IslamicLawBlog

N ewt Gingrich, who holds a Ph.D. in European History and is thus a presumptively educated man, has delivered yet another questionable  statement : “We should frankly test every person here who is of a Muslim background and if they believe in Sharia, they should be deported.” Over the decades, Gingrich is known for making unintelligent speeches, without weighing the consequences of his thoughtless philosophies. In 2011, Gingrich  said : “I am convinced that if we do not decisively win the struggle over the nature of America, by the time they’re my age, they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists.” Gingrich has not yet explained how an atheist transformation of America will be dominated by radical Islamists for whom a belief in One God is central to faith. Driven by an inflated self-concept of competence, Gingrich says things and then spends a lifetime  retracting  his foolery.  Gingrich’s proposal of making belief as a ground for

The Islamic State and other militant factions, fighting for sundry geopolitical causes, are obliterating the distinction between jihad and criminality. The utter disregard of life, the expansion of battlefield into schools and mosques, including the  Prophet’s Mosque , and the cruelty associated with violence have never been the lawful means of fighting jihad for any cause, including fighting against oppression, under the guidance of the Qur’an and Prophet’s Sunnah, the Basic Code of Islam. Jihad is an integral part of the Islamic faith; criminality is the antithesis to Islam. Muslim militants violate the Islamic law of war when they embrace  lex talionis  and adopt barbarity in answer to barbarity, and torture in answer to torture. Even if some militants are reacting to atrocities and torture perpetrated in the U.S.-administered prisons against Muslim detainees at  Abu Ghraib  (Iraq),  Bagram  (Afghanistan), and Guantanamo  (Cuba), the Basic Code does not allow criminality in r