like Sen Sanders, Reps Weiner, Kucinich, and former Rep McKinney. I mean the big-name, high level Democrats.
I’m merely observing the behavior of the Dem Leaders, this is what they do: When in the Minority, don’t fight the GOP, don’t get on TV and counter the lies of the GOP. When in the minority, betray the voters that put them there just to get the GOP back in the majority.
That is what the Dems have done since Reagan ‘won’.
Pingback: Thank God CPAC Isn’t the Oval Office | The Moderate Voice
I will say this: when it comes to the hilarity factor, CPAC never disappoints. I love watching the various factions shred one another. More popcorn, anyone?
Almost as long as we’ve been waiting for moderate evangelical Christians to come out foursquare against women’s-clinic murders. Granted, not as long as we’ve been waiting for the Republican rally in support of Gabrielle Giffords’s recovery.
This isn’t entirely OT:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/14/shirley-sherrod-sues-andrew-breitbart_n_822704.html
Ms. Sherrod’s lawyers had the jerk served at CPAC. Yes!
Bonnie, I think you’re on to something. The people expressing the greatest concern about a threat of Sharia law gaining a foothold in this country are the dominionist Christians, who want to impose their version of Biblical law in this country.
joanr16 ….I hope she sues his dumb ass off..Breitbart is looking forward to his full and broad discovery rights…Just like Tom Delay was looking forward to his vindication. Breitbart better put on a happy face because it doesn’t look good for him..The James( veritas) O’Keefe school of video journalism doesn’t seem to be working out so well for these up and coming conservatives.
Young Americans for Freedom voted [Ron Paul] off their advisory panel…Paul countered that he is now associated with Young Americans for Liberty.
Insert ‘People’s Front of Judea/Judean People’s Front’ joke here.
These people are beyond parody.
Well I always enjoy CPAC, as it shows just how nuts the far right is. Not that they notice, of course.
Well, I do agree with that one particular statement by Woolsey: I sure as hell don’t want Sharia law as part of any legal system that I have to live under (and that goes for Hindu law, Buddhist law, Christian law, etc).
I don’t want to be eaten by dinosaurs or abducted by space aliens, either, but let’s keep our concerns focused on things that might actually happen, shall we? Thanks much.
sure as hell don’t want Sharia law as part of any legal system that I have to live under
I don’t want to be eaten by dinosaurs or abducted by space aliens, either, but let’s keep our concerns focused on things that might actually happen, shall we? Thanks much.
I’m surprised that you’d make such a statement. For the record, if it matters, I’m 180 degrees from the CPAC crowd … but, if I’m correct, Sharia law has a role in Canada and Britain’s legal systems. Perhaps this was unthinkable 20 years ago … or who would have thought, in 1970 or 1980, that the U.S. would be in such debt to China … who would have thought in 1970 or 1980, if projections prove correct, that 30 percent of Europe would be Muslim? Did an African-American president seem possible even in 2007? In any event, I’d hardly place my earlier statement in the context of things-that-certainly-will-never-happen; I would want to be vigilant against the intrusion of any religion further into our legal system.
Carl, you are confused. I understand Sharia law is analogous to Halakha, or Jewish law, which has been going on within the U.S. for at least a couple of centuries. When was the last time a rabinnical court issued you a ticket or sent you to jail?
Jewish law is derived from the Talmud and several other sources. The Beth Din (rabbinical courts) function here as well, and adjudicate on many matters within Jewish communities, for Jews. But if you aren’t Jewish, you can ignore them. They have no impact on U.S. law.
By the same token, Sharia is derived from the Qu’ran and some other sources. Like Jewish law, it is subject to interpretation. The several schools of Islam understand and interpret Sharia in widely divergent ways. It isn’t any one list of “laws” that all Muslims have to follow.
In Middle Eastern countries that are effectively theocracies of some sort, such as Saudi Arabia, some version of Sharia law is allowed to have official status in the country’s criminal justice system. In secular countries, such as Turkey, Sharia is prohibited from having any influence in law and criminal justice, and so Sharia only applies to the personal and religious conduct of those who voluntarily subject themselves to it, just as Jewish law and rabbinical courts have always functioned here.
Because we do enjoy separation of church and state in the United States, even in a community with a majority of Muslims, there is no way that non-Muslims could be compelled to follow Sharia or be subject to legal proceedings under Sharia. Such a thing would be a massive violation of the First Amendment. Further, Sharia cannot be used as an excuse to ignore local, state, or federal laws.
I doubt that, but do you have examples?
According to Wikipedia, currently only about 7 percent of the population of Europe, excluding Turkey, is Muslim. The European Union countries all put together are 3.2% Muslim.
Me, too, but it’s evangelicals you’ve got to watch out for on that score. Also, lots of people are trying to scare you into being afraid of Sharia law, and are spreading a lot of rumors and lies about it, because they’re trying to manipulate you. You should be afraid of those people and what they’re doing to your head. Seriously.
Carl,
Here’s what I don’t worry about at all in the US:
Sharia Law. Creeping, or otherwise.
Here’s what scared the living bejeebus out of me:
Christian Theocratic Rule, and the loss of the seperation of church and state. Which, I get the feeling, if it does come, it won’t come at a creep, but at a full gallop.
Christian Theocratic Rule, and the loss of the seperation of church and state. Which, I get the feeling, if it does come, it won’t come at a creep, but at a full gallop.
It’s always been here in subtlety. maybe not in it’s entire stranglehold, but enough to see if you are looking for it…Ask a gay person how their social and legal acceptance is going with our secular laws.
Oh, btw, maha, I love the photo-shopping with the tinfoil and the bat’s near Gaffney’s belfry.
Sharia law has a role in Canada and Britain’s legal systems.
I doubt that, but do you have examples?
From the Times of London: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article4749183.ece, and Canada, http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/islam/shariah-law.html.
I’m not worried about Sharia law in the U.S.; but my original point — which was presented as believing in alien abductions, etc — was that I wouldn’t want to see any theocratic law in the U.S. judicial system. Saying that I wouldn’t want to see that seemed to invoke the host’s derision 🙂 While I don’t worry about it, I don’t see it as something that could just never happen.
Carl — Again, you’re confused. The Canadian example refers to arbitration. In the U.S., people in some kind of dispute, such as a divorce or a contested will can agree to submit the dispute to arbitration, which means it is settled outside the court. All parties must agree on the arbitrator, a third party who is not usually a religious authority, but could be. Orthodox Jews often choose rabbinical courts for arbitration. As I understand it, if the parties agree in advance that they will be bound by the decision of the arbitrator, that amounts to a kind of contract that could be enforceable by law.
The important points are that (a) the arbitration must be a voluntary agreement; although a court might mandate arbitration in a particular dispute, the arbitration agreement itself must be voluntarily entered into. And (b) again, this is not new. It might be new to Canada, but arbitration by religious authority has been going on in the United States since there’s been arbitration. It’s not exactly a “role” in the legal system; it’s more like a way that people can choose to settle disputes outside of the courts.
I can’t comment on the other article except to say that I don’t think the Times of London is entirely trustworthy; I’d like to see the issue explained by someone else. But Britain doesn’t have the First Amendment protections we have here, so even if the Times article is accurate, that couldn’t happen here.
You said “Sharia law,” which is not going to happen in our lifetime, if ever. So, again, it’s no more likely than alien abductions. The more clear and present danger in that regard comes from conservative Christians. Keeping conservative Christianity from creeping into the legal system has been a fight since the Constitution was written. We’ve held ’em off so far, mostly, but that fight will never be finished.