Taqiyya , or basic Islamic lying

Your basic definition for starters:

Taqiyya — The word “Taqiyya” literally means: “Concealing, precaution, guarding.” It is employed in disguising one’s beliefs, intentions, convictions, ideas, feelings, opinions or strategies. In practical terms it is manifested as dissimulation, lying, deceiving, vexing and confounding with the intention of deflecting attention, foiling or pre-emptive blocking. It is currently employed in fending off and neutralising any criticism of Islam or Muslims.

But then that does not begin to get at the nuanced roots of the application.

Taqqiya – An Tactic of Lying, Concealment

Islamists interpret their scripture to say that they are allowed to lie about the nature of Islam in order to further their political goals.
Mon, April 7, 2014 | The Clarion Project

Taqiyya is an idea of Islamic jurisprudence that has been redefined and appropriated by Islamists as part of their political strategy. This piece is not about use of the concept in mainstream theology.

Hard to define exactly, it has been variously translated as dissimulation, concealment, lying and diplomacy. Other words that are used are kitman and idtirar. These Arabic terms all have subtly different meanings.

Nevertheless they are used to describe the same overall strategy as practiced by Islamists: using deceit as a religious and political weapon.

It has been used by Islamists in a different context. Their interpretations of scripture say that they are allowed to lie about the nature of Islam in order to further their political goals, namely world conquest.

More at The Clarion Project

The next post will give some depth and background into this tactic or tradition.In view of the current events, its hard to know how this tactic might be employed. But does anyone notice the recent lying campaign Obama himself has been on over IS terrorists, and the nature of Islam with respect to the terrorism we see?

It seems like a perfect opportunity for those of the craft to employ useful techniques like this time-honored one. We’ve already seen the propaganda campaign by terrorists. This is an intrinsic part of Islam’s overall campaign. It deserves serious consideration.

When dealing with something of evil nature such as Islamic terrorism — just like Alinsky’s rules of radicals in politics — we must be aware of the techniques. How similar in nature are those two forces? I think the following post will be interesting and informative.

RightRing | Bullright

Inevitable Caliphate

All these problems with Islamists and terrorism throughout the world, namely the Mid East, are bad enough but we also have Muslim Islamistist sympathizers in high places. And they appear to be having influence over everything we do. Take this revealing quote from Elibiary, top adviser in DHS.

From the Clarion Project

Homeland Security’s Mohammed Elibiary: Caliphate Inevitable

Elibiary inferred that he wants the U.S. to support a future caliphate, framing it as a Muslim version of the European Union.
By Ryan Mauro
Wed, June 25, 2014

On June 13, Elibiary tweeted that the creation of a caliphate is “inevitable,” and America’s choice is whether to support it or not. He inferred that he wants the U.S. to support a future caliphate, framing it as a Muslim version of the European Union. The tweet is below:

Online supporters of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), a terrorist group that fights to reestablish the caliphate with Baghdad as its capital, distributed and praised Elibiary’s tweet.

In a follow-up tweet, he claimed that both political parties are “heading in that direction” of supporting a modern caliphate. As evidence, he pointed to the Bush Administration’s appointment of an envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference and the Obama Administration’s engagement of the Muslim Brotherhood.

In another tweet on June 21, Elibiary compared “drive by media slander of Islamism” to the segregation-era when African-Americans were treated as second-class citizens. In other words, the critics of the Islamist ideology are bigots. The tweet is below:

The governance of a potential caliphate would be based on sharia. Mosque and state would be combined. Elibiary is aware of this, but says the U.S. should not oppose sharia governance.

“We should remember that them [Islamists] ruling their countries with sharia law doesn’t mean them coming to our country and using our planes to destroy our buildings,” he told me in an extensive interview last year.

The reestablishment of the caliphate presents a direct threat to the West. A future caliph, or leader of a caliphate, would have widely recognized authority—or even an obligation—to declare and wage jihad.

More Clarion Project