Posted on 08/05/2010 8:13:02 AM PDT by markomalley
Few fireworks erupted as the Senate opened up floor debate over Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan this week. Conventional wisdom remains that President Barack Obama’s second nomination to the high court will be confirmed with little trouble.
Despite the appearance of a fait accompli, numerous conservative groups have provided a wide range of reasons to oppose the Kagan nomination. Among the oft listed concerns are: her lack of experience, her perceived hostility to the military and free speech, her abortion and gay rights records, and her apparent reverence for foreign law. All these points have acted to obscure what some argue is one of her primary disqualifications — her sympathetic view of Sharia, or Islamic law.
Kagan’s detractors point to her time as the dean of Harvard Law School as the primary demonstration of her approval of Sharia. Andrew McCarthy, a senior fellow at the National Review Institute, wrote in an article on The National Review’s website that as Harvard Law School dean, Kagan “became the champion of sharia.”
Included in Kagan’s offensives as dean, according to McCarthy, was condoning the acceptance of $20 million from Saudi prince Alwaleed bin Talal — who blamed the attacks of 9/11 on American foreign policy — to fund programs on Islam. She also spearheaded the “Islamic Finance Project,” a program aimed at mainstreaming Sharia-compliant finance in America. And, as some point out, she awarded the Harvard Medal of Freedom to the chief justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, Iftikhar Chaudhry, who critics say is a promoter of Sharia.
Robert Spencer, the director of Jihad Watch, told The Daily Caller that Kagan would help advance Sharia law in America out of ignorance. “[Kagan] would knowingly and wittingly abet the advance of Sharia, but she wouldn’t do it understanding anything about Sharia. She would do it out of her ignorance.”
Spencer attributes Kagan’s fondness for Sharia to naïveté and liberalism. “There is a general tendency on the part of political liberals in the United States today to take a benign view of Islam and Islamic law,” he said. “They are generally uninformed and share a hatred of the West and Western civilization.”
According to Spencer, Kagan will be a willing accomplice in the ongoing stealth jihad — or the institution of Sharia into non-Muslim societies via non-violent means, such as the courts and mainstreaming Islamic customs — currently underway against the West. “The goal of the jihad is to assert the primacy of Islamic law over non-Muslim society and over Muslim societies where it is not fully enforced, and that can take place either through violent or non-violent means and the goal is the same,” he said.
Frank Gaffney Jr., president of the Center for Security Policy, expressed concerns over Kagan’s seeming sympathy toward Sharia law in a recent Washington Times column. He wrote that, if confirmed, Kagan has an obligation to recuse herself from any case involving Islamic law. “One headed that way involves a federal lawsuit brought by David Yerushalmi and the Thomas More Law Center on behalf of an Iraq war veteran who thinks the constitutional separation of church and state is violated by U.S. government ownership of the world’s largest purveyor of Shariah-compliant financial products (the very thing Ms. Kagan’s Islamic Finance Project promotes at Harvard): AIG.”
Spencer says that he doubts the question of Kagan’s support for Sharia will come up in this week’s Senate debate. “In general American lawmakers have been entirely remiss on this issue. They have been uninformed and content in their ignorance. In some ways they have been bamboozled by the successful efforts by Islamic supremacist groups like the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) to portray any opposition to Sharia as hatred and bigotry and intolerance,” he said. “Of course no politician wants to be portrayed as that. It is the kiss of death.”
She’s sympathetic to everything wrong. Disgusting!!
The dems know this they don’t care they just want her overall radical progressive vote to SCOTUS.
She will go through if you dare say a word against this you’re a racist.
Next...Obama will specially appont Louie Farrakhan to the SCOTUS and no one shall utter a word.
Obama is King. Bow.
In the US, Islam and its evil spawn, Sharia, is sedition.
“sympathetic to Sharia law”
Actually it is an attitude of being against the Constitution. Being as the president describes - a neg-def list of what the government cannot do.
The lesson here is a really BIG, “ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES!” And we need to have a comprehensive list of the consequences of the election of Obama and a Democrat Congress to use in the upcoming election.
It could be that too many voters have been so dumbed-down that there's not turning them, but we have to try.
She’s sympathetic to anything, because she stands for nothing. Her open headed ignorance requires that she accept everything.
Lousy candidate. We will leave to regret this - and it won’t take long.
Allege?????????
What is Sharia law’s position on homosexuality?
Prince Alwaleed is believed to be the person who financed Obama’s education
at Harvard
Included in Kagan’s offensives as dean, according to McCarthy, was condoning the acceptance of $20 million from Saudi prince Alwaleed bin Talal
Elena Kagan.... Supports Sharia Law for the US........”We The People” DO NOT WANT SHARIA LAW in the USA!!
Ms Kagan served as Solicitor general of the United States from March 09 until May this year.
She “blocked” all cases about Mr Obama’s “eligibility” from reach the Supreme Court..... Her name has come up in at least 9 cases against Mr. Obama’s eligibility
KAGAN ADMITS SHE FALSIFIED DOCUMENT! Why doesn’t this DISQUALIFY HER?
By DFXJuly 07, 2010 08:22
She admitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee that as a Clinton lawyer, she falsified a document and the confirmation hearings are still proceeding? It seems to me that this admission should automatically disqualify her as a nominee!!!
Since she’s a man she won’t be effected by Sharia law ...
shariah law would rid a society of people like Elena Kagan and many of her cohort academics and intellectuals
at least, the female and homosexual ones
Would she be the stone thrower or the stone hittee?
Here is my rule-of-thumb, call it Wilson’s Rule: Anyone who has been a college administrator or full-time professor is unqualified for elected or appointed office.
In view of the burning issue of gay marriage, I could for see a major conflict with Sharia.
Here is my rule-of-thumb, call it Wilson’s Rule: Anyone who has been a college administrator or full-time professor is unqualified for elected or appointed office.””
I suggest you look at the trial lawyers—they run the country and all branches of government.
Academics are disqualified by their arrogant sense of superiority and cloistered cluelessness.
Administrators are disqualified because of their liberalism and utter spinelessness.
Scott Brown will be voting against the nomination of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court.
Everything up until now has been ground work. Establishing private Muslim communities like Dearborn, attacking America on 9/11 and then modifying the debate to rationalize more acceptance of Islam in the it’s wake by perverting the fundamental American belief in freedom and tolerance and using it against itself so to speak, (NY ground zero mosque), making Americans so afraid to seem bigoted that many will not say aloud what we all know; that 9/11 was a calculated attack perpetrated in the TRUE name of Islam, etc., etc.
Now this judicial confirmation would be the first tangible step in the Islamification of America. It’s in their playbook: move into a neighborhood and take it over, resist Western influence and keep your head down until sufficient numbers exist to use the democratic process against itself, install Shariah and finally exterminate non-moslems.
People must be able to see this like an accident in slow motion but as a society we are so impotent at this stage with our fear of appearing un- PC we would rather die than make ourselves feel uncomfortable. Truly sad. I hope a savior emerges be he human or perhaps better yet He.
Everything up until now has been ground work. Establishing private Muslim communities like Dearborn, attacking America on 9/11 and then modifying the debate to rationalize more acceptance of Islam in the it’s wake by perverting the fundamental American belief in freedom and tolerance and using it against itself so to speak, (NY ground zero mosque), making Americans so afraid to seem bigoted that many will not say aloud what we all know; that 9/11 was a calculated attack perpetrated in the TRUE name of Islam, etc., etc.
Now this judicial confirmation would be the first tangible step in the Islamification of America. It’s in their playbook: move into a neighborhood and take it over, resist Western influence and keep your head down until sufficient numbers exist to use the democratic process against itself, install Shariah and finally exterminate non-moslems.
People must be able to see this like an accident in slow motion but as a society we are so impotent at this stage with our fear of appearing un- PC we would rather die than make ourselves feel uncomfortable. Truly sad. I hope a savior emerges be he human or perhaps better yet He.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.