home
RSS
January 21st, 2011
11:04 AM ET

Radical Islamic infiltration of conservatives?

CNN's Anderson Cooper reports on claims that the American conservative movement is being infiltrated by radical Islamists.

- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Belief • Church and state • Islam • Muslim • New York • TV • United States

soundoff (64 Responses)
  1. Ray

    Frank Gaffney should be called out for what he is: a complete and total bigot and Islamophobe. By his standard, no Muslim in the world is free from blame. The sad fact that he's on a mainstream TV channel shows how pervasive this hatred is in the world. Was the guy who shot up Gabby Giffords indicative of all Christians? What a joke.

    January 24, 2011 at 2:55 pm |
  2. gupsphoo

    They should blend in well. There isn't much difference between radical islamists and Christian fundamentalists.

    January 24, 2011 at 6:21 am |
  3. HotAirAce

    In another thread, I promised to stop suggesting that the 2012 republican ticket would be Palin and Beck. Maybe it will be Palin and Muneef!

    January 23, 2011 at 1:59 am |
    • Peace2All

      @HotAirAce

      Ya' found a (loophole) in your 'promise' to me, and ya' just 'had' to go there, didn't ya', ...? 🙂

      Peace...

      January 23, 2011 at 2:15 am |
  4. (B)iraq Hussein Osama

    Moslems are Coming! Moslems are Coming!
    Build More Bombs to Defend Yourselves

    Shariah Law is Coming! Shariah Law is Coming!
    Spend More Money to Build More Weapons of Mass Destruction

    Moslems are Coming! Shariah Law is Coming!

    January 22, 2011 at 10:37 pm |
  5. Mu'min

    First, we all know for neo-cons that "radical Islam" is the same as "Islam" and that "moderates" aren't true Muslims. I won't comment on that ridiculous assertion, but let's face it. There are American Muslims. They support candidates and vote just like any other American.

    January 22, 2011 at 9:43 pm |
  6. AlexSaied

    I'm a muslim and have done work for Islamic organizations in this country such as CAIR, MSA and others. We're a small minority in this country less than 5% and we are doing what we can to work with the system to get our voices heard and be represented. So why everytime we try to do positive things for ourselves guys like this come along screaming and crying all this non sense. These right wingers are just Islamophobic Mulim and Islam HATERS! Ive never seen so much hate and venom. Anyway, we will continue to grow and form relationships with people who haven't lost their minds and be some of the greatest citizens and attibutes this country has. Ameen.

    January 22, 2011 at 11:41 am |
  7. Upperhand

    Anderson Cooper is an intentionally ignorant leftist who fails to even consider the possibility that the opposing view is even legitimate.

    January 22, 2011 at 3:20 am |
  8. James MacWhorter

    Muneef and Reality are the biggest bores on this blog. One look at their posts and you know they're not worth reading.

    January 22, 2011 at 1:49 am |
    • Muneef

      James MacWhoter.

      Not sure if these blogs are supposed to be serious or jokes ,because reality truly is boring...any way boring world every time we hear the news and nothing is promising peace to lively our selves with fun and jokes....any way sorry if you find my SOS's as boring...can not help it...

      January 22, 2011 at 8:10 am |
  9. Muneef

    Can he name those radical islamists branches rather bringing accusations to all Muslims ?

    January 21, 2011 at 8:30 pm |
  10. Muneef

    Al-Baqara sura 02:
    In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful
    Mankind were one community, and Allah sent (unto them) prophets as bearers of good tidings and as warners, and revealed therewith the Scripture with the truth that it might judge between mankind concerning that wherein they differed. And only those unto whom (the Scripture) was given differed concerning it, after clear proofs had come unto them, through hatred one of another. And Allah by His Will guided those who believe unto the truth of that concerning which they differed. Allah guideth whom He will unto a straight path. (213).

    One Nation, One God Religion but mankind has divided it to many and each claims to be the righteous among all. Seems they will be more and more divided to no end until the day Kindom of God is established on Earth....
    Divided in to many faiths,the divided in to branches of each faith,then divided as sub branches for each branches of a major faith...
    http://focusonjerusalem.com/majorbranchesofislam.html

    January 21, 2011 at 8:26 pm |
    • Muneef

      An example of one major faith and how it is divided among it's followers... And could be only one or more of those sub branches are making all the trouble in the world towards which seems all Muslims have to suffer...?!

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_schools_and_branches

      January 21, 2011 at 8:27 pm |
    • Muneef

      Result of which was decided to be discussed openly.
      Baroness Warsi: "Anti-Muslim hatred and bigotry is quite openly discussed"
      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12235237

      January 21, 2011 at 8:28 pm |
    • Reality

      And on and on goes the koranic-based drivel !!!

      January 21, 2011 at 11:50 pm |
  11. Muneef

    Al-Isra sura 17:
    Man prayeth for evil as he prayeth for good; for man was ever hasty. (11) And We appoint the night and the day two portents. Then We effact the portent of the night, and We make the portent of the day sight-giving, that ye may seek bounty from your Lord, and that ye may know the computation of the years, and the reckoning; and everything have We expounded with a clear expounding. (12) And every man's augury have We fastened to his own neck, and We shall bring forth for him on the Day of Resurrection a book which he will find wide open. (13) (And it will be said unto him): Read thy Book. Thy soul sufficeth as reckoner against thee this day. (14) Whosoever goeth right, it is only for (the good of) his own soul that he goeth right, and whosoever erreth, erreth only to its hurt. No laden soul can bear another's load, We never punish until we have sent a messenger. (15) And when We would destroy a township We send commandment to its folk who live at ease, and afterward they commit abomination therein, and so the Word (of doom) hath effect for it, and we annihilate it with complete annihilation. (16) How many generations have We destroyed since Noah! And Allah sufficeth as Knower and Beholder of the sins of His slaves. (17) Whoso desireth that (life) which hasteneth away, We hasten for him therein that We will for whom We please. And afterward We have appointed for him hell; he will endure the heat thereof, condemned, rejected. (18) And whoso desireth the Hereafter and striveth for it with the effort necessary, being a believer; for such, their effort findeth favour (with their Lord). (19) Each do We supply, both these and those, from the bounty of thy Lord. And the bounty of thy Lord can never be walled up. (20) See how We prefer one of them above another, and verily the Hereafter will be greater in degrees and greater in preferment. (21) Set not up with Allah any other god (O man) lest thou sit down reproved, forsaken. (22).

    January 21, 2011 at 8:22 pm |
    • AlexSaied

      Ameen.

      January 22, 2011 at 11:42 am |
  12. JohnQuest

    Let Us Prey, interesting article, essentially, what you are saying is, if they can't destroy us from without they will "try" from within? Not that I agree with you (I just don't know enough about the subject to make an inform opinion) but thank you for raising my conscious to this pressing issue.

    January 21, 2011 at 5:12 pm |
    • Let Us Prey

      @JohnQuest

      What detractors are warning is that Sharia-compliant finance (SCF): "First, legitimizes the incorporation of sharia into our legal system, despite the fact that many features of Islamic law are anti-consti-tutional. That is, once sharia governance is accepted in principle, Islamists shrewdly figure the skids are greased for imposing sharia tenets on other aspects of our national life (e.g., domestic relations, employment matters, criminal law, etc.). Second, because sharia is a discriminatory system, SCF promotes Islamist ideology and enriches Muslims at the expense of non-Muslims by controlling investments and “purging” interest."

      guardian.co.uk/money/2006/jun/13/accounts.islamicfinance

      nationalreview.com/articles/243717/american-taxpayer-financial-jihadist-andrew-c-mccarthy

      Congratulations to you for becoming aware of this issue. Research for yourself. I always start by first reviewing the arguments of those I disagree with.

      January 21, 2011 at 7:07 pm |
  13. Reality

    More Islamic reality:

    Mohammed was an illiterate, womanizing, lust and greed-driven, warmongering, hallucinating Arab, who also had embellishing/hallucinating/plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added "angels" and flying chariots to the koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers.

    This agenda continues as shown by the ma-ssacre in Mumbai, the as-sas-sinations of Bhutto and Theo Van Gogh, the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the Islamic bombers of the trains in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani “koranics”, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, the Ft. Hood follower of the koran, and the Filipino “koranics”.
    And who funds this muck and stench of terror? The warmongering, Islamic, Shiite terror and torture theocracy of Iran aka the Third Axis of Evil and also the Sunni "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia.

    Current crises:

    The Sunni-Shiite blood feud and the warmongering, womanizing (11 wives), hallucinating founder.

    January 21, 2011 at 4:33 pm |
  14. Reality

    "Paranoid delusions" about the infiltration of USA conservative groups by radical Islamists? Not so delusional based on the following:

    "Islam’s Koran and World Domination:

    Mohammed could not have known the size of the world, but several passages in the Koran show that he envisioned Islam dominating all of it, however large it might be: “He it is who sent his messenger . . . that he may cause it [Islam] to prevail over all religions´(Koran 9:33, M.M. Ali; see also 48:28 and 61:9). M.M. Ali designates these three passages as “the prophecy of the ultimate triumph of Islam in the whole world.”

    Mohammed’s successors, the caliphs, quoted passages like these to inspire Muslim armies as they advanced out of Arabia, imposing Islam by the sword upon a peacefully unsuspecting Middle East and North Africa, as I described in the previous chapter.

    Islamic armies, imbued with what Mohammed claimed was divine authorization, imposed Islam by force over vast areas, all the while extorting wealth from subjugated Jews and Christians to fund their ongoing conquests. As I noted, major defeats at Tours, France, in A.D. 732, and again at Vienna, Austria, in A.D. 1683, halted Islam’s attempt to take all of Europe by force. Gradually Islamic forces were forced to retreat from Europe, except for part of the Balkans. But Islam has again set its sights on a conquest of Europe and of European civilization, wherever the latter has spread to North and South America and other regions. Muslim strategists ask their followers, Why do we find in these modern times that Allah has entrusted most of the world’s oil wealth primarily to Muslim nations?

    Their answer: Allah foresaw Islam’s need for funds to finance a final politico-religious victory over what Islam perceives as its ultimate enemy: Christianized Euro-American civilization. So, Islam follows Nazism, fascism and communism as the world’s latest hostile takeover aspirant.

    Nazis, fascists and communists failed. Does Islam have a better chance at success? I believe it will flounder if we awaken to its threat in time; yet, if there is not adequate planned resistance, Islam does have a better chance of succeeding. Communism’s world takeover attempt was guaranteed to fail because its economic policy was naively contrary to human nature. Advocating the rubric What is mine is thine, and what is thine is mine, communism failed to see that human nature will not keep those two balanced propositions in equilibrium. Like a female black widow spider consuming her mate, the latter part of the formula makes a meal of the former, leading to the collapse of any system based upon that formula.

    In contrast, political systems do well if they can persuade people to adhere to What’s mine is mine and What’s thine is thine maxims.

    Only if a strong religious incentive is added does such an idealistic formula have any long-term chance. Even then success will be spotty. But communism (and Nazism, for that matter) excluded religion. And that mistake was the final nail eventually clamping a lid on communism’s coffin. Communism, on a historical scale, perished while still in its childhood.

    Islam is not repeating communism’s mistake. Mating political cunning and incredible wealth with religious zeal, Islam does have a chance to succeed and will succeed unless major parts of the Western world unite to take appropriate countermeasures. But many Western leaders, unable to believe that a mere religion could possible be a serious political threat, keep proclaiming themselves as Islam-friendly, reasoning that all religions are good-aren’t they?

    A Muslim strategist in Beverly Hills, California, declared several years ago, as quoted by a friend of mine: “Now that the struggle between Western democracies and international communism is winding down, it is time for the real and final struggle to begin, and we are going to win!”

    When will people realize that just as there are good doctors and quacks, good cops and rogue cops, there can also be good religions and bad religions?" from Secrets of the Koran by Don Richardson

    Secrets of the Koran

    Don Richardson

    January 21, 2011 at 12:17 pm |
    • Al Bluengreenenbrownenburger

      It is paranoid and delusional. If elements of Islam wanted to infiltrate American culture with the intent of altering the culture, absolutely the least effective place would be amonst the right-wing extremists. I can think of a great many areas that would be infinitely better, though I cannot imagine that such an attempt would have any effect in America.

      Or was this just a way for you to share another of your cut and paste things with us?

      January 21, 2011 at 1:01 pm |
    • Let Us Prey

      @ Al

      Don't forget.. we're still waiting for your treatise on 'The Reality of Islam."

      January 21, 2011 at 2:57 pm |
    • Upperhand

      @ Al Bluengreenenbrownenburger

      What culture? America has no culture!! or you may be confusing America with a country that has a legitimate culture?!?

      January 22, 2011 at 3:06 am |
  15. Let Us Prey

    The U.S. Dep't of the Treasury has been an active proponent of Sharia financing for several years now. They have even sponsored banking industry seminars presented jointly with Islamic financial representatives. Almost every major U.S. bank and investment house offer some form of sharia-financed or underwritten financial products.

    Anderson Cooper is simply scratching at the door of the real story. Come'on, Coop. Grow a pair. Put a mike in the face of Geithner.

    January 21, 2011 at 12:16 pm |
    • Bob

      True wisdom comes when you realize that your views on the subject matter may not be the reality.

      January 21, 2011 at 12:38 pm |
    • Nonimus

      I guess I don't see the problem. It's just another product, like socially-conscious funds or environmentally-friendly funds. I don't really understand why interest is considered bad, especially when Islamic banking practices do essentially the same thing but call it something else, by charging more than cost and then setting an interest-free installment plan on the total of cost + profit. Seems silly but whatever.
      Nobody freaks out over the Kosher food industry, why this?

      January 21, 2011 at 12:41 pm |
    • Let Us Prey

      @ Bob
      Are you suggesting that -you- know what 'true wisdom' is? Or are you just quoting some other putz?

      @ Nomimus
      Sure – no problems... http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=29728

      January 21, 2011 at 1:17 pm |
    • Bob

      Fine, I'll rephrase that. Wisdom comes.... 😛

      Being able to undestand that you may be wrong leads you to the conclusion of what your position really is, and in terms of what reality is. That's wisdom.

      January 21, 2011 at 1:52 pm |
    • Nonimus

      @Let Us Prey,
      Sheesh, what a scare piece. We're all doomed! Oh no.

      First of all, you were talking about a financial product, Sharia (Isalmic) Banking, the article on the other hand is talking about oil rich Muslims buying a controlling interests in US corporations, which, if I understand correctly is already possible for some corporations. The availability or not of Islamic banking has no effect on the ability to invest.
      Second, if the Muslim investor is so observant of Sharia law as to want to 'force' a company into compliance, then they wouldn't be able to buy stock in any company that wasn't already Sharia compliant anyway. That would be haram.
      Third, if I understand correctly, Zakat only requires giving of charity. I don't think it requires that the charity be one of these so-called "questionable Islamic charities", but would be just as valid given to "regulated U.S. charities at home."
      Fourth, any US company giving money or support to "illicit charities" would fall under the exact same US laws prohibiting support of terrorist organizations regardless of whether they are Sharia compliant or not.
      And finally, "the fear that Middle Eastern investors could force U.S. companies" to do things to our detriment might well be handled or countered, if needed, by the simple rule of supply and demand; you don't like a Sharia compliant company don't buy their stuff. In fact, it might be your best strategy to get them heavily invested in a company and then start a campaign to boycott it and bankrupt that company thereby ruining the investor, but there may be laws against that, I don't know.

      Go scare someone else, please.

      January 21, 2011 at 2:12 pm |
    • Let Us Prey

      @ Nominus

      From the article:

      There is also the fear that Middle Eastern investors could force U.S. companies to provide charitable donations to questionable Islamic charities. As Frank Gaffney notes, once an investment becomes subject to shari’a, at least 2.5 percent of the proceeds are donated to zakat, or charity. Of course, many corporations contribute to charities as a way to give back to the community. But most of the world’s Islamic charities are unregulated or are of unknown repute. The U.S. Treasury department continues to uncover illicit charities that provide funds to terrorist organizations worldwide. Thus, there remains a danger that the earnings of U.S.-based businesses would begin to send funds to questionable Islamic charities rather than regulated U.S. charities at home."

      From your statement:
      "In fact, it might be your best strategy to get them heavily invested in a company and then start a campaign to boycott it and bankrupt that company thereby ruining the investor, but there may be laws against that, I don't know."

      Um, yeah. How about Conspiracy and Anti-Trust. Not well-steeped in business law, are you?

      So "Go whitewash someone else, please."

      January 21, 2011 at 2:46 pm |
    • Let Us Prey

      @ Bob

      So – Wisdom is being able to understand that I may be wrong which leads me to the conclusion of what my position really is in terms of reality....?

      Gerble, Gobble, Gerp. Please. My eyes are beginning to water.

      January 21, 2011 at 2:50 pm |
    • Nonimus

      @Let Us Prey,
      "Not well-steeped in business law, are you?"
      I never claimed to be. But now that you mention it, I didn't know boycotts were considered Conspiracies or violate Anti-Trust. Oh, that's right they don't. Now "get[ting] them to invest heavily" might involve conspiracy, but it doesn't have to. I don't have any idea how Anti-Trust is even a consideration. Either way, that is why I specifically said, "but there may be laws against that, I don't know."

      However, none of that has anything to do with my points.
      As I understand things:
      1) you said Isalmic banking; the article is talking about corporate take-overs; two different things entirely.
      2) Sharia observant Muslims wouldn't be able to invest in a company that wasn't already Sharia compliant in the first place.
      3) Zakat does not require support of "Islamic charities [that] are unregulated or are of unknown repute."
      4) US companies are prohibited from supporting terrorist organizations regardless of their Sharia status.
      5) People can always 'vote with thier wallets', and not patronize(sp?) Sharia compliant companies.

      January 21, 2011 at 3:35 pm |
    • Nonimus

      P.S.
      Anyone wanting to worry about financial threats to America may want to start with China.

      January 21, 2011 at 4:25 pm |
    • Let Us Prey

      A. You're right, you don't know.
      B. Your statements haven't improved with repeti-tion.
      C. China recently began establishing banks in the U.S. They transact in Yuan. You can only buy 20K of Yuan per year as an investment hedge (presuming that they will increase in value (last yr +3%) as the Chinese devaluation policy relaxes over the next 3-5 years. The Yuan is not currently traded or exchanged in international money markets. What do you think they're going to do? Call in a 20 billion dollar U.S. debt note and take California in trade? Please.

      January 21, 2011 at 7:14 pm |
    • Upperhand

      @ Bob

      True wisdom comes when you pull your head out of your a**!!!

      January 22, 2011 at 3:09 am |
    • Nonimus

      @Let Us Prey,

      "A. You're right, you don't know."
      Apparently you know even less, else you would back up your claims.

      "B. Your statements haven't improved with repeti-tion."
      Apparently they don't need improvment, else you would have attempted to respond my points and I wouldn't have felt the need to repeat them.

      "C. ... What do you think they're going to do? Call in a 20 billion dollar U.S. debt..."
      My point about China was an aside to the larger debate, however, just so you know, it's estimated that China has around $1 to $1.7 Trillion in US debt. That's trillion, with a 'T'.
      ( http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/02/chinas-debt-to-us-treasury-more-than-indicated/ )

      January 22, 2011 at 11:39 am |
    • Let Us Prey

      @ Nominus

      "else you would back up your claims."
      The information is out there. I've already given you some. I'm not here to send you to remedial B-school. You make some interesting claims, i.e., about activities that "might" or "don't have to" be illegal, then offer that "you don't have any idea how Anti-Trust is even a consideration." Followed by your disclaimer: "but there may be laws against that, I don't know." I told you that there were. Weren't you interested enough to do a quick Google inquiry? Here – Imagine that the 'players' aren't Joe and Jane Q. Public who have little or no leverage, but rather investment bankers and brokerages who actually manipulate, offer, and trade. Start your search with "Conspiracy to Defraud." Now imagine if there was an effort, coordinated by the bankers and brokers, to damage a specific interest. You're bright enough to argue on a blog, you should be able to take a lead, research it for yourself and arrive at a reasonable conclusion (hopefully before banging out the way 'you think it should be.')

      "Apparently they don't need improvment, (sic) else you would have attempted to respond my points and I wouldn't have felt the need to repeat them."
      Don't think that I'm obligated to beat my head against the wall of your refusal to understand or acknowledge an issue. I have no masochistic tendencies. Nor do I wish to play "chase the skewed argument." You 'points' are digressive to my concern, as I'm sure you're aware.

      For instance, the initial article talked about several things, not just takeovers. Other articles were offered as well. Also, where exactly can I find an 'approved' interpretation of Sharia "compliance?" (Yeah, I know...) I'm also concerned about the 'permissive language' of Zakat (Islamic charitable giving) "not requiring" as opposed to prohibiting support of Islamic charities [that] are unregulated or are of unknown repute. Your wording on #4 is interesting, i.e., US companies being prohibited from supporting terrorist organizations *regardless of their Sharia status*, and you evade the primary issue of being unable to track the final destination of the "investment." Your last point assumes people's awareness of such and of the resulting impact. And this is as far as I choose to go with this game of 'fetch.'

      "My point about China was an aside to the larger debate"
      So what?

      " it's estimated that China..."
      Ibid. Yeah, I know. But you continue to evade my point in favor of continuing to advance an otherwise (irrelevant) observation. I'm not obligated to give you lessons in macroeconomics or open economies. You're a bright fellow... you'll figure 'it' out. Hopefully before you espouse all your opinions about 'it' or whatever else.

      Here – you don't even need a graduate degree to find this stuff:
      economywatch.com/finance/international-finance.html

      The internet is a wonderful thing. I hope you choose to use it. If not, I'm afraid you'll continue to be annoying.

      January 22, 2011 at 2:23 pm |
    • Nonimus

      @Let us Prey,
      "The information is out there. I've already given you some. I'm not here to send you to remedial B-school."
      You made the claim that we should be worried about Islamic Finance products, the 'burden of proof' is on you. And, I haven't seen it yet. The only article you referenced, in response, talked about, if "investors, or a bloc of investors, gains enough controlling shares of a company, they can exact a dangerous influence." All examples in the article of "how might this harm America," were contingent on that controlling interest. That is not Islamic Finance.
      If you aren't willing to support your claim, that's fine – we're done here.

      Islamic Financing:
      "The basic principle of Islamic banking is the sharing of profit and loss and the prohibition of riba (usury)." wiki – Islamic banking
      "Western financial services firms are beginning to offer Shariah-compliant investment vehicles that neither pay interest, nor benefit from gambling." Investopedia – Sharia
      "In spirit, Islamic finance seeks to promote social justice by banning explo.ita.tive practices. In reality, this boils down to a set of prohibitions–on paying interest, on gambling with derivatives and options, and on investing in firms that make por.nography or pork." Forbes
      ( http://www.forbes.com/2008/04/21/islamic-finance-sharia-islamic-finance-islamicfinance08-cx_ee_mn_0421islam_land.html )
      These aren't definitive; if you have better references, let's look at them.

      Ultimately though, it is my understanding that, regardless of Sharia compliance, all US companies are required to follow US law. If I am mistaken, please cite their exception to US law, based on Sharia compliance.

      Apparently my side comments about laws and China were distracting from the main topic, I won't continue with those.

      January 22, 2011 at 4:33 pm |
    • Let Us Prey

      @ Nonimus

      Start here. There's much more, including Sen. Jon Kyle's letter referencing David Yerushalmi's paper to SEC commissioner Cox. I can't post multiple websites in one post. It would have to be done in multiple postings. Let's see how you react to this one first.

      Civil Liability & Criminal Exposure Surrounding Shariah-Compliant Finance.
      David Yerushalmi, Esq.

      http://www.saneworks.us/uploads/application/35.pdf

      January 23, 2011 at 11:54 am |
    • Nonimus

      @Let Us Prey,

      I am not a lawyer, obviously, so I won't comment on Yerushalmi's legal opinion/paper. I also won't comment on his or saneworks' reputation right now. However, I will say that, rightly or wrongly, one judge has already disagreed with Yerushalmi, who was plaintiff's co-counsel on the case below that was recently dismissed, or summarily judged(?), in favor of the defendant, by a United States District Judge.

      (function() { var scribd = document.createElement("script"); scribd.type = "text/javascript"; scribd.async = true; scribd.src = "#{root_url}javascripts/embed_code/inject.js"; var s = document.getElementsByTagName("script")[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(scribd, s); })()

      I'm guessing there will be an appeal, which should be interesting to follow.

      Thanks for (indirectly) pointing out this case.

      January 23, 2011 at 4:03 pm |
    • Let Us Prey

      @ Nominus

      That's pretty much the response I expected from you. Did you even bother to read David Yerushalmi's paper, or did you simply make a personal 'summary judgment' based on your prejudice, i.e., " I also won't comment on his or saneworks' reputation right now."

      I had already pointed out the "AIG controversy" earlier in this string in my 1/21 in a response to ScottK. It's nothing to be avoided, in fact it needs to be spotlighted. Both parties to this action requested summary judgments, Plaintiff's was denied, Defendant's was approved, thus giving judicial endorsement to SCF. Here's the Thomas Moore Law Center's take on it. You bet there will be an appeal; it's already been filed. Yeah, I know.. TMLC. Your job is to demean and marginalize them, too. I'm sure it's in you 'useful idiot' contract.

      http://www.thomasmore.org/qry/page.taf?id=119&_function=detail&sbtblct_uid1=877&_nc=2c72e9156dd0a996e1d224eab065c2ce

      When this case was first filed in 2008, Obama, through Eric Holder and the DoJ, requested the judge to dismiss the case" for lack of standing.", and the judge refused. Several requests for dismissal were made; Obama did not want the case heard.

      Stinks, I say. The whole issue of SCF infiltration and acceptance into the U.S. financial industry while corporations, the courts and our own government are deaf to complaints grounded in Const-tutional law. This is the kind of crap that encourages conspiracy theorists.

      The appeal will take another year. How much more damage will be done by then?

      January 23, 2011 at 6:15 pm |
    • Let Us Prey

      And before you ask 'what kind of damage could be done', here –

      You want to know how many are on the OFAC's listing of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons?
      Here's 485 pages worth.

      treasury.gov/ofac/downloads/t11sdn.pdf (People & "charities")

      January 23, 2011 at 6:52 pm |
    • Let Us Prey

      Then read this.
      (remove the $ in Docu$ments)

      U.S. Treasury, Office of Foreign Asset Control, 2007 Audit Findings. "Inconsistent Compliance"

      treasury.gov/about/organizational-structure/ig/Docu$ments/OFAC%20Final%20Report%209-20-07.pdf

      Point is.. we can't keep track of the transactions. We cannot physically audit everything and everyone. Money wlll, and has, through 'halawa' practiced by SCF organizations here and abroad.

      January 23, 2011 at 6:57 pm |
    • Peace2All

      @Let Us Prey & @Nonimus

      VERY interesting discussion. Also, interesting links/references. Thanks guys. Extremely enlightening !!!

      Peace...

      January 24, 2011 at 1:57 am |
    • Let Us Prey

      @ Peace

      I have about a dozen more references, but, as you know, it's near impossible to list multiple websites. It's a really, really important issue, and I hope that folks like JohnQuest, yourself and others gain an understand of the inherent problems on the horizon. Of course the outlook isn't good as Jon Kyle found out when he was brushed-off by SEC Chairman Cox. I'm not even aware of a current Congressional investigation taking place.

      But in order to fully understand the implications, you have to bury yourself in the details, like how Sharia Advisory Boards must be given -complete- authority in Bank Articles of Incorporation over all bank activities that might affect issues of Sharia. Imagine. Scary.

      January 24, 2011 at 2:19 am |
    • Peace2All

      @Let Us Prey

      I appreciate your obvious knowledge in this area. I agree, it 'is' important, and i certainly don't want to bury my head in the sand on something as important as this.

      I will be keeping an eye out on this more now, and time permitting, do some research on this topic.

      Thanks again...

      Peace...

      January 24, 2011 at 2:32 am |
  16. Al Bluengreenenbrownenburger

    This story really does not belong in the Belief Blog, as it does not have anything to do with Islam as a reality. I am no fan of any religion, but this story is about the paranoid delusions that daily worsen amongst right-wingers. It belongs is a mental health blog somewhere, not here.

    January 21, 2011 at 11:41 am |
    • Let Us Prey

      @ Al

      " as it does not have anything to do with Islam as a reality."

      Yet another babe that's lost-in-the-woods.. So tell us, Al... exactly what is the 'reality' of Islam? This story is exactly where it should be. Well, alright – a couple of cross-references wouldn't hurt. Oh wait... "Filed under: Belief • Church and state • Faith Now • Islam • Muslim • New York • TV • United States.

      Cutting a class again, are we, Al?

      January 21, 2011 at 12:21 pm |
    • Al Bluengreenenbrownenburger

      I see from your post below that you are so sanity-challenged that you actually believe this paranoid delusion, so there really isn't any reason to point out how phenomenally absurd is the idea of radical Islam trying to infiltrate right wing politics.

      No, I'm not cutting class; I finshed my graduate degree many years ago, probably about the time you were failing the seventh grade for the third time.

      January 21, 2011 at 12:46 pm |
    • Let Us Prey

      Hey, Al... I wonder what kind of 'graduate degree' doesn't require research. Maybe Fine Art? Can you even use Google? Here, "graduate" – there's plenty more. All you have to do is get your head out of your ass and look for it.

      http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/nov/04/treasury-submits-to-shariah/

      January 21, 2011 at 12:56 pm |
    • Let Us Prey

      Let's see... If I go to Google and type in "U.S. Treasury & Sharia finance" I get – WOW ! Look at all this ! Oh, crap!
      There's your 'helpful Google search hint for the day."

      And don't forget to tell us of the 'reality' of Islam.

      January 21, 2011 at 1:02 pm |
    • Let Us Prey

      Aren't I in a particularly obnoxious and snarky mood today? Either that, or I just don't feel like putting up with stupidity.

      Yeah. That's it.

      January 21, 2011 at 1:07 pm |
    • Al Bluengreenenbrownenburger

      Just for giggles, I did google your words, and what a shock, lots of extremist right-wing websites came up, but not a single source that is even remotely balanced.

      The opinion writer for the Washington Post works at an right-wing extremist think tank.

      You are paranoid and delusional, they are paranoid and delusional. I won't reply to you again; you are too crazy.

      January 21, 2011 at 1:12 pm |
    • Let Us Prey

      Sure, Al.

      Ever wonder how ostriches keep the sand out of their ears? You may not choose to converse with me... but I'll still be here. Just in case you change your little mind.

      January 21, 2011 at 1:24 pm |
    • ScottK

      @Al – you hit the nail on the head.

      @Let us Prey – The only reason I can see why you should be worried about an infiltration of Islam into the conservative movement is the fact that they are mirror images of eachother, they just have different mascots. They are both intolerant of others beliefs, want theocratic rule & claim the use of violence as their right to defend their imaginary diety. You are more like those you claim to hate than you know, and far more like them than the rest of this country is comfortable with. Get your God out of our government & we'll keep our government out of your God.

      January 21, 2011 at 1:38 pm |
    • Let Us Prey

      @ ScottK

      Unfortunate that you share in Al's tunnel vision. Neither of you are even aware of the 'nail', let alone how to 'hit' it. I've conversed with you before; you're another one that is so focused on pop-culture atheism that you're unable to see the larger picture. " (I am) more like those (I) claim to hate than (I) know, and far more like them than the rest of this country is comfortable with"? Keep your words out of my mouth.. I never claimed to hate anyone (but I'm not too fond of you...) And to think that -you- know what "the rest of the country is comfortable with" ... good one.

      My point about sharia finance is that it is -already- being mainstreamed into our financial culture – irrespective of political affiliation. I suggest that Andy Cooper's 'news scoop' is simply a diversion. And who you -think- I 'hate', or who I'm 'like' is.. immaterial. Entertaining, but immaterial.

      January 21, 2011 at 2:33 pm |
    • civiloutside

      I'm quite certain that the US Treasury's interest in Sharia financial products is purely in the realm of "Here's a way for banks to make a buck off of Muslims who otherwise would not use their services," and not in the realm of "Here's a way to convert America into a Muslim nation through their pocket books."

      And if the products work, who really cares where the idea came from? The mere fact of an Islamic source for an idea does not invalidate the idea itself. Try evaluating the ideas on their own merits, rather than based on how you feel about their source.

      January 21, 2011 at 3:31 pm |
    • Let Us Prey

      @ civiloutside

      Oooh... good. I'm glad that you're "quite certain" DoTreasury doesn't have an evil agenda at hand to Muslimize (us according the the guidelines set forth in the Bilderburg NWO plan? 'nah. Let's not be silly. One currency? One religion? Impossible. Reserved for whackos.)

      But doesn't it give you a warm, fuzzy feeling knowing that our Treasury Dep't. is funneling USD into a foreign investment program where the money can't be tracked? Beats burying money in the Caymans or with those Swiss deviants with all that Nazi history... 'echh.

      Enough of the way -we- think about it... of course we're just in it for ourselves; but, you still have to wonder about the Islamic "point of view"... don't you?

      January 21, 2011 at 4:46 pm |
    • ScottK

      @Let us Prey – You show who you are and what you hate everytime you come on these boards posting these links. A link says "Hey guys! I think this is good stuff! click here see what I like!" And when said link is non-fact filled or full of unrealted racism attempting to convince others that "Sharia Finances"!! are coming to take us away, one has to respond as they would to a child worked up about how their life is ruined becasue they have a zit on picture day. Get over it, and yourself for that matter. If you knew anything about banking and Sharia you would understand that it is an attempt to bridge the gap between our modern interest rooted banking system and a religion that forbids that kind of monetary transaction since "Sharia prohibits the payment or acceptance of interest fees for loans of money'. (wiki ) We can either exclude them or find ways to include them. You dont want to include them, I get that, but why are you trying to stop others who do?

      January 21, 2011 at 5:36 pm |
    • Let Us Prey

      @ ScottK

      Settle down. I bet your face is all red and puffy, and you should probably wipe the spittle off of your keyboard.

      The exchanges get really interesting on this fact-based stuff, don't they, Scott? Tough to argue coherently when you can't simply attack someone's emotional belief in a mystical deity. These are the tough ones, Scott. I provide a website full of information, and rather than dispute it, you simply pull the "racist hate" objection. Problem is, whoever pulls that card first loses the debate. Can you hear the buzzer, Scott? Ask not for whom the buzzer buzzes... It buzzes for thee. (with apologies to Donne)

      " it is an attempt to bridge the gap between our modern interest rooted banking system and a religion that forbids that kind of monetary transaction "

      Wrong. Study up. Sharia is not an attempt to 'bridge' anything. You need to learn why Lloyds stopped their sharia mortgage program, the facts behind the AIG controversy, the concept of 'interest' simply being re-branded as 'profit sharing'. I know it's adding insult to injury, but here's another of those hateful, racist links.... from the National Review. So cover your eyes, just thought I'd warn you.

      http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/243717/american-taxpayer-financial-jihadist-andrew-c-mccarthy

      January 21, 2011 at 6:43 pm |
    • katherine

      Seems to me you have paranoid delusions about anyone who doesn't agree with you. I think there's a name for that.

      January 22, 2011 at 2:17 pm |
  17. Reality

    Once a day WARNING for new commentators:

    • The moderators of this blog have set up a secret forbidden word filter which unfortunately not only will delete or put your comment in the dreaded "waiting for moderation" category but also will do the same to words having fragments of these words. For example, "t-it" is in the set but the filter will also pick up words like Hitt-ite, t-itle, beati-tude, practi-tioner and const-tution. Then there words like "an-al" thereby flagging words like an-alysis and "c-um" flagging acc-umulate or doc-ument. And there is also "r-a-pe", “a-pe” and “gra-pe”, "s-ex", and "hom-ose-xual". You would think that the moderators would have corrected this by now considering the number of times this has been commented on but they have not. To be safe, I typically add hyphens in any word that said filter might judge "of-fensive".

    • More than one web address will also activate “waiting for moderation”. Make sure the web address does not have any forbidden word or fragment.

    Sum Dude routinely updates the list of forbidden words/fragments.
    Two of the most filtered words are those containing the fragments "t-it" and "c-um". To quickly check your comments for these fragments, click on "Edit" on the Tool Bar and then "Find" on the menu. Add a fragment (without hyphens) one at a time in the "Find" slot and the offending fragment will be highlighted in your comments before you hit the Post button. Hyphenate the fragment(s) and then hit Post. And remember more than one full web address will also gain a "Waiting for Moderation".

    January 21, 2011 at 11:26 am |
    • Lary Nine

      Thanks. Well explained. Let me just....ti-t ti-t ti-t-tie ti-t t-it ti-t-tie. Bu-l-ls-hit!

      January 21, 2011 at 8:21 pm |
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.