This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

OKLAHOMA CITY – Oklahoma Representative John Bennett has finally responded to the backlash he has received over the “hateful” questionnaire his office reportedly handed out to Muslim students who were asking to meet with him.

Rep. John Bennett said that three Muslim students visiting his office as part of Muslim Day were given questionnaires.

The handout included questions like “Sharia law says that it must rule over the kafirs, the non-Muslims. Do you agree with this?”; “The Koran, the sunna of Mohammed and Sharia Law of all schools say that the husband can beat his wife. Do you beat your wife?”

Bennett told the Tulsa World that he did not speak to the students personally, but added that the questions are based on Islamic texts.

“According to the Qur’an, Hadith and Islamic law, a woman may indeed have physical harm done to her if the circumstances warrant, with one such allowance being in the case of disobedience. This certainly does not mean that all Muslim men beat their wives, only that Islam permits them to do so,” Bennett said.

Adam Soltani, the executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations of Oklahoma, which sponsored the Muslim Day activities, said the questions were “stupid, Islamophobic and hateful.”

On Facebook, Soltani said the questions were produced by ACT! for America, an anti-Islam organization.

“The question that comes to mind is, does he do this to others?” Soltani told BuzzFeed News. “Does he ask question to his Christian constituents? His Jewish constituents? If the answer is no, that’s discrimination. There’s no other way to call it.”

Bennett sent KFOR a copy of the questionnaire, which can be seen below:

Rep. Bennett released the following statement regarding the questionnaire: (The following is an exact statement sent to KFOR by Rep. Bennett. Typos and grammatical errors have been left as written.)

For the record, I didn’t refuse to meet with any of them. I was already gone when they stopped by my office. I was on my way home when they visited the capitol.

That’s why I left the questionarre (sic) with instructions to my assistant; if they wanted to visit with me about CAIR or Mulim (sic) Day to answer them, set an appointment with me, bring their Quran, Sharia Law Book and Muhammed Sunna back with them when they come and we would sit down and discuss the facts in the questionarre. (sic)

*CAIR knows that the legislature typically isn’t in session after noon on Thursdays (this early in session), and Most Reps and Senators who Do Not live close are gone by noon. CAIR conveniently schedules their Muslim Day on Thursdays around noon every year. I don’t think this is coincidence.

All the questions on the sheet are questions I have already found the answer to in the Quran, Sunna, and Sharia Law.

ANYONE can do 3rd grade research and find the same answers via google. I use actual documents that Islamic Scholars have agreed on for my proof; Quran, Sunna of Muhammed, Sharia Law Book (Reliance of the Traveler).

The questionarre (sic) was left for them to provoke their thought. If they weren’t aware of what Islam stands for they should know and research, then make a better informed decision on what they want to support or not. If they are aware of what Islam, Sharia, CAIR, Jihadist stand for and still support it then they are part of the problem.

Here is the answer to the question about them beating their wife, and it being permitted in Islam;

Quran

Quran (4:34) – “Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.” Contemporary translations sometimes water down the word ‘beat’, but it is the same one used in verse 8:12 and clearly means ‘to strike’.

Quran (38:44) – “And take in your hand a green branch and beat her with it, and do not break your oath…” Allah telling Job to beat his wife (Tafsir).

Hadith and Sira

Sahih Bukhari (72:715) – A woman came to Muhammad and begged her to stop her husband from beating her. Her skin was bruised so badly that it is described as being “greener” than the green veil she was wearing. Muhammad did not admonish her husband, but instead ordered her to return to him and submit to his sexual desires.

Sahih Bukhari (72:715) – “Aisha said, ‘I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women'” Muhammad’s own wife complained of the abuse that the women of her religion suffered relative to other women.

Sahih Muslim (4:2127) – Muhammad struck his favorite wife, Aisha, in the chest one evening when she left the house without his permission. Aisha narrates, “He struck me on the chest which caused me pain.”

Sahih Muslim (9:3506) – Muhammad’s fathers-in-law (Abu Bakr and Umar) amused him by slapping his wives (Aisha and Hafsa) for annoying him. According to the Hadith, the prophet of Islam laughed upon hearing this.

Abu Dawud (2141) – “Iyas bin ‘Abd Allah bin Abi Dhubab reported the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) as saying: Do not beat Allah’s handmaidens, but when ‘Umar came to the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) and said: Women have become emboldened towards their husbands, he (the Prophet) gave permission to beat them.” At first, Muhammad forbade men from beating their wives, but he rescinded this once it was reported that women were becoming emboldened toward their husbands. Beatings in a Muslim marriage are sometimes necessary to keep women in their place.

Abu Dawud (2142) – “The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: A man will not be asked as to why he beat his wife.” The authenticity of this verse is characterized as daif (weak), however, a similar verse from Sunan Ibn Majah 3:9:1986 is said to be hasan (sufficient).

Abu Dawud (2126) – “A man from the Ansar called Basrah said: ‘I married a virgin woman in her veil. When I entered upon her, I found her pregnant. (I mentioned this to the Prophet).’ The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: ‘She will get the dower, for you made her vagina lawful for you. The child will be your slave. When she has begotten (a child), flog her'” A Muslim thinks he is getting a virgin, then finds out that she is pregnant. Muhammad tells him to treat the woman as a sex slave and then flog her after she delivers the child.

Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 969 – Requires that a married woman be “put in a separate room and beaten lightly” if she “act in a sexual manner toward others.” According to the Hadith, this can be for an offense as petty as merely being alone with a man to whom she is not related.

Kash-shaf (the revealer) of al-Zamkhshari (Vol. 1, p. 525) – [Muhammad said] “Hang up your scourge where your wife can see it”

Some contemporary Muslim apologists often squirm over this relatively straightforward verse from the Quran (4:34) – which gives men the right to beat their wives if they even have a “fear” of disloyalty or disobedience. Their rhetorical aerobics inspired us to write a separate article:

Wife Beating- Good Enough for Muhammad, Good Enough for You

(Islam teaches that to be a perfect Muslim you must follow Muhammeds examples)

Others are not nearly as squeamish. Sheikh Yousef al-Qaradhawi, one of the most respected Muslim clerics in the world, once made the famous (and somewhat ridiculous statement) that “It is forbidden to beat the woman, unless it is necessary.” He went on to say that “one may beat only to safeguard Islamic behavior,” leaving no doubt that wife-beating is a matter of religious sanction. (source)

Dr. Muzammil Saddiqi, the former president of ISNA (the Islamic Society of North America), a mainstream Muslim organization, says it is important that a wife “recognizes the authority of her husband in the house” and that he may use physical force if he is “sure it would improve the situation.” (source)

Sheikh Dr. Ahmad Muhammad Ahmad Al-Tayyeb, the head of Al-Azhar, Sunni Islam’s most prestigious institution says that “light beatings” and “punching” are part of a program to “reform the wife” (source).

Dr. Jamal Badawi endorses corporal punishment as “another measure that may save the marriage” (source). He isn’t clear on how striking a woman will make her more inclined toward staying with her assailant, unless the implication is fear of more serious consequences if she leaves.

Egyptian cleric, Abd al-Rahman Mansour, said in a 2012 televised broadcast that, in addition to discouraging the wife from filing divorce, beatings would inspire the wife to “treat him with kindness and respect, and know that her husband has a higher status than her.” (source)

During Ramadan of 2010, another cleric named Sa’d Arafat actually said the woman is “honored” by the beating (source). No one else seemed terribly surprised or upset by this.

An undercover report from progressive Sweden in 2012 found that 60% of mosques there actually advised beaten women not to report the abuse to the police. These women were also told that they must submit to non-consensual ‘sex’ with their husbands. (source)

In the birthplace of Islam, about half of Saudi women are beaten at home. “Hands and sticks were found to be used mostly in beating women, following by men’s head cover and to a lesser extent, sharp objects.” (source)

In 2016, the Council of Islamic Ideology proposed a bill – ironically named the Protection of Women against Violence Act – that actually included exceptions for “lightly beating” defiant wives. (source)

According to Islamic law, a husband may strike his wife for any one of the following four reasons:

– She does not attempt to make herself beautiful for him (ie. “let’s herself go”)

– She refuses to meet his sexual demands

– She leaves the house without his permission or for a “legitimate reason”

– She neglects her religious duties

Any of these are also sufficient grounds for divorce.

Respected Quran scholars in the past interpreted verse 4:34 with impressive candor. Tabari said that it means to “admonish them, but if they refused to repent, then tie them up in their homes and beat them until they obey Allah’s commands toward you.” Qurtubi told wife-beaters to avoid breaking bones, if possible, but added that “it is not a crime if it leads to death.” (source)

Muslim apologists sometimes say that Muhammad ordered that women not be harmed, but they are actually basing this on what he said before or during a battle, such as in Bukhari (59:447), when Muhammad issued a command for all the men of Quraiza be killed and the women and children taken as slaves. (Having your husband murdered and being forced into sexual slavery apparently doesn’t qualify as “harm” under the Islamic model).

But, in fact, there are a number of cases in which Muhammad did have women killed in the most brutal fashion. One was Asma bint Marwan, a mother or five, who wrote a poem criticizing the Medinans for accepting Muhammad after he had ordered the murder of an elderly man. In this case, the prophet’s assassins literally pulled a sleeping infant from her breast and stabbed her to death.

After taking Mecca in 630, Muhammad also ordered the murder of a slave girl who had merely made up songs mocking him. The Hadith are rife with accounts of women planted in the ground on Muhammad’s command and pelted to death with stones for sexual immorality – yet the prophet of Islam actually encouraged his own men to rape women captured in battle (Abu Dawood 2150, Muslim 3433) and did not punish them for killing non-Muslim women (as Khalid ibn Walid did on several occasions – see Ibn Ishaq 838 and 856).

In summary, according to the Qur’an, Hadith and Islamic law, a woman may indeed have physical harm done to her if the circumstances warrant, with one such allowance being in the case of disobedience. This certainly does not mean that all Muslim men beat their wives, only that Islam permits them to do so.

More Importantly… people are missing the REAL ISSUE (Actual threat) here on Muslim day, and that is the fact that CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations) is a known and designated terrorist organization and they are freely roaming through our state capitol.

CAIR is NOT a civil rights organization. They are masqurading (sic) as a civil rights group to promote their agenda.

Here is the proof;

CAIR is Hamas

The following is a small portion of the evidence which identifies the Council on American

Islamic Relations (CAIR) as a Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas and terrorist organization.

Summary

Among the massive amount of evidence entered into the US v Holy Land Foundation for Relief

and Development (hereafter “HLF”) trial – the largest Hamas and terrorism financing trial ever

successfully prosecuted in U.S. history – is a volume of evidence which definitively identifies

CAIR as an organization established by the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s “Palestine Committee”

which is Hamas in America. CAIR has received funds from other Hamas entities and

organizations affiliated with Al Qaeda. In fact, a document retrieved from CAIR headquarters

reveals internal discussions at CAIR to support Osama bin Laden.

While CAIR bills itself as a “Muslim civil rights” organization, the evidence does not support

this and, in fact, demonstrates it is a Hamas entity. Hamas is a terrorist organization.

Specific Facts

In 1993, the leaders of the U.S. Palestine Committee, which is Hamas in the United States,

met in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The meeting was covered by the FBI via physical

surveillance, microphones in meeting rooms, wiretaps on phones, and other investigative

techniques. An Action Memo from FBI Counterterrorism Assistant Director Dale Watson

stated this was a “Meeting among senior leaders of Hamas, the HLFRD, and the IAP.” The

FBI’s analysis of the Philadelphia meeting entered as evidence in the US v HLF trial stated:

“All attendees of this meeting are Hamas members.” CAIR founders Nihad Awad and Omar

Ahmad were present at this meeting.

The U.S. government’s indictment of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development

(HLF) stated: “The purpose of this (1993 Philadelphia) meeting was to determine their

course of action in support of Hamas’ opposition to the peace plan and to decide how to

conceal their activities from the scrutiny of the United States government.”

FBI recordings of the conversations by Hamas leaders at the Philadelphia meeting captured

Nihad Awad and Omar Ahmad discussing the creation of a new public relations organization

for Hamas which FBI investigators testified was CAIR, created in 1994 following the

Philadelphia meeting.

CAIR was incorporated in 1994 by Nihad Awad, Omar Ahmad, and Rafeeq Jaber, all of whom

were leaders of the Islamic Association of Palestine (IAP), a now-defunct Hamas organization

in the U.S.

In 1993 and 1994, CAIR founder Omar Ahmad served as the National President for IAP

(Hamas) and was the Chairman of the Board for CAIR from 1994-2005.

Rafeeq Jaber served as the National President of IAP (Hamas) from 1996-98 and 1999-2005.

Musa Abu Marzook, the Deputy Political Chief for Hamas and the Leader of Hamas in the

United States (Chairman of the U.S. Palestine Committee), was a member of the IAP Board of

Directors.

CAIR founder Omar Ahmad was on the Executive Committee for the U.S. Palestine

Committee (U.S. Hamas).

Because of the overwhelming evidence that CAIR is a Hamas entity, U.S. prosecutors

identified CAIR as a member of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee

(Hamas), and as unindicted co-conspirators in the US v HLF case – the largest terrorism

financing and Hamas trial ever successfully prosecuted in U.S. history.

10. The Palestine Committee (Hamas) Meeting in 1994 lists CAIR as the 4th organization

operating under it (Hamas). This document was entered into evidence at the US v HLF trial.

Hamas is a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) by the U.S. government and

many governments around the world.

In the December 2007 government filing in the US v Sabri Benkhala appeal (Eastern District

of Virginia), the government stated: “From its founding by the Muslim Brotherhood leaders,

CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists.”

13. In a document retrieved from CAIR’s headquarters in Washington, D.C. by one of its interns

– now UTT Vice President Chris Gaubatz – CAIR openly discussed supporting Osama bin

Laden. The document was titled “Proposed Muslim Platform for 2004” (dated 3/08/04) and

stated, in part, “Attempt to understand Islamic movements in the area, and start supporting

Islamic groups including Mr. bin Laden and his associates.”

In a 2004 FBI raid at the Annandale, Virginia residence of Ismail Elbarasse, a senior Hamas

and Muslim Brotherhood leader, the archives of the U.S. MB were discovered. One of the

documents found listed the leaders of the U.S. Palestine Committee (Hamas). On the list were

the names of CAIR founders Nihad Awad and Omar Ahmad (alias Omar Yeheya).

In the government filing rebuking CAIR’s motion to have its name removed from the

unindicted co-conspirator list in the HLF case, U.S. prosecutors stated, “As of the date of this

response, the Court has entered into evidence a wide array of testimonial and documentary

evidence expressly linking CAIR and its founders to the HLF and its principals; the Islamic

Association for Palestine and its principals; the Palestine Committee in the United States,

headed by Hamas official Mousa Abu Marzook; and the greater HAMAS-affiliated conspiracy

described in the Government’s case-in-chief.”

In the government filing rebuking ISNA/NAIT’s motion to have their names removed from

the unindicted co-conspirator list in the HLF case, U.S. prosecutors stated, “The U.S. Muslim

Brotherhood created the U.S. Palestine Committee, which documents reflect was initially

comprised of three organizations: the OLF (HLF), the IAP, and the UASR. CAIR was later

added to these organizations…the mandate of these organizations, per the International

Muslim Brotherhood, was to support Hamas.”

17. In ruling to leave CAIR on the unindicted co-conspirator list in the HLF case, Federal Judge

Jorge Solis listed a portion of the overwhelming evidence against CAIR and wrote: “The

Government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR, ISNA, and

NAIT with the HLF, the Islamic Association of Palestine (“IAP”), and with Hamas.”

In a 3-0 ruling, an Appellate panel agreed to leave CAIR, ISNA, and NAIT on the unindicted

co-conspirator list in the HLF case.

The Holy Land Foundation was convicted of being a Hamas organization, and its leaders

were convicted of being Hamas leaders which funneled over $12 million to Hamas.

HLF provided CAIR with $5,000 of seed money when it was founded, and CAIR raised

money for HLF.

21. FBI Assistant Director Steve Pomeranz stated: “By masquerading as a mainstream public

affairs organization, CAIR has taken the lead in trying to mislead the public about the

terrorist underpinnings of militant Islamic movements, in particular, Hamas.”

In a February 2010 affidavit from an FBI Special Agent in the immigration proceedings for

Hamas leader Nabil Sadoun in Dallas, Texas, the affiant declared the U.S. Palestine

Committee was affiliated with Hamas. He further identified four (4) Hamas organizations

created by the Hamas in America: Holy Land Foundation, Islamic Association for Palestine,

United Association for Studies and Research, and Council on American Islamic Relations

(CAIR).

In a 2003 Senate Sub-Committee hearing on radical Islam, Senator Charles Schumer (NY)

stated, “To make matters worse, the prominent members of the Council’s (CAIR’s) current

leadership who you Mr. Chairman invited to the hearings today, they declined to testify, also

have intimate connections with Hamas.”

In a letter dated February 12, 2010 to U.S. Congresswoman Sue Myrick (NC) from Assistant

U.S. Attorney General Ronald Weich, Mr. Weich wrote “Enclosed (is) evidence that was

introduced in that trial (US v HLF) which demonstrated the relationship among CAIR,

individual CAIR founders, and the Palestine Committee. Evidence was also introduced that

demonstrated a relationship between the Palestine Committee and Hamas.”

In June 2009, on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives, Congressman Frank Wolf

(VA) gave a lengthy speech in which he laid out a great deal of the evidence against CAIR and

its ties to Hamas. The transcript of this speech can be found at: https://web.archive.org/web/

20140922235833/http://wolf.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/wolf-gives-major-floorspeech-on-fbis-cooperation-with-cair#.V_QwB7wrIfE

In a letter dated April 28, 2009 from the FBI’s Assistant Director, Office of Congressional

Affairs, to U.S. Senator John Kyl (AZ), the FBI leader details why the FBI cut off all formal

ties to CAIR and identifies it as an unindicted co-conspirator in the HLF trial because of its

relationship with Hamas.

CAIR has received funds from overseas organizations WAMY (World Association of Muslim

Youth) and IIRO (International Islamic Relief Organization), a subsidiary of the Muslim

World League (MWL). Both WAMY and IIRO are Saudi-funded organizations whose U.S.

offices were raided by the government because of their possible ties to Hamas and Al Qaeda.

In 1999, CAIR received $250,000 from a Saudi-based bank headed by the former director of

the Muslim World League (MWL), identified by Osama bin Laden as a primary source of

funds for Al Qaeda. Federal investigators raided MWL’s U.S. offices.

In a 2008 interview, the Deputy Supreme Guide of the International Muslim Brotherhood

Muhammad Habib was asked about the Brotherhood’s connections to CAIR:

Interviewer: “But back to CAIR, some people from the Muslim Brotherhood have denied

having a connection with CAIR, Do they really represent you?” Habib: “Ehh, this is a

sensitive subject, and it’s kind of problematic, especially after 9/11.” Interviewer: “For them

to say that there is a relationship between you two?” Habib: “Yes, you can say that.”

CAIR has a long record of defending jihadis and jihadi organizations, and continues to

publicly condemn all counterterrorism efforts of the U.S. government and local law

enforcement. CAIR has never defended the United States in its war against the jihadis. But

why would they? They are Hamas.

It should be noted that the above information only represents a SMALL fraction of the evidence demonstrating CAIR is a Hamas/Muslim Brotherhood entity. Hamas is a terrorist organization.

CAIR = Hamas. Hamas = Terrorists. CAIR = Terrorists

Citizens of Oklahoma should be asking the question of WHY is a terrorist organization allowed to freely operate in Our State Capitol, and freely in Oklahoma?