His credentials allowed him to testify in court that the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro, Tennessee would represent a beachhead of Islamicism in the heartland of America, beating the drums of a tidal wave of Sharia against the cradle of our Christian hearths like a wolf in a velvet glove. Here's the fun stuff (emphasis mine):
Gaffney, who has been warning about the supposed threat to the Constitution from Sharia for years, was the only witness in the first day of hearings in a lawsuit filed by a handful of opponents to the mosque. They're trying to convince a judge to file an injunction against the mosque's construction, on the grounds the public officials violated open meeting law when approving the project.An ordinary mortal would think this moment represented the last of his usefulness to anybody even halfway serious about anything. Some bozo paid Gaffney to appear in that courtroom to verify the inevitable dangers of Sharia law, about which he admits no expertise, in relation to the alleged violation of a public-accountability law committed when giving zoning approval for a building. It's just short of bringing Sarah Palin in to explain calculus as proof of witchcraft in a hearing about whether a county commissioner inappropriately used a private email account to contact a developer — which, be fair, is entirely possible.
Gaffney argued that Sharia -- that is, a system of laws defined by the Koran -- is a threat to the Constitution, and most mosque leaders preach Sharia. It's a common argument among necons and mosque opponents.
"I see several things that are a red flag from a security standpoint," he said, according to the Daily News Journal. "They have engaged in activities that should be worrisome to this community."
The "phenomena" of radical imams preaching a Sharia takeover of the Constitution "is present in communities like this," he said.
Gaffney admitted, however, that he is no expert.
"I don't hold myself out as an expert on Sharia Law," he said. "But I have talked a lot about that as a threat."
But an ordinary mortal would be wrong:
After the hearing, [Gaffney] told local reporters that President Obama's counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan is violating U.S. law.Nicely done, Gaffney. It's like watching Chuck Yeager walk out of the black plume of smoke where the NF-104 cratered. See, he doesn't have any credentials for his opinions, but you don't need them when you can walk away from a fatal spin like the above with the masterful use of "submission."
"If you know sedition is going on and don't do anything about it, that's a felony offense under the U.S. statute," he said, attributing the violation to a scourge of political correctness. "I call it submission."
As people like Gaffney are so fond of pointing out, Islam means "submission." Technically, it means "submission to God," which is an attitude entirely translatable to the average Christian, but people like Gaffney tactically opt not to elaborate. The submission definition is enough, because it calls to mind images of hordes of unthinking automata, ululating kill-bots who wipe their butt with warm water and a left hand, who don't eat bacon, who get stoned in the totally wrong way.
As the piece linked above pointed out, Gaffney has spent over a couple years now trying to stay on the rhetorical tightrope of, "I'm not saying President Obama is a Muslim, but what would say that to you is all this evidence. Not me. Just the evidence." Once you're aware of that, his final quote is a masterstroke. Political correctness is submission, the liberal tool that limps wrists in the face of a real existential threat. That submission is practiced by the nation's counter-terrorism advisor. And we all know who nominated him.
At first blush, it's shocking that Frank Gaffney's sleazy insinuation-based punditry could reach this level of economical competence. But probably the more shocking thing is that he's been doing this so long and still hasn't replaced his "ums" and "uhs" — those conversational filled pauses — with "wink."