TROUBLING ISSUES CONCERNING ISLAM AND U.S. POLICY

Friend or Foecol lloyd

 Author LUTHER R. LLOYD –Sun City Center, Florida –

[Out of Darkness in 2009 and Baffling Puzzle in 2012.  His books are available at www.Authourhouse.com and Amazon.com.  His latest release, Friend or Foe, available 4th QTR 2016]

27 June 2016 –

Fellow Countryman:

I have always been taught that being truthful is the best course of action in any situation even though it may poise difficulty for the parties involved.  Nevertheless, it is the only way to gain and maintain mutual respect.  Appeasement can imply weakness of character and resoluteness in maintaining the principles and ideals of one’s position.  If the opposition reads the actions of another as signifying weakness and it is not corrected, the appeasing party will be disrespected and subject to the loss of what they seek to accomplish even though they may be physically more powerful.  Thus, failure to focus on the right issues can lead to problems and defeat of your goals before one knows what’s happening.  I fear we may be in this situation with Islam today.

Uncovering the truth and fighting for it in all one does these days seems to be a greater obstacle to our nation’s interest than I have ever experienced before in my lifetime.  After all, when the President of the United States says, ISIS, or ISIL is not Islamic and our citizens have been decapitated in the name of Allah, what is a poor citizen to believe about him, and his administration’s understanding of events as well as his leadership?  Well, before I get into some of the issues we live with in the West concerning Islam, I’d like you to know I am a Christian and I speak from a Christian’s perspective as I address these issues.

Frankly, I have been appalled as to how those who should know better throughout our country from sitting governmental leaders to academicians and journalists have addressed the issue of Islam.  From my perspective, their actions have been uninformed and endangered our citizens around the world.  They have blatantly disregarded the historical past, and the undeniable realities of the present by elevating Islam at the expense of our citizens.  As Mr. Daniel Pipes and Ms. Mimi Stillman wrote back in 2002, “In adopting a determinedly apologetic stance, they [Federal authorities] have made themselves an adjunct of the country’s Islamic organizations.  By dismissing any connection between Islam and terrorism, complaining about media distortions, and claiming that America needs Islam, they have turned the U.S. government into a discreet missionary for the faith [Islam].”

Since those words were written, the current administration has elevated and legitimized the Muslim Brotherhood by referring to it as ‘moderate’ and placing a few of its members in government, has denied any connection between terrorism and Islam in its National Security documents and has opened our country to additional Middle Eastern immigration based on humanitarian concerns.  In the meantime, our foreign policy initiatives have provided assistance to Arab Spring events in overthrowing existing leaders, led to a resurgence of the Russian influence in the Middle East, endangered Iraq and Afghanistan’s future stability, stimulated the rise of ISIS or ISIL, allowed extensive and unsettled turmoil in Libya with unnecessary loss of U.S. lives in Benghazi, permitted a standard Islamic ten-year truce with Iran, and permitted a reshuffling of state alliances as the U.S. sits on the sidelines.

So what is our main problem with Islam?  To me it is simple: all the documents of Islam are radical from a Western standpoint.  The Wests’ leadership has intentionally downplayed or disregarded the truths contained in Islamic doctrine and misrepresented the Islamic faith to its’ citizens.

I suspect that many of you are as disturbed by these things as I.  So I’d like to take a few minutes to review some of what I consider to be Western issues concerning Islam and our governance that have contributed to our situation today and have the potential of truly endangering us going forward both here and overseas.

————————————————————————————————

Issue #1: A popular interpretation of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is simply that the religious doctrines of a particular faith are protected from ANY legal actions.

This is simply not true.  The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that our citizens can believe anything they wish, but they cannot take any action contrary to our laws and good order.  Thus, polygamy was banned in 1878, and the use of drugs in religious ceremonies was banned in 1940.  U.S. Islamic organizations rely on our lack of knowledge concerning the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the law in propagandizing their positions visa-vie our laws and court rulings.  Thus, they constantly try to apply the “Freedom of Religion” concept of this amendment to their arguments supporting Islam in the hope that our citizens will not understand that Islamic doctrine as written violates the essence of the First Amendment by supporting a theocratic government and Shari’a law.  It always sounds good unless one is familiar with our laws and court rulings.

Unfortunately, our politicians do the same thing.  Mr. Ryan’s admonishment of Mr. Trump recently is a case in point.  Mr. Ryan was talking about the openness of our culture to all faiths while Mr. Trump was addressing the dangers of the Islamic faith as expressed outwardly through terrorism. Unfortunately, the doctrine of violence against minorities remains an integral part of the Islamic faith, and our failure to handle it properly constitutes an unresolved issue for our government.

—————————————————————————————————

Issue #2: Islam is just a religion and should be treated like any other under our Constitution. 

No…Islam is not just a religion!  The religious portion of Islam, i.e. the five pillars and doctrines concerning heaven and hell, are of no concern to us. However, the principal ideological documents of Islam (the Koran, Hadith, and Sirah) contain and sanction a political movement that places Allah and Islam above any man made law.  In essence, Islam contains a cleverly camouflaged political ideology violating our constitutional concept of the separation of church and state.  Additionally, Islam sidesteps our political system because we allow it to be treated as a religion without countering its political aspirations such as the imposition of Sharia law within our legal system.  It is even granted 501(c)(3) status while it seeks to overthrow our constitutional government in favor of a theological government.  We must take action to de-legitimize the political nature and activities of Islam.   Islam should be treated as a political party, not a religion!

———————————————————————————————-

Issue #3: Culturally acceptable moderate Muslims are religiously acceptable Muslims. 

NO! These are two separate issues.  There is no written moderate Islamic doctrine acceptable to the West and all Muslims.  As a consequence when the term “moderate” is used, what is the ideology behind the use of the term?  There is no way to know.  On the other hand, the term Muslim is defined by the Koran, Hadith, and Sirah, and if followed literally, leads to jihad, violence and destruction of any individual of another faith – an Infidel, i.e. you and I.  This has happened on a regular basis for fourteen hundred years.   Thus, non-Muslims are plagued by the use of the term moderate because a true Muslim man or women must eventually become a jihadi and attack individuals of another faith if he/she wants to be called a Muslim.  The use of this term also tends to lower our sensitivity and alertness to the Muslims around us, i.e. he’s my neighbor.  This will continue until Islam is reformed.

RELIGION IS THE MAIN ISSUE WE FACE AND UNTIL WE CONFRONT IT HEAD ON WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SOLVE THE MUSLIM PROBLEM.

————————————————————————————————-

Issue #4: The Oath of U.S. Citizenship or public office DOES NOT COMPROMISE a Muslim’s faith.

Wrong!  According to Koranic Doctrines, a Muslims’ allegiance is to his God (Allah) and the ulema (fellow Muslims) before any state or government.  Thus, if a practicing Muslim sincerely follows Islamic doctrine he/she cannot help but be in violation of our Constitution when swearing allegiance for citizenship or an oath for governmental office.  The question is simply to whom will he/she be responsible?  Yes, we have had Muslims die in behalf of our country, but at the same time, those who accept their faith as preached under its Imams and have lived in this country for a long time, have gone to fight with ISIS.   I would suggest that religion plays a bigger role in this than currently credited to it by officialdom.  He who goes to fight on behalf of Islam is more in tune with the doctrines of his faith than he who does not go.  How do you uncover the truth of his/her faith in either case?

Religion can no longer be off limits during interviews and interrogations.

————————————————————————————————-

Issue #5: U.S. citizens should not be concerned about Muslim beliefs in a theocracy, i.e. a government without the separation of church and state.

Absolutely incorrect!  Without the separation of church and state, you cannot have a functioning democracy or the effective rule by the consent of the people.  Instead, the church dominates and rules the population in a totalitarian way with Allah as the head of state and its’ Imams functioning in a political and religious manner simultaneously.  There is no “free will” exercised by the people.  Any actions on the part of Muslims to impose a theocratic government would appear to be as seditious as communism was in the 1950s and should be dealt with soon in the courts.

Preaching Islam constitutes preaching the overthrow of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence.

———————————————————————————————–

Issue #6: The Muslim faith only affects Muslims.

Wrong!  By design, the Muslim faith is based on the concept of dualism and is the ONLY religion that is diametrically opposed to the Golden Rule, i.e. “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”  Islam intentionally divides society into two segments: the believers (Dar al-Islam, the House of Surrender) and unbelievers (Dar al-Harb, the House of War).  Obviously, this doctrine favors Muslim interaction with Muslims while categorizing the non-Muslims as “Kifurs”…one of the most demeaning terms known to man.  [The use of the word “Infidel” is really relatively neutral and fails to convey a Muslims true feeling concerning a “Kifer,” or non-believer.]  Oppression, injustice, lack of equality, domination, taxation, as well as mental and physical cruelty dominates an infidel’s life in a Muslim society.  As a Westerner, you would find such a life very unpleasant.

————————————————————————————————

Issue #7: Our elites tell us that religion is not the driving force behind current events.

This is totally and fantastically incorrect!  There is a tendency in the U.S. to think of the Arab as a romantic Bedouin camel jock because of the books and movies most of us have seen, however, those were not such men that flew the airliners into the New York towers.  They were educated men with a fanatical belief in their faith, and they willingly laid all their worldly possession and associations aside to fight and die, if necessary, for Allah.  At the same time, other educated men lead poor, innocent and downtrodden Arabs into suicide missions using the Koran, the very words of Allah. They are led to believe their sacrifice will be a sacred and honored event of personal glory for themselves and their families.  Yes, money may also be presented to their families, but I do not believe for a moment that it is the drawing card that leads them to sacrifice their lives.  Unfortunately, I believe it is to our detriment that those around us don’t believe that strong religious motives ALONE can provide the impetus for such actions.  Everything I have studied about the indoctrination process of such men and women as they go through their indoctrination period leads me to believe RELIGION IS THE MAIN ISSUE WE FACE AND UNTIL WE ADDRESS IT HONESTLY WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SOLVE OUR MUSLIM PROBLEM.

————————————————————————————————-

Issue #8: The basic concepts articulated by our founding fathers need tweaking to improve application in the twenty-first century. 

Strongly disagree!  The bottom line is simply that we must be careful when incorporating new philosophies and approaches into our concepts of old.  Our quests for continued freedom of religion, while experimenting with multiculturalism, political correctness and an overabundance of tolerance in this country could jeopardize everything we have gained.  Turning a blind eye to the true effects of these concepts and practices could destroy the very things we hold dear.  As an example, it may be politically correct to focus on the peaceful aspects of Islam accredited to the propagandists, collaborators, and sympathizers, but this is not where our enemies focus.  Throughout the world, with envy in their hearts and vitriolic messages against the infidel spewing from their lips, leaders teach their fellow Muslims to hate, die and kill under the banner of Islam, so that they might receive a heavenly martyr’s reward.  For most in the Middle East and elsewhere, these are powerful messages that have won many converts to the cause. And, to our chagrin, even those who have experienced the freedoms of the United States, have rejected what we have, and turned our openness against us.  Particularly troubling is the fact that many are educated, from well-to-do families, and have studied and lived in our societies for a number of years.  The question constantly before us is simply, who is next Muslim to follow Allah’s deadly doctrines?

————————————————————————————————

Issue #9: Islam is a peaceful religion. 

No! Not as the doctrines are written and practiced today.  Muslims use the so-called “Peace Verse” in the Koran, Sura 2:256, to support their claim of being peaceful, but they do not tell you about the Islamic “Doctrine of Abrogation” which Mohammad used to change, modify and eliminate an earlier verse by a later pronouncement.  In this case, Sura 9:5, the “Sword Verse” was pronounced just before Mohammad’s death thereby superseding the peace verse.  You wouldn’t know this unless you had studied the Koran and Islamic practice to some degree of depth, or someone had informed you about this doctrine.  As a result, one simply can’t read the Koran and understand its true message.  He or she must know the rules of the game.  Thus, President Bush was partially correct in saying Islam is a peaceful religion, even though the peaceful verses have been overridden by the sword verse.  Circumstances govern a Muslim’s use of either verse.  Obviously, the peace verse will be used in evangelizing, and the war verse if violence is considered necessary.

Over one hundred other Koranic verses support holy war and violence against Christians and other religions.

————————————————————————————————

Issue #10: Allah and the Lord of Christianity are the same deities. 

As you know, both Islam and Christianity are monotheistic faiths, meaning the worship of only one God.  This has led to the assertion, predominately by Muslims, that both faiths worship the same God.  Unfortunately, some Christians espouse this belief as well, thereby adding confusion to their brothers and sisters in Christ.  You see this is simply false.  The Lord of the Bible and Allah are not the same deities.  Why?  Because it is the character, nature and personality of the two that makes the difference.  Christ came to earth that He might be known and that His followers might obtain salvation and eternal life as they emulate Him and develop a personal relationship with Him.  As one follows His path in greater devotion they become more compassionate, caring and loving with an expanded servant’s heart and attitude.

Allah never came to earth.  A Muslim can only know him intellectually and must emulate Mohammad in his earthly travels.  Allah and Mohammad sanction violence in accomplishing the goal of world religious domination.  Thus, as a devotee masters the Doctrines of Islam he can turn to all forms of warfare to accomplish Allah’s purposes. Allah never came to earth but honors his adherents for dying in spreading the Islamic faith.  Thus, we find ourselves in a religious war regardless of how the administration talks about it and we must have boots on the ground to destroy the fanatics and demonstrate a better way of life to those seeking our destruction just as we have done in Germany, Japan, and Korea.

There is no other way to protect our citizens and become victorious.

———————————————————————————————–

Issue #11: Many officials say the enemy follows a distorted Islam. 

This is the propaganda line of the Muslim Brotherhood as well as all Muslims who seek to destroy us and IT IS FALSE.  Everything our enemy is doing is based on Koranic Doctrine, but we have declined to study our enemy and his ideology, in fact, we have gone out of our way to take his word concerning his faith.  We have completely failed to study it ourselves.  Thus, his so-called “cultural experts” and willing academics have blinded us to his true intent.  We have even heard our highest government officials talk about a distorted Islam thereby giving our enemy, Islam, a free pass.  These troubling thoughts are engendered by an appeasement philosophy predicated on emotionalism as to the size of the task and desire to cultivate Muslim support in fighting the radicals or jihadists.  It discounts the resilience, determination, willingness and courage of our citizens to face the truth and overcome the barbarism and false thinking before us.  I would rather deal with Muslims on a truthful basis and chance being respected by them on that basis than live a life of appeasement and be disrespected as a weak person without integrity.

As a Christian, I do not believe I have another choice!

————————————————————————————————

Issue #12: Moderate Muslims are in the best position to overcome the radicals today and in the future.

Moderate Muslims certainly appear to have the best understanding of their faith.  However, this thought seems wrong to me on several levels.  First, I believe the whole philosophy of such a division in Islam is a Western construct supported by Islamist’s to deceive us as to the truth.  In point of fact, I know of no written moderate Islam anyone can follow.  What is its philosophy?  Would it be simply not executing jihad, avoiding the harsh realities of Sharia law, living in a westernized Ataturk secular society, or a combination of all these?  Without the West recognizing Islam as our true enemy and Muslims failing to define and overwhelmingly support a moderate Islam, we will spend another fifteen years -if not longer – chasing terrorists without a successful conclusion to our ideological struggle.

Second, if Islamic doctrine defines the Koran as the sacred word of Allah given to Mohammad, what Muslim human has the right to modify, disregard, or deny Allah’s truths?  The answer to believing Muslims around the world has been and will continue to be, NO ONE!   In essence, the radicals, Islamists, jihadists, or whatever you want to call them, are doing what Koranic doctrine says.  Thus, if I as a Muslim do not join in the fight, I am left with the option of supporting it in other ways as stated in the Koran or denying my faith.  How would you handle this theological quandary as a devout Muslim, or as a Muslim living in a Muslim country?

Finally, the former Prime Minister and now President of Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdogan had this to say on this subject in 2007 and 2010:  He claimed it is “very ugly” for Westerners to draw these distinctions between Muslims as “moderate” or “Islamist” — “It is offensive and an insult to our religion,” he said, because “there is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam, and that’s it.”

————————————————————————————————-

Issue #13:  Jihad simply means a Muslim’s internal struggle in following the path of Allah.

According to the Center for the Political Study of Islam,  it is true that three percent of the Hadith of Bukhara use jihad in the sense of an internal study; however, it is also true that ninety-seven percent of these texts addresses Jihad as Holy War.

Andrew C. McCarthy has written, “In point of fact, according to the authoritative Sharia manual Reliance of the Traveler, which has been endorsed by scholars at Al-Azhar University in Cairo (the seat of Sunni scholarship since the tenth century) and by the International Institute of Islamic Thought (the Muslim Brotherhood’s think-tank), ‘Jihad means to war against non-Muslims.’ The inextricable bond between jihad and Sharia is also easily explained.

In Muslim doctrine, Sharia is deemed the necessary precondition for Islamizing a society. Islam’s designs are hegemonic: Even in its less threatening iterations, it is taken as a given that believers must call all of humanity to the faith. What separates the true moderates from the faux moderates and the terrorists are the lengths to which one is willing to go in carrying out that injunction. That it is an injunction, however, is not open to debate.

Our political leaders can continue to trivialize jihad as if it were some benign struggle to brush after every meal. They can continue to ignore the core tenets that make Sharia antithetical to a free, self-determining society. But they can’t do that and do the only job we need them to do: protect our lives and our liberties.”

————————————————————————————————

Issue #14:  We are not, nor will we be, in a religious war with Islam.

This may be your desire but what does your enemy think and say?  What is the inspiration behind his recruiting, his suicide bombers coming against us, and his drive to continue this conflict against the West in the face of our military superiority?  Listen to some thoughts of his modern leaders.  In 2002 Ayatollah Khomeini said “Those who know nothing of Islam PRETEND that Islam counsels against war.  Those who say this are witless.  Islam says, ‘Kill all the unbelievers’ just as they would kill you.  Islam says, ‘Kill them, put them to the sword and scatter their armies.’  Islam says, ‘Kill in the service of Allah.’  Whatever good there exists is thanks to the sword and the shadow of the sword.  People cannot be made obedient except by the sword.  The sword is the key to Paradise, which can only be opened for Holy Warriors.”

In writing “Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror,” anonymous, subsequently identified as the former head of the Osama bin Laden Unit of the CIA Counter Terrorist Center, Michael Scheuer, wrote “…there are those elites who say that the …Bin Laden movement has nothing to do with religion.” and “In none of the characterizations about Bin Laden is religion identified as part of his appeal.”  But what does Bin Laden say?  In a paraphrase of a few of the statements Bin Laden made on 28 Sep and 21 Oct 2001, anonymous wrote that he said, “I will be mostly quiet…I will incite all Muslims against you…Though you are evil, I care nothing for you, your beliefs, or your ways, but I will force you to end several of your policies toward Muslims.  I will not grow weary, weak, or irresolute.  I will not compromise.  You will, God willing, be defeated.”

And on the third of November of that same year, he stated on Al-Jazeera TV that, “The war is fundamentally religious.  Under no circumstances should we forget this enmity between us and the infidels.  For the enmity is based on creed.”  In essence, Islam is the glue, cohesion, appeal, and rationale that holds the focus of the people and has made Bin Laden and al-Qaeda so deadly.  Indeed, Osama was a charismatic leader in the sense that he was, and still is, much loved by Muslims.  As Michael Scheuer wrote, “Love not so much for Bin Laden the person – although there is much of that – but love for his defense of the faith, the life he lived, the heroic example he set, and the similarity of that example to other heroes in the pantheon of Islamic history.   There was, and is, an emotional bond, an excitement of the historical memory and imagination of Muslims, as well as an allegiance generated by a sense of family, you know “Osama my Brother.’”  To me, the bottom line is simply, If Islam is not the problem, ask yourself why it is that during the last fifteen years of constant jihad, Muslims have failed to take dynamic action against the Koranic rationale supporting the insurgents?  Then too, does anyone really believe young men and women are willing to blow themselves up based on non-religious reasons?

———————————————————————————————–

Issue #15: Non-Muslims can’t understand Islam because of the Arabic language. 

No longer true because of extensive and thorough translations available today.  There is no question the language is difficult to master, but many have done so and translated Koranic thoughts into understandable English as well as other languages.  At the same time, the Islamic faith is difficult because it requires a religiously trained person to guide the non-Muslim through the intricacies of current Muslim thought to avoid blunders.

There are two principle reasons for this.  First, it permits distortions of the truth when evangelizing, or when a Muslim considers himself to be in a less favorable situation.  This is called “tiqyyia” in Arabic, or “ketma” in Persian.  In either case, he is permitted to deceive his adversary.  All are good at this as they will tell you something in English and say the opposite to a fellow Muslim in Arabic. Second, Muslims believe Allah’s words are sacred, perfect, eternal, universal, unalterable and complete (written on a tablet in Heaven.).  Thus, it can never be denied.  But over time, Allah changed his mind, and the Muslim “Doctrine of Abrogation’” came into being in which an earlier verse in the Koran is in fact superseded by a later one.  Therefore, the “Peace Verse” (Sura 2:256) is replaced by the “Sword Verse” (Sura 9:5).  However, you would only know this through study or having been told by your local Imam.

On the other hand, because it is Allah’s sacred word the “Peace Verse” still applies doctrinally.  So, it can be used selectively to prove a point.  Muslims will point to the ‘Peace Verse’ when evangelizing, or they are disadvantaged, and the “Sword Verse” when evangelizing efforts are unsuccessful, or Muslims are capable of prevailing.  Nevertheless, the truth is that the “Sword Verse” is preferred in Islam.  In the West, we believe in a unity ethic substantiated by the Golden Rule and a unity logic supported by the Law of Contradiction.

But as seen by the example above, two contradictory statements can be true at the same time in Islam.  This is so opposite to our Western way of thinking that not many attempt to understand its intricacies.  But, relying on Muslim cultural experts places one at a disadvantage in knowing the truth when coming against our enemies.  Mohammad placed great emphasis on Deception in Warfare as have we over the centuries.  Winning with minimum causalities is the essence of good tactics and strategy.

———————————————————————————————

Issue #16: The Muslim Brotherhood is a moderate organization worthy of US support.

No, it is considered radical.  The Brotherhood was started in 1928 Egypt in protest of Ataturk’s secularization of Turkey and the elimination of the Caliphate.  Its goal has been the restoration of an Islamic theocracy through the rejuvenation of the Caliphate.  In Western terms, it is a radical organization that has tried every technique to gain legitimacy and undermine those it seeks to overcome.

All the modern leaders of Egypt from Gamal Abdul Nasser to Sadat and Mubarak have recognized it as anathema to any secular society and sought to outlaw and/or destroy it as has President as-Sissi.  Yet the current US administration has supported it in toppling Mubarak and the other governments of the Middle East out of a misunderstood reading of its’ true worth to the people it proposed to govern.  When one considers that the people of Egypt only permitted the Brotherhood leaders to remain in power for one year before rising up by the millions (30-40 million in the streets throughout the country protesting their rule at one time) to throw them out of power in Egypt, the true sense of their harsh, unfair, arbitrary and corrupt governance comes into reality.

Worse yet, we who stand for the separation of church and state facilitated the Brotherhood’s dictatorial take over in Egypt.  What a negative mark against our leadership!  No, the Brotherhood is not a moderate organization.  Its leaders will tell you anything to gain favor and put themselves in a position to undermine our government.  Having observed them in action in Egypt, listened to their openly hostile statements of sedition and subversion in the US and Europe and witnessed their associates’ barbaric actions against our citizens in the ME, I do not understand how anyone can refer to them as moderate.  The Brotherhood should be banned from the U.S. NOW!

————————————————————————————————

Issue #17:  Our country is war weary thus implying we really aren’t willing to stand against our enemy.

I agree our citizens are tired of war.  On the other hand, I believe that regardless of how tired we may be, we are more desirous of implementing President Reagan’s “We win, they lose!” philosophy in all such situations than any other.  Additionally, it would seem the only ones who can legitimately make any such claim are those who are in the fight.  Truly, the blame for this foreign policy situation rests squarely on the current administration and particularly the President’s unwillingness to follow the advice of his military leaders.  You must allow them to define the enemy and give them the permission and where-with-all to do the job they must do to be victorious.

As in all previous times when the task seemed so enormous, we must think out-of-the-box and be the over-comers this nation has always been.  We must also remember we are a Christian nation, we are an exceptional nation, and as such we hold ourselves to a higher standard at all times.  We can be friendly infidels and cooperate with those who are willing to partner with us without surrendering our ideological values and cultural identity in the process.

Islamist’s, jihadist’s, and radical’s need to understand this and not be allowed in this country.  They should be thoroughly screened before leaving their home country.  Any questionable evidence should lead to denial of entry.  Religion should not be off limits for discussion since it drives Islamic political thought and action and Islam is the only purported religious faith to which politics applies.  In my belief, the torch of freedom still burns brightly in this country, and our leadership needs to be the principle proponent of it.  Defense of our principles and country are the permanent responsibility of our President and Congress.  They must walk the line which best defends us regardless of political party affiliation.

————————————————————————————————-

Issue #18: To understand Islamic doctrine ALL one needs to do is read the Koran. 

Disagree!  I’ll never forget Andy Rooney saying this years ago as our problems with Islam began.  And since then I have run into many people who tell me they have read the Koran, and I applaud their effort but question their understanding.  You see to understand the doctrines of Islam ones needs three texts, the Koran, the Harith or Tradition of the Prophet, and the Sira or biography of Mohammad.  And if he wants to understand the details of Sharia law, he must read the Reliance of the Traveller mentioned by Andrew McCarthy in his excerpt in Issue #13.  But none of these texts explain the Doctrine of Abrogation by which an earlier verse may be modified or nullified by a later one.

Thus, many of the verses Mohammad was given while trying to evangelize in Mecca were literally canceled when he lived in Medina during his last years.  However, it is only the student of Islam who will know which ones were changed.  Obviously, the Imams’ will know along with the members of their mosques, but the average Westerners will be lost until he talks to an Imam or studies.  The bottom line is simply that reading the Koran will not give the reader what he/she needs to understand the true Islam of today.

————————————————————————————————

Issue #19: Jihad simply means internal struggle of an individual to live as Mohammad lived. 

WRONG!  Deception at its finest.  Jihad does mean internal struggle but is used overwhelmingly in the Koran to signify Holy War and specifically in this sense of pacifying those it seeks as converts.  More precisely as Mr. Daniel Pipes wrote in the New York Post on December 31, 2002, “It means the legal, compulsory, communal effort to expand the territories ruled by Muslims at the expense of territories ruled by non-Muslims.

The purpose of Jihad, in other words, is not directly to spread the Islamic faith but to extend sovereign Muslim power (faith of course, often follows the flag).  Jihad is thus unabashedly offensive in nature, with the eventual goal of achieving Muslim dominion over the entire globe.  What we see today is simply a continuation of what was accepted 1400 years ago by its followers.  Why is it so difficult for Western leaders to accept this fact and respond in every way possible to defeat this menace?

————————————————————————————————

Issue #20: Restoration of the Caliphate should be of little concern in the West. 

Absolutely WRONG!  The whole purpose of the Muslim Brotherhood is to restore the Caliphate that Ataturk dissolved back in 1924.  The Caliphate represented the Golden Days of Islam.  It combined the religious-political rule under a single Islamic governing body.  It had two principal missions, 1. Constantly expanding the Islamic faith in accordance with Islamic theology and 2. Administering/ruling the states and territories it conquered under Sharia law.   Thus, to allow the existence of the Caliphate would mean its constant aggression.

The only way to stop the reestablished Caliphate is to destroy it and its ability to administer its captured territories.  This is an absolute must!  There is no other way.  It must be destroyed and completely extinguished, or it will develop into another Iran and be far more menacing.  We should do this as soon as possible before it expands its territory and makes it even more difficult to destroy regarding all our resources.

———————————————————————————————–

Issue #21:  Because the doctrines of Islam permit lying to protect Muslim individuals and their faith from harm trust becomes a grave concern.

Absolutely.  Unfortunately, this is true, and it is why vetting someone who says he is a Muslim is such a problem.   How do you vet someone whose faith permits him to lie without consequences?  Frankly, I am not certain you can.  Thus, I do not believe Muslims should be allowed in the U.S. until this issue is resolved even though we have been allowing their entry for years.  Times have changed.  Islam has reasserted its militancy.   The evidence is all around us.  The quest for Islamic supremacy – political and religious – is being aggressively pushed.  The message is clear but slow to be accepted: fight for your way Mr. American or accept that which we bring to you.

The question we all have is what can we do to help ensure the culturally acceptable Muslim is indeed acceptable?  For me, a place to start would be presenting a Muslim desiring to live in the U.S. with a document highlighting Islam’s doctrinal beliefs that conflict with those in our Constitution and Declaration of Independence.  (See Enclosure #1 for a Proposed Letter to Muslim Immigrants.)     Then I would require them to sign a legally binding promise that they would not engage in any activities violating our laws in these areas.

The punishment for doing so would be immediate deportation without the right to appeal.   I would ensure that this document is published openly so that all our citizens would become knowledgeable of these key differences.  I believe they would immediately see the need for such a procedure and gain insight as to the real problem we face.   Granted this is merely paper and ensures nothing, but over time, it should help to limit Muslims of questionable character from desiring entry.  Such a document would also serve to educate both the applicant and our people concerning Islam…something that really needs to be accomplished.  This may sound strange, but many Muslims do not understand their faith because they are illiterate and only listen to their Imams.

————————————————————————————————-

Issue #22: We need to help the Muslim refugees from the Middle East and our vetting systems are good enough.

No, let’s get serious…it takes time to vet a Muslim!  Over the course of President Obama’s tenure, he and his administration have gone out of their way to establish and support a truly assertive and aggressive counter culture in our country through Muslim immigration and the willful acceptance of minimally vetted refugees from Muslim countries.  The dangers inherent in the Islamic faith have been witnessed by all Americans in Europe and around the world.  Theirs is the only faith that has a political agenda in which violence has been authorized to meet Allah’s goals.

Although Muslim’s may be culturally acceptable, their religious doctrines and actions over the past 1,400-plus years leave us all in a quandary as to whether or not a Trojan Horse of deadly consequence has been allowed to gain a significant foothold here at home with little resistance from Congress or our uninformed fellow citizens.  The Administration’s policies may have been directed at improving party dominance, but, from my perspective, they have not been focused on the best interests of our country.  Hillary Clinton has been a fellow traveler down this road.  As a consequence, I do not believe she should be our president, and I sincerely hope others will consider this in November.  I understand this could make me sound like a one issue voter, but I assure you I am not.

No matter how one attempts to justify the influx of Muslims into our country, I find the administration’s policies absolutely vindictive, extremely misguided and totally disrespectful of our society.  To think that anyone who would intentionally plant a cancerous element in our country and then do very little, if anything, to prevent its’ metastasizing is beyond my wildest imagination in defining the word “change,” which he used incessantly when first running for office in 2008.

What’s more the fact that his party and their opponents were willing to accept his direction in this matter is absolutely criminal to me.  In point of fact, our immigration law (PL 414) has been violated.  In my opinion, those who have been elected to protect our government and society have turned the other cheek thereby violating their oaths of office to the detriment of all our citizens.  This is only one area of concern, add in the others and is it any wonder American citizens are turning out in such large numbers to address the issues they hold most dear during our forthcoming 2016 Election?  I think not and my prayer is that we will return to staunch, uncompromising leadership when enforcing the laws on the books and develop new ones that are needed to counter the many past failures arising as a result of the last administration.———————————————————————–

Enclosure 2 to Fellow Countrymen Letter of 27 June 2016

In Item #21 of Enclosure 1, I proposed that we make an effort to point out specific areas of the Koran, Hadith and Sira that place Muslims who are intent on coming to our country in conflict with our laws and society.  While short, the following cover letter would be accompanied by a paper referring to specific verses each would be given for review and acceptance.  We must understand that not all Muslims are familiar with the specifics of their faith.  Thus, they must understand their faith and our laws at the same time.  Our citizens also need this knowledge to understand what and why this type action is necessary; after all, we do not teach civics in our classrooms any more.  Thus, such a document would be designed to educate both parties and hopefully bring harmony and unity to our society.  This will only happen if the problems we face are dealt with honestly.

You may be offended by the need for such a letter because I am also.  On the other hand, we have had individuals take the oath of Citizenship only to attack us later.   When a judge asked the offender about the violation of his oath, he simply said he was lying.  We will always have this problem because this is permitted in Islam.  No piece of paper can counter this.  On the other hand, often times being challenged to understand the true situation and having to sign a document that states you do, may have a deterrent effect on someone who is leaning toward the radical side.  I believe such a document must deal specifically with the problem at hand and not a broad statement as “the laws of the land.”  Something like the following might bring a lot of clarity to all parties concerned.

—————————————————————————————–

PROPOSED LETTER TO MUSLIM IMMIGRANTS

Dear Potential Citizen:

It gives me great pleasure to extend a cordial welcome to you on behalf of all our citizens.  Our democracy offers you the greatest freedom to be the person you desire to be within the confines of our laws and our society.  However, it is paramount that you understand that while the First Amendment to our Constitution grants you freedom of religion to believe as you wish, the Supreme Court of the United States has constrained your ability to act out any religious doctrine that is contrary to our laws.  Thus, it has denied entry and citizenship to those practicing polygamy and on another occasion, the use of drugs in their religious ceremonies. 

Further our country practices the division of church and State and considers the application of a theocratic government to be in violation of our Declaration of Independence and Constitution.  Public Law 418, the Nationality Act, of 27 June 1952, specifically denies permanent entry and citizenship to anyone who would seek to impose any such system of government on our citizenry.

The doctrines in the Koran, Hadith and Sira are in specific violation of the laws of our country as per the above law.  Additionally, specific Koranic verses leave no doubt individual believers are and remain our enemy until we submit to Allah.  Furthermore, we are now aware you are authorized to deceive us as to your true intent while you are moving to take over or destroy our government in favor of yours.  If this is not enough, your faith doctrines, state beyond any shadow of a doubt, that you may use violence to accomplice your goals.  We witness this being done in the Middle East today by those you, and many in our Western government, have chosen to call radicals or jihadists.

The problem facing us today is that many of you have chosen to call yourselves moderates at the same time you call yourselves Muslims.  Unfortunately by your own texts you become our enemy if you say you are a Muslim.  If you say you are a moderate Muslim our quandary is that we do not know what you mean because there is no written recognizable moderate doctrine defining your status, while the President of Turkey, a NATO ally, says categorically their is no such thing as a moderate.  We would like you to be moderates who support our country and its laws, but the reality of your faith is that you may attack us at any time you decide to take your faith literally.  Allah absolves you for doing so but our citizens die.  This is our experience and quandary.

Thus, if you desire permanent residence in the United States and citizenship, we must ask you to renounce any effort on your part, or in joining others, to seek the practical application of those Islamic doctrines as stated in the Koran, Hadith, and Sira that are contrary to our Declaration of Independence and Constitution.  If you are unable to do this, we do not believe you will be able to assimilate and support our country as is desired. We believe you would be much happier in a country where you could practice your faith without restrictions.

We look forward to you joining us and being a citizen of our great country.  On the other hand, we understand the power of faith and wish you well if you do not desire to declare a position that is culturally acceptable to us but opposite your faith beliefs.

Sincerely,

Director; Immigration and Naturalization

—————————————————————————————-

Conclusion  

There are many issues that apply when considering Muslim immigration.  Our response to all of them and the liberal Democrats who are the most prone to espouse and push them on the uneducated and apathetic public must result in education.  We must tell the truth and do it boldly to make our points.  Failure to do so has the potential of leading us down the same path of the German people of the late 30’s and early 40’s who found themselves with a Hitler in their midst and who used them and sacrificed their families, country, futures and fortunes for the Third Reich.  Heaven forbid anything like this happening in our time on earth!

————————————————————————————————

About the Author

Colonel (Ret.) Luther R. (Luke) Lloyd, USA, was trained as a Middle East specialist while serving in the U.S. Army.  He holds an MA in Arab Studies from the American University in Beirut Lebanon.  Later he lived and worked in Saudi Arabia, & Egypt.  U.S. assignments included the Current Intelligence Division, Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the Office of the Joint Chief of Staff (OJCS) in the Pentagon as well as the Political-Military Division, J-5 the Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force (RDJTF) which later became the United States Central Command (USCENTCOM) at MacDill where he retired as the Division Chief.

He has taught off and on at his church and at his Continuing Care Facility, Freedom Plaza, where he has resided since 2001.  He has also been a frequent speaker in the Sun City Center, Florida area and has published two educational novels: Out of Darkness in 2009 and Baffling Puzzle in 2012.  His books are available at www.Authourhouse.com and Amazon.com.  The new book, Friend or Foe, should be out by years end.  It contains two appendices reprinted in this document.  He has elected to publish this portion of his book separately to facilitate the use of his material by others in discussing and coming to an understanding of the true issues we face today.  Hopefully this will assist in bringing reality into our approach to all Muslims.

——————————————————————————————–

  • Ryan, Paul, House Speaker Paul Ryan Condemns Donald Trump’s Muslim Comments, Chicago Tribune, News/Nation & World, 8 December 2015.
  •  See Chapter 11 and its notes in Mr. Lloyd’s first book, Out of Darkness, 2009, for a meaningful discussion of the term Kifar and its true connotation to the believing Muslim down through the ages.
  •  Three Suras in the Koran support the Doctrine of Abrogation: 2:106, 16:101 and 13:39.
  •  ACT! For America, Is the Gitmo Bar Pro-Islamist? Sat., 13 March 2010, Andy McCarthy, March 22, 2010, 12:53:32 PM EDT.
  •  Glaszov, Jamie, The Study of Political Islam, Front page magazine.com, February 5, 2007.  Interview with Bill Warner, Center for Political Islam, page 2.
  • From Act for America E-mail of October 13,2014 at 7:48 AM, The U.S State Department: Out of Touch with America, Out of Touch With Reality.
  • Cited in Editor’s review of Ronald de Valderano’s, Terror: The War Against the West, http://libertyhaven.com/politicsandcurrentevents/crimeandterrorism/terrorwar.shtml accessed online 13 August 2002, page 23.
  • Anonymous, Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror, Bassey’s, Washington, D.C., 2004, pages 160, 166, and 168.
  • Ibid, page 249, Statement of Osama bin Laden, Al-Jazirah Space Channel Television, AJSCT, 3 Nov
  • Letter to the Editor, Luke Lloyd, Sun City Center, Florida, No One-Issue Voter, Tampa Tribune, Nation & World Section, Saturday, April 30, 2016, page 12.
  • Glaszov, Jamie, The Study of Political Islam, frontpagemagazine.com, February 5, 2007.  Interview with Bill Warner, Center for Political Islam, page 2.
  • Letter to the Editor, Luke Lloyd, Sun City Center, Florida, No One-Issue Voter, Tampa Tribune, Nation & World Section, Saturday, April 30, 2016, page 12.
  • From Act for America E-mail of October 13,2014 at 7:48 AM, The U.S State Department: Out of Touch with America, Out of Touch With Reality.

——————————————————————————————

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Enclosure 2 to Fellow Countrymen Letter of 27 June 2016 PROPOSED LETTER TO MUSLIM IMMIGRANTS

 

 

In Item #21 of Enclosure 1, I proposed that we make an effort to point out specific areas of the Koran, Hadith and Sira that place Muslims who are intent on coming to our country in conflict with our laws and society.  While short, the following cover letter would be accompanied by a paper referring to specific verses each would be given for review and acceptance.  We must understand that not all Muslims are familiar with the specifics of their faith.  Thus, they must understand their faith and our laws at the same time.  Our citizens also need this knowledge to understand what and why this type action is necessary; after all, we do not teach civics in our classrooms any more.  Thus, such a document would be designed to educate both parties and hopefully bring harmony and unity to our society.  This will only happen if the problems we face are dealt with honestly.

 

You may be offended by the need for such a letter because I am also.  On the other hand, we have had individuals take the oath of Citizenship only to attack us later.   When a judge asked the offender about the violation of his oath, he simply said he was lying.  We will always have this problem because this is permitted in Islam.  No piece of paper can counter this.  On the other hand, often times being challenged to understand the true situation and having to sign a document that states you do, may have a deterrent effect on someone who is leaning toward the radical side.  I believe such a document must deal specifically with the problem at hand and not a broad statement as “the laws of the land.”  Something like the following might bring a lot of clarity to all parties concerned.

 

Dear Potential Citizen:

It gives me great pleasure to extend a cordial welcome to you on behalf of all our citizens.  Our democracy offers you the greatest freedom to be the person you desire to be within the confines of our laws and our society.  However, it is paramount that you understand that while the First Amendment to our Constitution grants you freedom of religion to believe as you wish, the Supreme Court of the United States has constrained your ability to act out any religious doctrine that is contrary to our laws.  Thus, it has denied entry and citizenship to those practicing polygamy and on another occasion, the use of drugs in their religious ceremonies.  Further our country practices the division of church and State and considers the application of a theocratic government to be in violation of our Declaration of Independence and Constitution.  Public Law 418, the Nationality Act, of 27 June 1952, specifically denies permanent entry and citizenship to anyone who would seek to impose any such system of government on our citizenry.

 

The doctrines in the Koran, Hadith and Sira are in specific violation of the laws of our country as per the above law.  Additionally, specific Koranic verses leave no doubt individual believers are and remain our enemy until we submit to Allah.  Further, you are authorized to deceive us as to your true intent while you are moving to take over or destroy our government in favor of yours.  If this is not enough, your faith doctrines state beyond any shadow of a doubt that you may use violence to accomplice your goals.  We witness this being done in the Middle East today by those you, and many in our Western government, have chosen to call radicals or jihadists.

 

The problem facing us today is that many of you have chosen to call yourselves moderates at the same time you call yourselves Muslims.  Unfortunately by your own texts you become our enemy if you say you are a Muslim.  If you say you are a moderate Muslim our quandary is that we do not know what you mean because there is no written recognizable moderate doctrine defining your status, while the President of Turkey, a NATO ally, says categorically their is no such thing as a moderate.  We would like you to be moderates who support our country and its laws, but the reality of your faith is that you may attack us at any time you decide to take your faith literally.  Allah absolves you for doing so but our citizens die.  This is our experience and quandary.

 

Thus, if you desire permanent residence in the United States and citizenship, we must ask you to renounce any effort on your part, or in joining others, to seek the practical application of those Islamic doctrines as stated in the Koran, Hadith, and Sira that are contrary to our Declaration of Independence and Constitution.  If you are unable to do this, we do not believe you will be able to assimilate and support our country as is desired. We believe you would be much happier in a country where you could practice your faith without restrictions.

 

We look forward to you joining us and being a citizen of our great country.  On the other hand, we understand the power of faith and wish you well if you do not desire to declare a position that is culturally acceptable to us but opposite your faith beliefs.

 

Sincerely,

Director

Immigration and Naturalization

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

About the Author

 

 

Colonel (Ret) Luther R. (Luke) Lloyd, USA, was trained as a Middle East specialist while serving in the U.S. Army.  He holds an MA in Arab Studies from the American University in Beirut Lebanon.  Later he lived and worked in Saudi Arabia, & Egypt.  U.S. assignments included the Current Intelligence Division, Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the Office of the Joint Chief of Staff (OJCS) in the Pentagon as well as the Political-Military Division, J-5 the Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force (RDJTF) which later became the United States Central Command (USCENTCOM) at MacDill where he retired as the Division Chief.

 

He has taught off and on at his church and at his Continuing Care Facility, Freedom Plaza, where he has resided since 2001.  He has also been a frequent speaker in the Sun City Center, Florida area and has published two educational novels: Out of Darkness in 2009 and Baffling Puzzle in 2012.  His books are available at www.Authourhouse.com and Amazon.com.  The new book, Friend or Foe, should be out by years end.  It contains two appendices reprinted in this document.  He has elected to publish this portion of his book separately to facilitate the use of his material by others in discussing and coming to an understanding of the true issues we face today.  Hopefully this will assist in bringing reality into our approach to all Muslims.

 

 

 

Tags :