Last summer, the Obama Administration made changes to the loyalty oath immigrants must take before being naturalized. The changes allow naturalized immigrants to be exempted from military service based on “religious training and belief or a conscientious objection.” There were reports on the internet that President Obama himself had ordered the changes because of Islamic sympathies, though these allegations have been disputed.

Nevertheless, this change is momentous—and dangerous to America—for a number of reasons.

As Raymond Ibrahim, author of Crucified Again: Exposing Islam’s New War on Christians, points out, the new changes in the Oath of Allegiance “serve incoming Islamic supremacists especially well.”  He explains that Islamic law allows Muslims to “feign loyalty to non-Muslim ‘infidel’ authorities,” but Muslims are banned from “actually fighting or killing fellow Muslims on behalf of a non-Muslim entity, such as the United States.” Muslims must follow the Islamic doctrine of Loyalty and Enmity, says Ibrahim. “According to this essential teaching, Muslims must always be loyal to Islam and fellow Muslims while having enmity for all non-Islamic things and persons.”  

Ibrahim points to a number of verses in the Qur’an that support this doctrine. But the most pertinent, he says, is Sura 3:28: “Let believers not take for friends and allies infidels rather than believers; and whoever does this shall have no relationship left with Allah—unless you but guard yourselves against them, taking precautions.” Significantly, the words translated as “guard” and “precaution” are both derived from the Arabic word taqu, the same root that gives the word taqiyya, which is the Islamic doctrine permitting Muslims to deceive non-Muslims whenever they are under their authority.

To be required to fight in a war against fellow Muslims is the worst nightmare of any devout Muslim serving in the U.S. Military. Witness the example of Nidal Hasan who committed “work-place violence” according to the U.S. Army and killed 13 Americans (one of whom was pregnant) when he found out he was to be deployed in the Middle East.

The current leader of al-Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahiri, has written a treatise on Loyalty and Enmity, telling his followers they may pretend to be friendly and loyal to non-Muslims, as long as they do not “undertake any initiative to support them [non-Muslims], commit sin, or enable [them] through any deed or killing or fighting against Muslims.”  

As our nation considers how it can protect itself from Islamic supremacists who would come here as immigrant refugees, the Islamic doctrines of Taqiyya and Loyalty and Enmity are extremely important to understand. But they are not the only ones we should be knowledgeable of.  

Another relevant doctrine is the Islamic doctrine of immigration, Al-Hijra. “Immigration,” write Sam Solomon and Elias Al Maqdisi, authors of Modern Day Trojan Horse: The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration, “is viewed as a transitional period of preparation for transforming the host society from an open, or non-Muslim, society into an Islamic society or at least one where Islam would be supreme.”

Solomon and Al Maqdisi, both Christian converts from Islam who were Islamic scholars, explain that Muhammad’s migration (Hijra) from Mecca to Medina is marked as the founding of Islam with the Islamic calendar starting on this date. This move spread Islam beyond the bounds of Mecca and established it as a socio-religious and socio-political system. As a consequence, they write, immigration is “considered to be the most important method of spreading Islam as a way of life, meaningful religion, and a political system, and consolidating it far beyond the Muslim countries.” Muhammad’s Hijra is to be imitated by all Muslims “as a religious obligation.”

Migration does not have to be to another country, however, it can even be from one city to another so that the number of Muslims would be strengthened and Islam would gain both religiously and politically in that geographic area. Thus, for example, whereas in 1997 Dearborn, Michigan had the largest Arabic speaking population outside of the Middle East and was a hub for Muslim immigration, now, Muslim mosques, which are a symbol of the presence of Muslims and Islam within a community, are sprouting up around the country. Most have been built since 1990.

According to a 2011 survey there are 2,106 mosques in the U.S. Only 5 percent of those existed prior to 1960. The biggest totals are found in metropolitan areas, but San Francisco now has as many as Detroit (62). With Florida in the top five states in total number of mosques (118), we have been seeing growth in recent years in our local communities. In the Fort Lauderdale area, the small city of 50,000 where I live now boasts its own mosque tucked away on a quiet street off a main thoroughfare.

As the authors of The Modern Day Trojan Horse point out, Islamic teaching views immigration as a “transitional period of preparation for transforming the host society from an open, or non-Muslim, society into an Islamic society or at least one where Islam would be supreme.”  The primary goal of Islamic immigration is the establishment of an Islamic state in the new territory. Solomon and Al Maqdisi state that Islamic migration (the Hijra) “is considered to be, by Muslim scholars from religious and jurisprudence point of view, as the vanguard, a preamble and prelude to jihad for the establishment of an Islamic state.”

“So,” they conclude, “when Muslim immigrants refuse assimilation and despise integration it is done as a political move expressed religiously. Hence it would be in the interest of the host society and its national security to examine all requests [for religious accommodations], from a socio-political angle.”   

They also recommend that all immigrants and particularly Muslim ones should be asked to agree to accept the following requirements to:

• Abide by the law of the land
• Do their utmost to be integrated and assimilated with the host society
• Regard religion as a personal matter of free will choice
• Embrace the equality of genders
• Regard and treat the discriminatory and violent doctrines and teaching of the Shariah as inapplicable and ineffective for today
• Accept the equality of all Muslims and non-Muslims
• Uphold the separation of state and religion
• Value and uphold the right of every individual to choose the religion of his or her choice irrespective of the religion of next of kin or community they might have belonged to by birth or association of any kind.

While it might take a sea-change of the political landscape in America for requirements such as these to be instituted for incoming immigrants—and even for those who are seeking citizenship, still consideration and discussion of these points might go a long way toward exposing the potential danger our nation faces if even a fraction of the more than 3 million Muslims estimated to be in America are indeed following the Islamic doctrine of immigration, as well as those of Taqiyya and Loyalty and Enmity.