If you haven’t been following the slide of Dearborn, Michigan to total domination by the Islamic state, you’re about to get a taste of it in Texas.
For years, state legislatures have been flirting with anti-Sharia law legislation in an attempt to thwart Sharia from creeping in to American legal culture, or perhaps it’s really a ruse to just let the voting electorate continue to think that those in positions to protect the constitution are actually doing so, when they clearly are not.
In a North Texas County, three men have formed an Islamic tribunal, to resolve disputes, between two parties, using Islamic, Sharia law. Operating as a nonprofit, this tribunal vows, on its website as a firm that addresses:
“The need for a mediation and non-binding arbitration firm that adheres to Islamic principles in the Muslim community has been a long time in the making.”
FOX29 reports the firm only deals with civil cases from business dealings to divorce, and will not deal with crime or punishment.
Is it legal? Maybe, maybe not, but they have been handling cases since 2013 and have mediated at least 25 cases.
“This tribunal is not there to circumvent legal laws, federal laws, state laws — it is simply an arbitration,” said Imam Zia ul Haque Sheikh. “A tribunal where two parties that are disputing get together, they come to an agreement and then they present that agreement to a judge.”
They say the tribunal is there to help and can save people in the Muslim community time and money.
But do their rulings conflict with U.S. laws, the constitution?
“The general rule is if you decide to use something other than a government-sanctioned court to resolve your dispute, then generally that will be respected and enforced,” said Austin-based attorney Pete Kennedy.
Kennedy says these types of organizations are not unique to the Muslim community. The judges say participating in the tribunal is voluntary, and even after a decision is made the case could still end up in traditional U.S. courts.
“We do not have that kind of authority to force anyone to follow our decision. That’s your decision if you accept it,” said El-badawai. “If you do not accept it, that’s between you and your God.”
In this Blaze video, Glenn Beck interviews the two of the men of the tribunal and you hear first hand the nature of Sharia culture. It’s more than a bit scary.
At this point most people are figuring out the infusion of Sharia law is unconstitutional, so why are we even having the discussion?
On Beck’s 2/10/15 radio show, he went into great detail about the dangers of this infusion, but the question remains, how do you stop it?He clearly outlined the problem, but not so much a solution. Why? And why have legislatures only seen fit to flirt with legislation, which would only further bloat bureaucracy, to address Sharia? Why is a solution to the problem so illusive, hard to address? It shouldn’t be, and here’s why.
Every public servant who holds an office, occupies a seat on a bench or even a school board, takes and oath to protect and defend the constitution of the United States. So, if a judge, city council member, mayor, governor, state legislator, or congressman is delinquent in that duty, it is in violation of their oath. And, there are mechanisms already in place, in the federal and most, if not all, state constitutions to remediate that violation. It is the legislature’s duty to IMPEACH judges who are delinquent in their duties. Most state legislatures have that responsibility, and most also have the power to recall many of their elected. So, again the question, if there is an infusion of Sharia into the culture, and it can reasonably be determined Sharia is adverse to the constitution, why is it so hard to get public servants to act, and why won’t those with microphones call for action? Real action, not half-hearted Yankee-Doodle?
In a corrupted system, where government has grown out of reach of the people it is supposed to serve, consider how those, who hold positions of authority and power, are desperate to hold their seats at the table. Consider how the upsurge of the Tea Party, in 2009, threatened maintaining those positions. With the upsurge in the Tea Party, and independent thought among the voting populace, arose many superstars of the conservative movement. But what have they done, really, to advance the cause of conservatism?
Listen to this interview, with Lee Stranahan, former Breitbart contributor, explain how Tea Party organizations aren’t really working for you, and how, just maybe, they have a vested interest in keeping government dysfunction in place as a path to their own job/fund raising security. Very telling and a perspective not widely considered by many conservatives. Perhaps it explains why many, so called, “voices” of constitutional conservatism talks a good game, but has little substance away from the mic.
So, brining this conversation full circle, the question of Sharia in the U.S. doesn’t need to be legislated. The founders gave us plenty of avenues to address breeches of the constitution and dereliction of duty. What they didn’t give us was a fool proof B.S. detector to recognize spin and degradation of liberty. They knew self-interest could and would supplant the integrity of men, and they were right. Whether it’s Sharia law, Obamacare, Benghazi, or any host of other atrocities we’ve watched being swept under the rug, blindly following a narrative, even if it sounds good, doesn’t protect the constitution or liberty.
Why is the Sharia cancer spreading in Texas and across the United States? Maybe because the fire in the belly to require accountability has been programmed out of American exceptionalism by political correctness. It’s time to stop looking to government and faux conservative idols to lead you back to constitutional truth. It’s time for accountability. The components are there. Stop waiting for someone else to do it for you.