Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden has announced that American public schools must teach more “about the Islamic faith.” Speaking to the largest Muslim political action council in the country at the “Million Muslim Votes” conference, Biden said, “I wish we taught more in our schools about the Islamic faith. I wish we talked about all the great confessional faiths. It’s one of the great confessional faiths.”
In an age of ignorance, learning more about other religions is a very noble goal, and tolerance for others’ beliefs is one of the most basic tenets of American society. But is Biden correct that American schoolchildren are not taught enough about Islam?
The teaching of any religion for the purpose of instilling belief or participation in it or its rituals is contrary to the establishment clause of the First Amendment. For many years now, however, concerned parents and organizations from across the country have documented that Islam is indeed taught in schools, but not in the scholarly, disinterested, factually accurate fashion appropriate to our religiously pluralistic society.
As far back as 2008, Cinnamon Stillwell documented in The San Francisco Chronicle that, in school districts from New Jersey to Texas, American K-12 students received what she called “indoctrination” in Islam. Examples she cited included students being taught (compulsorily) how to perform Islamic prayers by Islamic evangelists, being segregated according sex and dressed in traditional Islamic clothing, and learning from textbooks which describe jihad as an effort to convince “others to take up worthy causes, such as funding medical research,” as well as almost completely erasing Jews from the history of the Middle East. Not only that, some of the people who brought those workshops into the schools were also members of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), an organization long tied to terrorist groups such as Hamas and even al-Qa‘idah.
A decade ago, high school students in Wellesley, Massachusetts, were brought for a field trip to the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center to experience a Muslim mid-day prayer ceremony. While there, boys and girls were segregated according to Islamic practice and invited to join the adult Muslims in their prayers. Parents were only told that students would be taught about the mosque’s architecture, and then watch the prayer service without participating. (This particular mosque has also been revealed as having been founded and financed by clerics with deep terrorist ties — not to mention that both Boston Marathon bombers, as well as many other terrorists, were known congregants of a sister mosque several miles away.)
In 2015, in both Florida and Tennessee, students were taught to write out the English translation of the Shahadah, the Islamic equivalent of the Catholic credo. The Nashville seventh graders’ class also taught, without qualification, that the “angel Gabriel told Muhammad that he was to be a prophet of Allah,” and, reportedly, “skipped Christianity.”
In 2018, in West Virginia, seventh-graders were actually assigned to “Fast for 24 hours and give lunch money and food to a food bank, to sympathize with Muslims going through Ramadan.” Parents of the student who complained said that, “most of the faith aspects of Christianity and Judaism were stripped from the lesson plan by the teacher.”
And in 2019, concerned parents in Newton, Massachusetts, sued their local school district after students were taught that “Jews and Christians deliberately forged their holy texts to contradict the Muslim Koran” and that “Zionism has ‘little connection’ to Jewish history in ‘Palestine[.]’” The plaintiffs’ massive complaint details how ninth graders read from a supposedly scholarly book by a Georgetown University professor saying that, “Arabic is… in a very real sense… the language of God.” Furthermore, these same teenagers — from one of the most heavily Jewish suburbs in America — were subjected to blatant anti-Israel propaganda in their history courses, some of it via the use of teaching materials financed by the government of Qatar, a well-known funder of Hamas.
Most of these examples — only a small list out of many dozens — coincide with the implementation of Common Core throughout American public schools during the Obama administration. Common Core’s origins lie with global educational initiatives funded by Libya, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia. Recipients of such funding include the massive textbook publisher Pearson Education, which also received funding from CAIR.
The organization which hosted the “Million Muslim Votes” conference at which Vice President Biden spoke is called Emgage Action. They have proudly partnered with CAIR in organizing American Muslims ahead of the 2020 election, and this particular event prominently featured Nihad Awad, CAIR’s president. They have also accused the Israeli army of using “Torture or cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment” against Palestinian children, and support the anti-Semitic BDS movement against Israel.
These are not organizations with which anybody, let alone a presidential nominee, should be associating — especially urging to help him win an election.
The irony of Biden’s comment is that while American public school students actually learn quite a bit about Islam in their required classes, very little of what they learn is either accurate or presented appropriately. In a sense, Biden is correct that American children should learn more about Islam — as in the truth, both good and bad, taught like any other academic subject. Fairness is imperative: telling Muslim children to recite Christian prayers as part of an assignment would rightly result in mountain ranges of lawsuits; the reverse cannot be allowed either.
In teaching Islam, schools must use properly vetted curriculum which gives equal time to all religions, and does not officially endorse tenets of Islamic belief as fact. School materials must also not originate from terrorist-linked organizations, let alone foreign governments or any other overtly political entity.
As a man jockeying for a position of enormous influence over American public education, Vice President Biden should be aware of this problem. If he is not, and persists in believing that curriculum on Islam is scarce in American schools, his ignorance is deeply troubling. If he is, and seeks to encourage yet more taxpayer-funded Islamic indoctrination, then that is far more troubling still. And when such supportive intentions are pledged to the likes of CAIR and its allies, then we are reminded again for the thousandth time that we, as voters, take our children’s futures in our hands.
By Barry Nussbaum, Son of Auschwitz survivors, Founder American Truth Project, Foreign and Domestic Policy Commentator
Have We Forgotten What Happened On 9/11?
Sharia in the U.S. Judicial System?
The U.S. Senate’s recent confirmation of Zahid Quraishi as America’s first Muslim federal judge to a lifetime position on the District Court of New Jersey raises some concerning questions.
First and foremost, there is the question of his faith. Does it matter if Zahid Quraishi is a Muslim? The Left would, of course, maintain that raising the Muslim identity of Quraishi is racist, bigoted and “Islamophobic.” But those who understand the reality of Sharia – and the fact that Islam is not a race — understand that this matter is more complicated than what might first meet the eye.
It may very well matter if Quraishi is not just a Muslim “by name” – or just a “secular Muslim” by birth heritage. Indeed, if, as an adult adherent to Islam, he devoutly recites the Shahada — “There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah” – then Quraishi’s Muslimness could matter very much. That’s because it could indicate whether or not Quraishi would ever uphold aspects of Sharia – Islamic law – in his legal rulings.
As a survivor of Sharia law, I can tell you: Sharia matters — and in the most horrendous and painful of ways.
It is vital to understand that in Islam, Allah’s Law is supreme for Muslims, above all other laws and legal systems. And that poses a problem for America when Islam resides on its territory, because Sharia is completely incompatible with the U.S. Constitution and the foundations of a free society.
Quraishi’s relationship to Islam, therefore, matters a great deal — seeing that his new position entails significant power and influence in America.
So let’s dig a little bit deeper on Quraishi.
The Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) surprisingly did not come out and cheer Quraishi’s appointment — as one might have expected them to do. Instead, the Muslim “civil rights” organization appeared to be quite furious about him. Zahra Billoo, head of CAIR’s San Francisco branch, issued a statement affirming that she “would much rather have a white Christian judge with progressive values… It’s not enough that he is Muslim. In fact, it’s insulting.”
It appears that the problem for Billoo and CAIR is that Quraishi is not a Muslim from an apparent “list” of “20 to 50 Muslims who have been in the fight” for “social justice.” One unnamed Muslim politician who complained to Slate magazine about Quraishi’s appointment echoed the same theme: “We don’t know what his stances are on civil rights because you can’t find one article or anything that he’s written publicly about the Muslim struggle in the last 20 years post-9/11.”
For those concerned about Quraishi’s potential ties to Sharia, this negative disposition from the “Sharia camp” toward the Muslim judge might appear to be good news. But is it?
CAIR’s concern about Quraishi’s supposed lack of support for “progressive values” appears to be a good sign in light of CAIR’s own record of opposing counterterror measures and slandering opponents of jihad and Sharia tyranny. However, CAIR’s disposition toward Quraishi tells us little, if anything, about the key issue at stake: does the judge hold Islamic values or not?
The narrative takes another peculiar twist when we examine what transpired during Quraishi’s questioning before the Senate Judiciary Committee: When asked by Committee Chair, Democrat Senator Dick Durbin: “What do you know about Sharia law?” Quraishi answered that he knew “nothing about Sharia.“
Quraishi knows “nothing” about Islam or Islamic Law?
Christine Douglass-Williams has commented on Quraishi’s dubious answer:
“Virtually everyone knows something about the Sharia. In his position, Quraishi is likely to know a lot, and was probably fibbing, and not in an intelligent way, either. It isn’t possible that a man of his standing, who ‘has served as a military prosecutor and Army captain in Iraq, as an assistant U.S. Attorney who has tried cases of public corruption, organized crime and financial fraud, and as a white-collar criminal defense lawyer’, would know ‘NOTHING’ about Sharia.”
What makes the matter even more peculiar is that when one pulls up Quraishi’s questionnaire answers for the Senate Judiciary Committee, one finds that he is mentioned as a “Muslim” many times in his “Honors and Awards” list. So Quraishi is praised, rewarded and held in acclaim by the Muslim community for his achievements in light of his Muslimness, but he personally doesn’t know anything about Islamic law at all?
Could it be that Quraishi might actually not be the incidental Muslim he postures as being? Could it be that he has been recognized and awarded by important prominent Muslim organizations because they gauged that, among other things, he actually is somewhat of an adherent Muslim after all?
Is it possible that CAIR might really not be as upset as it is claiming to be about Quraishi’s appointment? Or maybe it is upset, but not for the reasons it has given? Could it also be that certain players involved in this narrative are engaging in some form of taqiyya – the command in Islam for Muslims to deceive non-Muslims?
Would it also be out of bounds to ask: even if Quraishi is not an adherent Muslim, is it legitimate to be concerned that he one day could become one?
It is vital to stress at this point that Islam is not just a “religion” the way that Christianity and Judaism are religions. Islam is much more than a “faith.” For example, like Judaism, Islam has a legal system — but Islamic Law extends far beyond any Judaic (or even secular) legal system. Sharia embodies all the commands of Allah and all the examples of Muhammad-as divine law that must be implemented in all areas of life.
Qur’an 33:21 is just one verse of many that confirms that Muhammad is “an excellent pattern” for Muslims to follow. It would do well for people to keep in mind that the “excellent” examples that Mohammed set for his followers included the following: marrying a six-year-old girl, A’ishah, and having sex with her when she was nine (Sahih al-Bukhari 5134); encouraging rape of female captives (Qur’an 4:24); stating that women are stupid (Qur’an 2:282) and that hell is comprised of mostly women (Bukhari 29); commanding men to beat their wives (Qur’an 4:34); and being merciless to a woman who had been beaten so brutally that her bruise was green (Bukhari 5825).
With some of these matters in mind, the question surfaces: would or could an American Muslim federal judge consider such material as a basis for his rulings? According to Islamic law, a Muslim judge must do so. Sharia mandates that no true Muslim is obligated to obey the laws of a non-Muslim country. Qur’an 33:1 commands to “not obey the disbelievers and the hypocrites.” Qur’an 4:60 says that those who “refer legislation” to the non-Muslims are led “far astray.” And Qur’an 9:3 says that “Allah is disassociated from the disbelievers, and [so is] His Messenger.” According to Islamic tradition, the revelation of that last verse allowed Muhammad to break the Treaty of al-Hudaibiyah.
Let us be clear: an American judge who follows Muhammad’s example can take an oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution, and not really mean it. In fact, Muhammad instructs such a judge exactly what to do in this situation: “if I take an oath and later find something else better than that, then I do what is better and expiate my oath.” (Bukhari 5518)
The supremacy of Islamic Law over all other laws still applies today. The Islamic website International Shariah Movement is run by certified Islamic scholars. Its post “Obey the Law of the Land?” cites Qur’an 33:1.
Under Sharia, if a woman is raped, a Muslim judge must disregard any forensic or non-witness evidence, because Qur’an 24:13 requires “four male witnesses” for a rape conviction.
A beaten woman may also easily be denied divorce, because Qur’an 4:34 commands that “Men are in charge of women,” and so may “strike them.”
That is exactly what a Muslim judge in an Iranian Islamic court told me personally when I was a 15-year-old child bride, desperate for a divorce to escape the beatings. In fact, a beaten woman who leaves Islam must be hunted down and murdered, according to Islamic law, because Muhammad said, “Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.” (Bukhari 6922)
With all these realities in mind, it is clear that if we cannot at least ask Judge Zahid Quraishi some questions regarding his adherence, or non-adherence, to Islamic law, or even understand that the issue of Quraishi’s Muslimness is an important one to address, then America is in deep trouble.
As an individual who suffered under Sharia, and was able to escape its monstrous clutches, I strongly encourage my fellow Americans to ask the right questions in this vital – and troubling – narrative about America’s new federal judge.
Iran Elects Mass Murderer as Next President
The ‘election’ for president is over in Iran. The grand ayatollah handpicked Ebrahim Raisi who was then ‘elected’. He’s not just a hardline jihadist, but he’s a mass murderer and a big-time one. And more importantly, he’s very proud of his background.
He’s accused by the world of having personally supervised the trials and executions of somewhere between 5,000 and 40,000 Iranians in the 1980s. He has personally been sanctioned by most of the world, including the United States, who cannot even legally talk to him.
Meanwhile, Raisi calls himself a defender of human rights when asked about the mass executions. The guy is a world-class war criminal. He ran the death panel that sentenced and executed tens of thousands of political prisoners at the end of the 1980s. He is now the leader of the world’s most notorious state sponsor of terrorism.
The first thing we have to know about Ebrahim Raisi is that these charges of mass murder as far as the Iranian mullahs are concerned, are not a problem but rather they are a bonus. It’s not that they picked him in spite of his terrible record. They picked him because of his terrible record.
Domestically, the ayatollah is sending a message to the Iranian people who remain discontented in large part with the Islamic regime. The message is simply put, “ you are not going to be able to dissent. There will be no ability to protest. Anybody who expresses any kind of public disagreement, it’s very clear what kind of treatment they’re going to get with Ebrahim Raisi as the President of Iran.”
Keep in mind, Raisi was not elected. He was selected. He was selected by the supreme leader of Iran, who is the real power in the country, and he is going to execute the policies of the supreme leader. The supreme leader’s disposition toward his own people and toward the world is revealed by the person he selects to be the President of Iran.
By picking Raisi, Ayatollah Khamenei is not only showing that he’s going to crack down harshly on dissent within Iran, but he’s showing that he understands that with Biden’s handlers running the United States, that the United States is weak, is not going to stand up to him and this is his time to step up Iran’s support for terrorism worldwide, supporting Hamas, supporting Hezbollah, supporting Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
The Iranian regime has also in the past supported al-Qaida and the Taliban, and other jihadi groups as well as and this is much less known. It’s clear that Iran understands that leftism is corrosive to Western civilization, and they want to destroy Western civilization. Therefore Iran will support both the leftists and the Islamists around the world who are anti-America and anti-Israel.
From now on, we can expect to see increased belligerence on the part of Iran. And Raisi’s ascension to the presidency means that Iran is going to be strutting around and sponsoring terrorism around the world and cracking down on its own people within the country.
By Barry Nussbaum, Son of Auschwitz survivors, Founder American Truth Project, Foreign and Domestic Policy Commentator