Lies about Islamic Taqiyya Dr. Carson Right: Washington Post and Academics Wron

[Geee]

Gatestone Institute:

Tell that to Ka'b ibn Ashraf, whose head was cut off. for The prophet of Islam allowed his followers to lie to the Jew to slaughter him.

 

Muslims deceived non-Muslims not because they were being persecuted for being Muslim — according to the Washington Post's definition of taqiyya — but in order to make Islam supreme.

 

Dr. Ben Carson got it right when he said that taqiyya "allows, and even encourages, you to lie to achieve your goals." The prophet makes that clear.

 

Dr. Ben Carson's recent assertion that the Islamic doctrine of taqiyya encourages Muslims "to lie to achieve your goals" has prompted the Washington Post's Glenn Kessler to quote a number of academics to show that the presidential candidate got it wrong:

 

The word "taqiyya" derives from the Arabic words for "piety" and "fear of God" and indicates when a person is in a state of caution, said Khaled Abou El Fadl, a professor of law at the University of California at Los Angeles and a leading authority on Islam.

 

 

"Yes, it is permissible to hide the fact you are Muslim" if a person is under threat, "as long as it does not involve hurting another person," Abou El Fadl said.

 

The other academics whom Kessler quotes — including Omid Safi, director of the Duke University Islamic Studies Center, and Noah Feldman of Harvard Law School — make the same argument: yes, taqiyya is in the Koran but it only permits deception in the case of self-preservation, nothing more.

 

Not exactly.

[Valin]

@Geee

 

Taqiyya
Arabic: 'at-taqiyya
Other spelling: taqiyah

In the Middle East, but especially Islam, the concealment of belief, as a method of self-protection. Taqiyya is allowed, and performed, when necessary to avoid death or injury to oneself or other Muslims. Taqiyya is mainly considered as a part of Shi'i theology or modern-day Islamism.

Taqiyya may be translated with 'fear' and 'caution'. It is closely related to the term katm or kitman, 'concealment'. Taqiyya is in many cases linked with regulations of how Muslims should act with non-Muslims.

The rules concerning the true intention of taqiyya are strict, and abusers of taqiyya will be punished by God.

 

(Snip)

 

Traditionally, a majority of Sunnis will not accept taqiyya, arguing that it is an expression of lack of faith in God. Yet, there are Sunni theologians who defend the use of taqiyya, stating that the faith in the heart is what counts, not outward expressions, like with the historian and theologian at-Tabari (dead 923).

 

(Snip)

 

Rules as to when taqiyya is permitted and not, has been set down. A Muslim facing corporal punishment or imprisonment may not perform taqiyya to avoid this. A male with family responsibilities may perform taqiyya if his wife(s) and children are in danger.

In recent years, taqiyya has often been used by militant Islamists, who usually are Sunnis. In preparation for terrorist attacks, using taqiyya has been part of covering their tracks. The world saw a very illustrative example of taqiyya with the 911 (September 11, 2005) attack on USA, when the local al-Qaida leaders went to bars and drank alcohol shortly before initiating their suicide attacks.

 

(Snip)

[Valin]

Dr. Ben Carson On The Oregon Shooting And The Article VI Test For Muslim Nominees

Duane Patterson

Thursday, October 1, 2015

 

Audio

 

(Snip)

 

HH: All right, now I want to go to your Jake Tapper interview about Muslims in public service, because I think I understood you to say anyone is eligible to the presidency of the United States if they will swear to uphold the laws and Constitution of the United States. Is that the summary of what you were trying to say?

 

BC: Yes, and I did say that before he brought that question up.

 

HH: Now there is within Islam taqiyya theory, where…

 

BC: Right.

 

HH: …proponents of Sharia Law believe they are entitled to lie…

 

BC: They can tell lies, yeah.

 

HH: So how do you square that variant of radical Islam with the oath requirement? How would the oath requirement operate vis-à-vis someone who holds that position?

 

BC: Well, the good thing is we have a system that puts people through an election process. And let’s say there was a Muslim who was running for president. You know, the people hopefully would have an opportunity to get to know that person. They would be able to see what that person’s lifestyle has been. And that would give them an opportunity to evaluate that lifestyle against what the person is saying. And if the things are consistent, and they clearly are people who have accepted the values and principles that formed America, and they’re clearly willing to abide by the Constitution, and they have demonstrated that in their lives, then I don’t see a problem.

 

HH: Now here comes the harder question. If Muslim is nominated to the Supreme Court of the United State, or to a federal appeals court, or a federal district court, how would you think the questioning ought to go, given Article VI prohibition on religious tests, but also given the standard that you just articulated? How ought the nominee to be questioned to see if they meet your standard?

 

BC: Well, again, I were the one nominating such a person, I would spend a good deal of time looking at their background, and seeing if it is consistent with the kinds of standards that we expect from such a position. I would take that into account much more than what they have to say. And that’s what’s been part of the problem, I think, with some of the selections. You know, we listen to what they say, and not what they have done.

 

(Snip)