“Religious Right and Politics -- From Iowa to Cairo”

A Rebuttal to Parvez Ahmed’s Article in Huffington Post… by Randy McDaniels

Parvez Ahmed, Former National Chairman of the propaganda arm of HAMAS in America, aka Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) once again appears to be operating as the mouth piece for CAIR’s parent group the Muslim Brotherhood.

In the article titled “Religious Right and Politics – From Iowa to Cairo”, regarding the Presidential race, he asserts bias against women (we can only assume Michelle Bachman), pandering to the religious right for votes, and therefore implying bias and bigotry against other faiths in an attempt to place the recent elections in Cairo on equal footing to the Presidential Primary Elections in America.

In a pot calling the kettle black, comparison he paints republicans as alarmist regarding Islam, gives the reader the impression America is at war with Islam, and equivocates conservative Christians in America to “Muslim Conservatives” aka extremist who are gaining seats in government.  He ends this barrage with the statement “the mutual paranoia palpable”.  One can only assume from his position, is Conservatives within the Republican Party are on par with the Hard Line Islamist violently toppling nations in the Middle East in the opinion of Parvez Ahmed.

His Defense of the Muslim Brotherhood is less surprising, when you consider his fellow Tampa Human Rights Commissioner and former CAIR/HAMAS leader Ahmed Bedier traveled to Egypt to be part of the Revolution, as he boasted on his face book post with the picture of him waiving the Egyptian flag in Tarir Square.  Until 2009, when the FBI formally cut all ties with CAIR due to their direct support of terrorism, Parvez and Ahmed were conducting “Sensitivity Training” or more appropriately influence operations with the FBI and Police Departments across the nation to include Jacksonville, Florida.

The fact is the Arab Spring has seen the toppling of many countries in the Middle East.  As many in the counter Islamic movement predicted, and which is become increasingly clear to the mainstream media, the Muslim Brotherhood, Salafi’s, and other radical elements have been the big winners, resulting in greater conformance to Sharia and less freedom or democracy.

While, Parvez acknowledge's matters of fact to appear neutral, stating the obvious, that the religious right, puritanical Salafi’s and the Muslim Brotherhoods Freedom and Justice Party captured the overwhelming majority of seats in Egypt's free elections, and susequently mentions a similar trend in Tunisia and Morocco, as well as the resultant move toward religion in government (Sharia Law), after which he immediately goes into spin mode. 

Parvez attempts to obfuscate this sweeping trend by referencing a Pew Research Poll regarding two “secular democracies”, Turkey and Lebanon.  Parvez cherry picks information completely discarding the fact the poll state more than 50% of the population of Turkey thought Islam in their politics (Sharia Law) would be a good thing and ignores the fact that Syria and to a lessening extent, Hezbollah all but control Lebanon.

Turkey has also increasingly made a shift towards once again becoming an Islamic State.  In fact, if trends continue we may likely see the reemergence of the Islamic Caliphate in the next few years in Turkey, unless Iran acquires nuclear status, in which case it may assume the Caliphate.

In addition, Parvez states “As politics face a rightward religious tug across the globe, it will be hasty to stereotype the trend.”  Apparently he is in agreement with the direction the political winds are blowing.

Giving a misleading impression to further the spread of Islam is a form holy deception or taqiyya, which Parvez masterfully wields when he factually states “Reformist scholars of Islam have asserted that Sharia ought not to be codified as state law. The reasons are tantalizingly simple. A state is a political institution, not a religious authority.”  

The fact is reformist Scholars of Islam are those who would have to deny some aspect of Sharia, Quranic Scripture, or the Sunna of the Prophet, rendering them Apostates or enemies of the state and Islam in accordance with all authoritative Islamic law.  Reformation is nothing more than wishful thinking, while there are peaceful secular Muslims (Apostates), what I term MINO’s or Muslims in name only, there can be no peaceful Islam or Sharia until all religion is for Allah…. World domination in accordance with all Authoritative Islamic texts, this is the peace adherent Muslims speak of.

Considering Parvez Ahmed held state and National Leadership positions within CAIR, a federally designated Muslim Brotherhood Front Group and HAMAS in America for (10) ten years, he would be intimately familiar with the primary two goals of the Muslim Brotherhood which are;   to establish Sharia Law worldwide and Re-establish the Global Islamic State (Caliphate) in which there is NO SEPERATION OF MOSQUE AND STATE countering his implied assertions in his latest propaganda piece.

More Deception…… “The Muslim belief in the divineness of Sharia is obviously not shared by people of other faiths. Moreover, the interpretation of Sharia is a fallible human endeavor, often leading to conflicting juristic opinions, which then leaves unanswered the question of whose Islam should the state endorse.”   

Parvez tries to give the illusion that there are many interpretations of Islam, the fact is…. Islam is Islam; there is one divine book of scripture (Quran) and one Sunna (Sira/Biography and Hadith/Traditions) of the prophet. 

These sacred texts along with Ijitihad, (human reasoning) and Ijma, (scholarly consensus) with unanimous consent of the Scholars of the day, was how Sharia Law was derived.  On this there is agreement by all (4) Sunni schools of Islamic Jurisprudence and both major Shia schools.  While there are some minor differences within the schools, they are annotated in the Sacred Islamic Law Manual, and do not create any conflict regarding the law, regardless of how divided on religious aspects the Sunni and Shia may remain.  In addition, the gates to Ijitihad have been closed for a 1,000 years and no law can be changed, added or annulled, all that is left are opinions in conformance with Sharia Law (the Muslim Constitution), commonly referred to as opinions or Fatwa’s.

The Deception continues…..”Once a state begins to enforce the laws of any religion then the coercive power of the state becomes the primary factor in the determining how religion gets practiced. The state loses credibility and faith loses spirituality. The Quran unequivocally states that there is no compulsion in matters related to religion.”

Parvez makes factual statements while not owning them, then uses an EARLY Mecca verse from the Quran, Sura 2:256, which states no compulsion in religion, knowing full well that the verse was abrogated with the final authoritative verse regarding religion being, Sura 8:39 And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is all for Allah.

In closing Parvez Ahmed states “The yearning for freedom may ultimately overcome parochial religiosity in politics. From Iowa to Cairo, the world watches with trepidation.” As if there were real hope for reform and true secular democracy in contrast to the reality of an ever growing Sharia compliant Middle East.

NOTE:  Egypt’s Freedom and Justice Party which won the majority of seats, is the party of the Muslim Brotherhood, the parent organization of CAIR/HAMAS and the Freedom this party seeks is Freedom from manmade law, and the justice they speak of is Justice in accordance with Sharia law.