A group of highly respected national security professionals dubbed “Team B II” are releasing a major new study today of the threat America faces from Islamic shariah law currently creeping into our legal system.
HUMAN EVENTS got an advance look at the document. The report, entitled “Shariah: The Threat to America” is now available in full online at www.ShariahTheThreat.org.
This much-needed analysis takes a fresh look at shariah law, placing vital information in the hands of average, everyday Americans and intelligence officials alike and offers a chilling threat assessment of shariah’s crushing incompatibility with the U.S. Constitution.
The report is being released today at a Capitol Hill press conference by members of the “Team B II” threat assessment team. Those team members include former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Lieutenant General William G. “Jerry” Boykin, former Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew C. McCarthy and Center for Security Policy President Frank Gaffney.
Members of Congress also present to support the release are Representatives Trent Franks (R.-Ariz.), Pete Hoekstra (R.-Mich.) and Michele Bachmann (R.-Minn.).
During the Cold War with Soviet Russia, analysis from the CIA and other intelligence agencies had missed the mark by basing threat assessments on input from policymakers, not on actual, factual threat doctrine. In 1976, “Team B” was formed to take a more thorough, realistic look at the enemy.
Their 1976 work product challenged then-prevailing official U.S. government intelligence estimates of the intentions and offensive capabilities of the Soviet Union and the policy known as “détente” that such estimates ostensibly justified.
Given today’s politically correct climate, the likelihood of a federal government-driven “Team B” threat assessment scenario at this crucial time is remote.
This study from highly respected, top intelligence and policy experts is the result of months of analysis, discussion and drafting and focuses on the preeminent totalitarian threat of our time: the legal-political-military doctrine known within Islam as shariah.
Other distinguished members of “Team B II” are: former CIA Director R. James Woolsey; Lt. Gen. Harry “Ed” Soyster, former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency; Adm. James “Ace” Lyons, former commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet; Ambassador Henry Cooper, former director of Strategic Defense Initiative; and Joseph Schmitz, former inspector general at the Department of Defense.
The analysis provides a comprehensive “second opinion” to official U.S. government assessments and characterizations of the shariah threat. It offers examples from history and from widely accepted sources of authority in the Islamic community to present the unfiltered nature of shariah law, challenging today’s assumptions euphemistically described as “violent extremism”—as well as the policies of co-existence, accommodation and submission that are rooted in those assumptions.
A sample from the report:
Tolerance in America Versus the Quran
“This brief examination of American principles establishes that American principles are principles of liberty are rooted in mutual toleration. It follows that, in the United States, liberty was never intended to tolerate the intolerant and its citizens were never intended to tolerate totalitarian doctrines. Put differently, intolerant, totalitarian doctrines are in direct conflict with the stated purpose of American government ‘to secure these rights [endowed by their Creator].’
“Even a fairly superficial reading of the Quran and other primary source documents of shariah reveals that it is a political-military-legal doctrine, rather than a religion as defined by the American standards mentioned above. The prominent Islamic scholar Abdul Mawdudi concurs with this assessment, saying: “But the truth is that Islam is not the name of a ‘Religion,’ nor is ‘Muslim’ the title of a ‘Nation.’ In reality, Islam is a revolutionary ideology and program which seeks to alter the social order of the whole world and rebuild it in conformity with its own tenets and ideals.”
“Shariah is, moreover, a doctrine that mandates the rule of Allah over all aspects of society. Specifically, in contrast—and fundamentally at odds—with the Virginia Statute for Religious Liberty, shariah holds that God did not create the mind free, but in subservience to the will of Allah (as detailed in shariah). The condition of human beings is submission to Allah, not freedom.”
From submission, dhimmitude and shariah blasphemy codes to “fear as reason” policy, this analysis offers a stunning look at what “moderates” and “violent extremists” alike desire—including so-called “moderates” like Ground Zero mosque Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf.
They seek an America that is “shariah compliant.”
Conclusions offered in the report are an eye-opener. Another sampling:
“Under successive presidencies, the United States has failed to understand, let alone counter successfully, the threat posed to its constitutional form of government and free society by shariah. In the past, such failures were reckless. Today, they are intolerable.
“The preceding pages document shariah’s true supremacist and totalitarian character. They make clear its incompatibility with the Constitution as the only source of law for this country. As we have seen, shariah explicitly seeks to replace representative governance with an Islamic state, to destroy sovereign and national polities with a global caliphate.
“If shariah is thus viewed as an alien legal system hostile to and in contravention of the U.S. Constitution, and as one which dictates both violent and non-violent means to a capable audience ready to act imminently, then logically, those who seek to establish shariah in America—whether by violent means or by stealth—can be said to be engaged in criminal sedition, not the protected practice of a religion.”
And a further sampling of the recommendations in the report reflect the seriousness of the threat we face from an ideology that has covertly permeated our government institutions.
“While detailed recommendations for adopting a more prudential and effective strategy for surviving shariah’s onslaught are beyond the scope of this study, several policy and programmatic changes are clearly in order. These include:
• U.S. policy-makers, financiers, businessmen, judges, journalists, community leaders and the public at large must be equipped with an accurate understanding of the nature of shariah and the necessity of keeping America shariah-free. At a minimum, this will entail resisting—rather than acquiescing to—the concerted efforts now being made to allow that alien and barbaric legal code to become established in this country as an alternate, parallel system to the Constitution and the laws enacted pursuant to it. Arguably, this is already in effect for those who have taken an oath to “support and defend” the Constitution, because the requirement is subsumed in that oath.
• U.S. government agencies and organizations should cease their outreach to Muslim communities through Muslim Brotherhood fronts whose mission is to destroy our country from within as such practices are both reckless and counterproductive. Indeed, these activities serve to legitimate, protect and expand the influence of our enemies. They conduce to no successful legal outcome that cannot be better advanced via aggressive prosecution of terrorists, terror-funders and other lawbreakers. It also discourages patriotic Muslims from providing actual assistance to the U.S. government lest they be marked for ostracism or worse by the Brothers and other shariah-adherent members of their communities.
• In keeping with Article VI of the Constitution, extend bans currently in effect that bar members of hate groups such as the Ku Klux Klan from holding positions of trust in federal, state, or local governments or the armed forces of the United States to those who espouse or support shariah. Instead, every effort should be made to identify and empower Muslims who are willing publicly to denounce shariah.
• Practices that promote shariah—notably, shariah-compliant finance and the establishment or promotion in public spaces or with public funds of facilities and activities that give preferential treatment to shariah’s adherents—are incompatible with the Constitution and the freedoms it enshrines and must be proscribed.
• Sedition is prohibited by law in the United States. To the extent that imams and mosques are being used to advocate shariah in America, they are promoting seditious activity and should be warned that they will not be immune from prosecution.”
Much, much more at the link.