Shariah Panic Still Has A Home At Fox

The fear of Shariah law creeping into the U.S. legal system is a myth, and The New York Times has reported that the originator of anti-Shariah movement is attorney David Yerushalmi, who has been described by the Anti-Defamation League as having a record of “anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant and anti-black rhetoric.”

But don't tell Eric Bolling that. Yesterday, Bolling used his Fox Business Network show to push the creeping Shariah myth.

Bolling also worried about whether Sohail Muhammad, a Muslim judge appointed to the bench by New Jersey's Republican Governor Chris Christie, will have “a completely objective view on American case law.” Bolling promised his audience: “We'll keep our eye on” the judge.

During the segment, Bolling also claimed that "[w]hile folks worry about the mosque-ing of America, there's also a fear of creeping Shariah, the slow but steady influence of Shariah Muslim law into America." One of Bolling's guests was Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, a star witness at the first of Rep. Peter King's (R-NY) anti-Muslim congressional hearings. Unsurprisingly, Jasser did little to alleviate Bolling's fear that Shariah is coming.

Another of Bolling's guests, Bo Dietl, who can always be counted on to make disparaging remarks about Muslims, did not disappoint. He said that, unlike in “Muslimland,” in America, “a judge will convict you for assault if you assault the woman, if you assault your wife, even under your aba daba law there.” Dietl also expressed concern that “judges who are from the Islam can become judges in America and then they can start weighing these cases out and start to understand it under the Shariah law.”

The only thing missing from the segment was the bigoted commentary of Pam Geller, who has claimed that Christie “show[ed] himself to be a dangerous blustering bloviator, a good little dhimmi” who has made a “monumental mistake.”

But perhaps Dietl was a good stand-in for Geller. After all, he once advocated that in the event of a nuclear attack by Muslim terrorists, the United States should declare “holy war” and threaten to “bomb the most religious places.”

Here's a transcript of the segment:

BOLLING: Residents of a tiny town in Georgia are fighting plans to erect a giant mosque there. And even though they say their complaint has nothing to do with religion, the Department of Justice has jumped into the case. The DOJ is also defending plans for mosques in other states as well. And while folks worry about the mosque-ing of America, there's also a fear of creeping Shariah, the slow but steady influence of Shariah Muslim law into America.


JASSER: I think Shariah is important to be aware of because if you look at the U.K. for example, there are over 80 functioning Shariah courts. Shariah is what Muslims consider to be our law. So there's personal Shariah that I think is not a threat. But then there's Shariah that's an instrument of political Islam where Muslims want to develop a separate system where they have their own penal system, punishments like you mentioned in honor killings, in other things, stoning and divorce systems where women get second and third class status. And we need to start using this as a teaching point to demonstrate that these are fault lines in the separation between the West and eastern society where Muslims need to advance our laws to modernize and defeat the ideas of political Islam or else they're going to continue to have separatist systems that are tools for radicalization. And terrorism is increasing in the West because of that radicalization.

BOLLING: Doc, I watched that special last night about that case of the Arizona family where the father ran over the daughter because of her unwillingness to partake in an arranged marriage. Have the U.S. courts knowingly or not begun to recognize cultural or religious Muslim laws when deciding cases here in the U.S.?

JASSER: Well, Eric, the fault line again is political correctness. I was horrified here in Phoenix to see this court, the jury come back with a second degree aggravated assault verdict. You know, he was found guilty and he got 34 years so yes, he got punished but his mitigation of his punishment was exactly what would happen in Pakistan or in Jordan, in societies that say 'Well, if a brother or a father commits an act out of rage because he was fulfilling the pride of the tribe or the family, then he should be mitigated.' And that is exactly the special, but Bill Hemmer demonstrated and showed the audio where this was clearly premeditated but the jurors felt a little understanding of the culture - something where it wasn't first degree. That sent a bad message that no longer can we use our legal system in the West to push reform in the Islamist system.

BOLLING: Doc, we only have about 30 seconds but is that what the definition of creeping Shariah or Shariah creep is? It slowly kind of indoctrinates itself into society?

JASSER: Well, I think what they are trying to say -- I don't like the term that much, but what they are trying to say is that there is a threat where separate enclaves get set up where Muslims aren't subject to the greater law of the land but to rather to their own interpretation of Shariah which is in the 15th century and that creeps and effects society and they use it in every method possible to separate from the greater law and have their own legal system which oppresses women and other things that need reform.


BOLLING: Alright, let's bring it out to the panel. Let me start with you Mark Lamont Hill. You are hearing it, this case really --

HILL: You guys are downers man.

BOLLING: No, look it's a scary thing.

HILL: I have been sitting here with you guys and I find out I'm --

BOLLING: No, a man ran over his own daughter because she wouldn't go over to Iraq and involve herself in an arranged marriage. I mean, and then he gets found on a second degree murder charge, not on a first degree murder.

HILL: Yeah, I mean I don't think that should have been a mitigating circumstance. I think we have to consider culture and context in courts of law. I think we always have and always should, but I don't think that, you know, Shariah law should be -- should inform a decision in such a way that someone gets less time or a less severe sentence because they appeal to some religious tradition which is violent, or at least some cultural tradition which is violent. So I think we might be on the same page when it comes to that, but I don't think -- I think it is dramatic and hyperbolic to say that we're having Shariah law creep into our culture. I mean for God's sake tonight he's talking about social --

BOLLING: Is it? Is it? Is that unfair?

HILL: Yes.

BOLLING: Is that hyperbolic? Is this hyperbole Dee-Dee or is this happening?

BENKIE: No, it's not. And how dare you Mark even think about that because Shariah law in inching, millimeter, whatever, having anything to do with being able to stone women to death, being able to run over, to be able to treat us like dogs. How dare you even think about that this is even --

HILL: But I didn't say that --

BENKIE: Yes you did.


DIETL: Well, you know what, we're on the same page here, because when you commit a crime in this great country of America, you should be tried like everyone else. This is not Afghanistan, this is not Iraq, this is America. We have our laws here and women are protected. They cannot be beat up because of your Shariah law, Mr. Muslim guys there in Muslimland. And it ain't going to happen here. When you go before a judge, a judge will convict you for assault if you assault the woman, if you assault your wife, even under your aba daba law there. They say you can do it, you can't do it in America.

BOLLING: I am not sure about aba daba law, but I am sure that at some point there are going to be juries who say: “Well, it's part of their culture so I have to give a little bit of leniency.” Whether it is stated by the judge, defendant or not, eventually it is going to work its way into our culture.


DIETL: The only thing that could happen. Here is what could happen. We could have judges who are from the Islam, could become judges in America and then they can start weighing these cases out and start to understand it under the Shariah law.


BOLLING: Very quickly. We have a judge right across the river, Chris Christie is appointing a Muslim judge, and this may or may not happen, he may have a completely objective view on American case law. It remains to be seen. We'll keep our eye on it.