Sen. Barack Obama became president-elect on the uplifting, if inexact, slogan, "Yes, we can."
This week, there is growing evidence that people who have in mind doing away with the presidency of the United States - and all other aspects of our secular, democratic and constitutional
form of government - are similarly convinced of their inevitable
success. Judging by the sheer audacity of their agenda, "Yes, they can"
would appear an apt description of the prospects for the Saudis and
other champions of the totalitarian program they call Shariah.
In the run-up to an emergency summit outgoing President Bush
has called to address the now-global financial crisis, the oil-rich
Islamists of the Persian Gulf led by Saudi Arabia have not only
established that their petrodollars are indispensable to any solution.
They also seem to have secured the Bush administration's acquiescence
to the sinister strings attached to any bailout of the West in which
they might participate.
Specifically, the Saudis and their friends want the United States to
join those, particularly in Europe, who have accommodated themselves to
Shariah. No, we are assured, they aren't taking about the brutal
theo-political-legal code that features such barbaric practices as
beheadings, floggings, stonings, amputations, female genital mutilation
and mysogeny more generally.
All they want, those in the know insist, is for Washington to
encourage Wall Street - more and more of which is owned by the U.S.
government - to embrace Shariah-Compliant Finance (SCF). A Treasury
Department seminar convened last week depicted SCF as nothing more than
a kind of socially responsible investing vehicle that respects Muslim
religious beliefs by eschewing interest-bearing transactions and those
involving pork and "sin" stocks. So, what's the big deal? The
Catholics, Methodists and Jews have their funds, why not the Muslims?
What makes the Shariah-Compliant Finance gambit both a big and
troublesome "deal" is that, unlike these other religious traditions,
Shariah's adherents are pursuing a global theocracy. They believe they
must impose their agenda on everybody else, religious and secular
alike, using violence if necessary. And SCF is explicitly described by
leading practitioners as a complement to violent holy war: "financial
jihad" and "jihad with money."
In other words, there is no such thing as free-standing
Shariah-Compliant Finance. According to all of the recognized
authorities and institutions of Islam, Shariah is a unified,
indivisible program to which all faithful Muslims must adhere
Not surprisingly, therefore, the Saudis & Co. are not simply
seeking to insinuate Shariah-Compliant Finance into our capital
markets. They are also advancing creation of a parallel
Shariah-governed society through various other means.
One of these techniques will be in evidence when the Saudi monarch
himself convenes a meeting in New York City in the hope of imposing
Shariah blasphemy laws worldwide. In light of the stated, and seemingly
benign, purpose of the so-called "Culture of Peace" event hosted by
King Abdullah at the United Nations - namely, promoting interfaith
understanding and tolerance, numerous world leaders, including
President Bush, will be present. Never mind that Saudi Arabia is
arguably the most intolerant nation on Earth, a fact even some in the
Bush administration have acknowledged.
The real reason attendance at the king's seance will be impressive,
of course, has more to do with the hope that petro-largess will flow to
those who ingratiate themselves to the House of Saud. Abdullah appears
confidently to have signaled that, if the West plays ball on the
"Culture of Peace" agenda, the Saudis and their fellow Islamists will
be constructive at what might be called the subsequent "Culture of
Money" meeting in Washington.
What will the answer be when the Islamists insist that free speech
must not allow the slander, libel or defamation of Shariah, or other
aspects of their faith? If the European Union and the United Nations
Human Rights Council have already accommodated themselves to this
demand, why should we object? So what if, by so doing, we would
effectively thereby be precluded from talking about - or even
understanding - the Islamist threat we face, to say nothing of
eviscerating the First Amendment? As the Treasury Department can
attest, we need the money.
Unfortunately, this is no time for us to be diminishing awareness
throughout the Free World of the various, grave dangers we face from
adherents to Shariah's seditious program. London's Sunday Telegraph
reported last weekend that a classified British government assessment
has concluded there are "some thousands of extremists in the U.K.
committed to supporting Jihadi activities, either in the U.K. or
Such extremists are said to be engaged in attack planning in the
United Kingdom "either under the direction of al Qaeda, or inspired by
al Qaeda's ideology of global Jihad" (read, Shariah). They may inflict
"mass casualties" and constitute a "severe" threat to the Government
Security Zone (including the Houses of Parliament and key executive
offices) in the heart of London.
At such a moment, a federal judge in Oregon has held the law
criminalizing material support for terror is unconstitutionally
"vague." Taken together with the other manifestations of our
capitulation, is it any wonder the champions of Shariah are convinced
that "yes, they can" have their way with us? Who will disabuse them of
this terrifying notion? We can, but will President-elect Obama lead the