The Problem of a Radical Imam at Wake Forest University

Pages: 1 2

Understanding that you are a very busy lawyer, perhaps you could have had one of your associates or paralegals do a modicum of research on this issue before painting yourself into a corner.  Since you obviously haven’t done much research, allow me to give you a primer on the basics of Shariah law.  And please understand, that one of the main tenets of Shariah law is that it is not served up a la carte.  A Muslim must make a choice to either be all in for Shariah, the 7th Century Islamic law set out by Mohammed or, if the Muslim has entered the age of reason and enlightenment, opt not to be a Shariah supremacist.  Wake Forest, if they had done the proper vetting, could have chosen a 21st century Imam who was a non-Shariah supremacist and we wouldn’t be having this dialogue, but they didn’t.

Here are some basic tenets of the Shariah law ideology that you are trying to defend in the name and guise of diversity:

  1. All laws were handed down by Allah.  There are no man-made laws such as the Constitution.   Shariah is, to quote Andy McCarthy, “not merely a set of religious principles for spiritual guidance but a full-scale, authoritarian governmental system, regulating every aspect of political, social, and economic life.”  Please note the quote from Imam Griggs in number 6 below whereby he gives voice to this belief.
  2. Denial of freedom of conscience, religion and speech.  If you are a non-Muslim in a Shariah dominant state, you have three choices, convert to Islam, be a dhimni (a second class citizen with less rights and more obligations than a Muslim), or death.
  3. Death to apostates (Muslims who leave the faith).  Have you seen the recent Pew poll taken in Egypt after the fall of Mubarak where a full 80% of Egyptians stated that it was their belief that apostates, those renouncing their Islamic faith, should be put to death?
  4. A caste system where everyone is segregated by creed and sex.  A society where men’s rights are superior to women’s rights and where a Muslim’s rights are superior to a non-Muslim’s.  This obviously includes polygamy with men allowed up to four wives.  A woman’s testimony is only worth ½ of a man’s testimony in Shariah courts (which Britain now has).
  5. Death to homosexuals.  Did you ever wonder why Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the President of Iran, when speaking at Columbia University said there were no homosexuals in Iran?  At least those students had enough common sense to laugh and boo him for this comment, instead of defending him in the name of diversity.
  6. Women must cover all of their skin.  Here is a website with a Question and Answer with Imam Griggs describing why women should cover up.  One quote from Imam Griggs says it all: “I think it’s very important to understand that the parameters of dress for Muslim women and Muslim men are parameters that were established by the creator of the universe, by Allah, and those parameters do not change.” (See No. 1 above) I encourage you to read this article in order to gain an understanding into this man’s ideology, at least what he will admit to publicly, so that you will know what you are defending.
  7. Zakat – Islamic charity, of which 1/8th must go to fund jihadist violence by non-military Muslim actors on non-Muslims;
  8. Taqiyya – lying to non-muslims in order to spread their faith.
  9. The permissible use of violence to impose Shariah law.  You really should read the notebook of information that I supplied to Dr. Hatch in my August 5th letter as it sets all of this out clearly and in great detail.  But I will summarize it for you.  Imam Griggs touts extensively, including on the website for his mosque, his membership in the Islamic Party of North America (IPNA).  He wrote the definitive history of IPNA.  He is an officer in IPNA.  I bought their instructional manual entitled “Taking Islam to the Street: The Daw’ah of the Islamic Party of North America” in which Imam Griggs is quoted extensively.  In other words, he is a big player in IPNA.  Page 66 of this manual recites their eight-line motto…line five of which is “Jihad, all out struggle, is our means” …to impose Shariah Law everywhere. In all schools of Sunni and Shia jurisprudence, Jihad is obligatory and means to wage warfare against non-Muslims.  There is no other legal definition of Jihad in Islamic Law.   If you don’t believe me, perhaps you could have one of your associates do a little legal research on this issue.  You may want to rely on someone who has a little more expertise than the Southern Poverty Law Center.  The classic and authoritative manual of Islamic Sacred Law, which is available on Amazon, is “Reliance of the Traveller” (sic).  This is the leading text on Islamic Jurisprudence and it has a very unambiguous definition of Jihad, which is clearly set out in the opening sentence of the section on Jihad.

So Mr. Williams, do you believe that this is an ideology worth defending, worth circling the wagons for, worth implying that I am a bigot or Islamaphobe because I want the Wake community to know about it, worth castigating those who don’t want to give their money to Wake as along as this is protected and kept hidden at Wake?  Do you really believe that Wake should allow this ideology to use its campus for more jihadist recruits who want to pull our society down from within?

I ask you, if Wake Forest’s motto, “Pro Humanitate (for humanity), is at the heart of the University’s identity and reflects a dedication to making a difference in the world,” then who is best supporting that mission?  You, who are trying to support yet hide this hideous ideology, or I, who am trying to expose it?

I firmly believe that unless all Americans understand Shariah Islamists, then they cannot begin to understand what is happening in the world, why non-Muslims are murdered in the millions by Muslims in Shariah Islamic countries, why the Arab spring is turning out to be the Arab Winter, or why Iran wants to destroy Israel and can never be allowed to posses nuclear weapons.

I believe that what is best for Wake Forest, its students and alumni, and what I would encourage you to get behind, is the symposium/debate which I have proposed.  Shouldn’t it be a hallmark of a great institution to be open-minded, to embrace dialogue and debate on difficult issues of national and worldwide importance, to eschew political correctness and follow the truth wherever it leads?  If I, and the others mentioned above, are wrong, then why not engage in a debate for everyone to witness?  What are you and the administration afraid of, other than educating the Wake community on the nature of Shariah law and the ideology of Imam Griggs?

Donald L. Woodsmall
Class of ’77, J.D. 81


Dr. Hatch
Board of Trustees
Chaplain Auman
Arthur Orr
Old Gold and Black
Winston-Salem Journal
Wall Street Journal

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

Pages: 1 2

  • Geneww

    Please read the one page proof that God authored the Bible at Then read the Koran and you will rapidly discern that everything God loves and established (Judeo-Christian, Israel and the "One Nation under God…USA") is hated by its author.
    The world and this countries problem is not politics but a real battle between Righteousness and Evil. Satan is a liar, deceiver, counterfeiter and out to destroy. Name one Muslim led country where Judeo-Christians are not subdued to servitude, or killed. The “One World Leaders” and Arabs countries have funded billions to destroy governments with Judeo-Christian Constitutions and principals since they can not co-exist!

    • bubbaland1

      Mr Woodstall,
      Perhaps the best means to address this issue is to persuade WFU alumns not to donate to the University and to discourage their children from attending WFU. Another means is to perhaps organize a boycott of key WFU sporting events. The only way to get the attention of private universities is through their wallet! Lastly, how about putting together website called JihadatWFU and post quotes from the chaplain.
      Good luck in your endeavor,
      P.S. Contact Caroline Glick at the Jerusalem Post perhaps she could do a column on this and spread the word.

  • Khushi

    Mr Woodstall, you have done a sterling service to your country and to the free world by pursuing this matter. A lesser man would have warned the authorities, presented the evidence and left it at that. But your tenacity is commendable.
    I hope this imam is thrown out immediately.
    Good luck.

  • alwaysonwatch
  • dwkunzmd

    As a WFU graduate (also class of '77) I have already sent emails to Dr Hatch and Mr. Williams in support of Mr Woodsmall.

  • doesn'tmatter

    Mr. Woodsmall, I have read your letter in its entirety, but not taking anything for face value, I did my own research and re-read your letter. Anyone can read and react, but I have chosen to read, contemplate and then react to your letter. My father actually sent me this letter via email and asked "is this happening at every university?". To that question there are many ways that I could answer. I am currently working on my PhD and second master's degree. While I am not going to argue on whether or not the facts are really the true. I don't want to say that I am not concerned but I do question your tone and overall intention with this email. I find it curious that you felt the passion and desire to first off search out evidence against Mr. Griggs. I saw no mention of researching extensive background information on the catholic priest that the university hired? What you think that the child sex abuse scandal is over? Or did you feel that it is a conspiracy against the Christian world set up by others?
    You keep mentioning a "debate" needs to be held to educate the student, faculty and staff of WFU. A debate? How about a persecution? Isn't that what you are looking for? What about a day of education on Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Atheists and agnostics? I feel that with this letter you are going on the attack instead of learning and trying to understand a different way of life. While you may call me naive or an idealist, I am not that at all. In fact, I am all about learning and understanding. For myself, I would not become a Muslim or practice Islam because I don't believe in the tenants of the religion. However, it doesn't mean that I hate all Muslims or don't appreciate the fact that everyone has the right to believe what they want to believe, however, when you are trying to oppress others because you feel they are oppressors, it becomes a huge disaster and history shows a dangerous and repetitive pattern: Nazi's; American's enslaving African Americans, Japanese internment camps etc. You get the point . You even say in your letter "support yet hide this hideous ideology". Who are you to say what is hideous ideology? That sir is bigotry and hatred at its finest. Because you don't believe what someone else believes it is now hideous? I am not calling you hideous. I think that your motivation is to degrade, belittle and develop a hate movement towards Islam and even others who believe differently than you. Where does it stop? This is why people continue to fight and rage wars. I am not asking you to be tolerant…but to understand. To tolerate is to put up with, deal with, stomach. Quit asking for a "debate". Again, why not create a forum where individuals can speak of their religious beliefs if you are so worried about understanding what people believe in? In fact, why are you emailing others at the University? Why don't you meet with Griggs to discuss your concern, your viewpoint and ask him yourself about "The Brotherhood". Why are you going around the issue instead of setting up a meeting with the very man you are talking about? You are on the attack, out to "slay the beast".
    I do believe it is important for us all to have a greater understanding of one another, but not in an attacking and blasphemous way. I am sure that the University put thought and time into conducting a search for a representative and I am sure they do this with everyone not just those who represent various religions.

    • LibertyLover

      Pure sophistry unworthy of a self proclaimed academic.

    • 2Anglico

      Written by an ACLU lawyer in training.

      • 2Anglico

        Note how doesntmatter almost immediately changes the subject by asking about Christian clergy. Also, the tired tactic of discrediting the author is present throughout doesntmatter's "argument". At NO time does doesntmatter even attempt to address Mr. Woodsmall's concerns.
        Why don't you try to refute the authors points instead of engaging in name calling?

        • doesn't matter

          It was merely to make point. What sparks a person to "investigate" another? Is it because of their faith, they way they look, the color of their skin? I am just curious as to what efforts he put into other staff members that were recently hired. Clearly the University didn't see a threat or a problem, I am sure there are many people who could have chosen for this role. Why does he chose to go everywhere except the source…Griggs himself?

    • cheese_burger

      This idiot said: "Who are you to say what is hideous ideology?"

      I did, for one. Islam is a hideous ideology, plain and simple. Have you read the Koran? Have you read the Sira? Have you read the Hadiths?

      Hideous is a very mild expletive, in the case of both Islam, and by extension, Muslims.

      Muslims are Monsters. They have no choice, because the tenets of Islam were designed precisely to create Monsters, and only Monsters.

      Look up the word mufa'khathat. Muslims, raping infants in the name of Allah… the rotten ugly, repulsive Soul of Islam… or should I say, Jizzlam.

      You sir, are a turd, and a fool, to boot.

    • Jack Salami

      Catholic priests don't wish to supplant the constitution, sir,

    • dirt

      Phd in libral art or music? Master in economy or psychology? When someone push out the ideology of violence and inequity of men and women, there's no bigotry if others want to expose that.

      Assume a person with Phd and Master degree know the difference between facts disclosure and hate speech.

      There is a topic on this issue, which is Sharia, of course there's no mention of other none-related issues.

      It's true we need to understand eath other, but what do you do after you realize that the other want to subdue and dominate you? Still pretending it's not there? Or you're ready to convert or become a subclass person or be a martyr?

      Politicaly correctness is for politician only, none politician should not follow suit.

    • michiganruth

      I stopped reading your (very long un-paragraphed) comments the minute you brought up a "Catholic priest." excuse me? have you wandered onto a comment board you don't mean to be on?

      we're talking about radical Islam and a troubling imam with an unsavory background. we are talking about "academic freedom" not meaning much of anything anymore, in these days of political correctness. and we are talking about why the liberals, who have nothing but contempt for Christianity and Judaism, are willing to do ANYTHING to accommodate Islam.

  • jacob


  • maria

    Looks that PhD can be received only non-informed or person on socialist or Islamist payroll. If doesntmatter really believes on that cropp he wrote he is ignorant and naive one but more likely he is liar using deception and on Islamic payroll.
    Did not he know that all honest disputes on Islam immediately announced by islamists and their supporters as "islamophobia"? Did not he see demonstration in our country and Western world/European ones those one with posters "Islam will dominate"?
    How dare that "PhD" seeker compare Christianity to cult of hatred and political ideology of hatred and istrument of conquering the world under disguise of religion "Islam"?
    He is represent the fifth column to destroy our beloved country supporting those invaders. Did not he know how many bloody plots have been revealed by FBI just last years? All of them were plotted by "peaceful" Muslims.

  • Matamoros

    "Islam" is actually the cult of Mohammed…not at all unlike teh cult of Jim Jones of Jonestown fame. The "pillars" of this cult are murder, rape, pillage, hatred, and war. "Allah" is none other than Mohammed's sock puppet, his alter ego, his ventriloquist dummy. This cult is a monstrosity and the pisant "diversity" adherents in this country are its willing lackeys. They're anxious and happy to sacrifice their morals, their intellect, their conscience, to avoid being called "racist" or "prejudiced." To paraphrase Mohammed (May He Burn in Hell), 'if you take Mohammedans as friends and compatriots, you are one of them.'

    • doesn't matter

      That is not the pillars of Islam. Unfortunately there are some individuals who chose to interpret teachings in the way that suits them the best and use those choices and interpretations to cause harm to push their agenda. Do I agree with everything written in Islamic law? No I do not. That is why I am not Muslim.

  • stuart Parsons

    Muhammad's alter ego, the Mighty Allah and his deluded followers want to control the world. Therefore, Islam is a far, far greater tthreat to the well-being of mankind than Fascism and Communism ever were.

    Please remember that freedom is never more than one generation from extinction. We do not pass it to our children in the bloodstream. If has to be fought for, protected, cherished like a loved one, and passed on for them to do the same. Otherwise, in our twilight years, we will be secretly telling our grandchildren of the good old days when democracy and tolerance flourished and good men and women were free to speak their minds….

  • rediscover911com

    Those who did 9/11 are succeeding in dominating the world. They control mass media, Hollywood, Congress, Wall Street, the ABC departments, the Executive, and the Courts.

    They put forth such propaganda as this article to demonize muslims.

    When they aren't committing 'false flags' attacks, they are intimidating others while feigning to be victims. It wasn't muslims.

    • Hanna

      It was however only Muslims who were rejoicing in the streets world-wide, delirious at the suffering and deaths of innocent people. If it wasn't them, they certainly proved to us what delights them. Many conspiracy theories originated in the Muslim world, I have observed and researched this myself since 9/11.

    • Samuel

      Another anti-Semitic POS crawls out from under its rock. Maybe you know DeShawn?

    • michiganruth

      10 points off for forgetting to mention the USS Liberty!

      you Jew-haters are slipping.

    • Anonymous

      Hey "rediscover" :

      hold your breath …. now stay that way ….

    • Ghostwriter

      Oh no! Not another truther! Not these people again! I thought the crawled back under their rocks a long time ago. And I agree with Hanna. Most of the Muslim world celebrated 9/11. Is it any wonder why many Americans are so leary of Muslims?

  • crypticguise

    Surely there is a way for alumni and board of trustees to remove this useful idiot for Islam at Wake Forest. The time for idle talk is over. Supporters and those who ignore IslamoFascists in the Universities and Colleges must be taken to task and removed if necessary from their cushy sinecures.

  • doesn't matter

    You are naive to think that Islam is the only religion where these issues occur. What about sects of the FLDS, members of the Catholic Church, etc. If all this evidence was created and found why hasn't the government tried him for treason then? Griggs is a US Citizen, if his transgressions are so easy to find and are supported with evidence, then where is the action? I don't obviously support rape etc. There is always good and bad with every religion, every belief system.

    • Hanna

      I answered that question if you had bothered to read. OK simplified :
      Many people of all faiths or no faith do bad things. However, It is against the laws of decent countries. I dont know about Griggs I am Dutch & in Europe. In Islam they are allowed as in the Quran or Hadith and Sharia allows them which is based upon the words and actions of their "Holy" prophet Mohammad. (marrying underage girls)
      I call sex with a 9 year old girl "rape" Muslims disagree as they say Mohammad "married her" so does that make it ok to you too ? I have met refugees, worked with them, many were Christians fleeing Islamic oppression. I have been reeling from their stories, shocked and even physically sick and there is plenty of evidence. They are frightened when they come to the West to meet Muslims here !.In India & Egypt many( Christian & Hindu) girls are raped and forced to become Muslims
      and many more atrocities often due to the Islamic Sharia infamous "Blasphemy laws". Even thinking about it makes me feel sick again.

  • michiganruth

    this mindset at Wake Forest is the same one that causes libs to say "I'm PROUD that they are building a mosque at Ground Zero. it will show the world we are tolerant!"

    what they don't understand is it only shows the world we are weak and ignorant. anybody who's ever studied Islam for more than a minute knows that they build mosques at the sites of their triumphs. that's what they're wanting to do in NYC, and the PC crowd wants to help.

    may G-d deliver our country from these maroons.

  • rediscover911com

    While lame attempts to spin Islam as inherently evil will convince some, those whose dominance is dependent upon such lies need look no further than their own house, the Talmud for all the vile evil that is said to be inherent to Islam. and the world awakens to the synagogue of satan. John 8:44, Revelations 2:9, Revelations 3:9

  • maturin20

    I had to go through this letter point by point just to make note of how insidious Donald Woodsmall was in his attempt to troll the University. Here is what I noticed:

    01) WS = Wood. Small.

    02) WS is “responding” to a “letter” of decline, from Williams as if he is not the initiator.

    03) WS decides he is going to condescendingly lecture Mr. Williams.

    04) WS was trying to get WFU’s chaplain Griggs fired because he is a Muslim.

    05) WS harangued WFU President Hatch with an unsolicited 50 page manifesto.

    06) WS requested an audience with Hatch in order to vilify Griggs to Hatch’s face, or organize a public verbal duel with Griggs.

    07) WS was politely refused an audience in the interest of tolerance and was not indulged with debate.

    08) WS cuckolded Hatch for political correctness, made an argument from silence, and acted spurned.

    09) WS impugns the “intellectual honesty” at WFU because Williams would not indulge his tirade or facilitate his duel.

    10) WS points out that Williams is in charge of the money of the university as a fiduciary/trustee.

    11) WS makes a passion play out of his rejection letter.

    12) WS ploy backfires as it reveals that his “letter” was a belligerent voice message.

    13) WS ploy backfires as it reveals that WFU is familiar with Woodsmall and declined him with reason.

    14) WS goes from intimating that he has intelligence on the Muslim Brotherhood to claiming he knows “the press”

    and “insiders” at WFU. He serially claims special esoteric knowledge.

    15) WS projects fear of being labelled a bigot onto the WFU administration.

    16) WS proclaims that the university is now discredited, implying unaccredited.

    17) WS insinuates that Williams is lazy and ignorant, begins name-dropping Texas and the USDOJ.

    18) WS segues from rhetorical questions of inquiry to grandiose claims of unique expertise on the evils of Sharia and terrorism.

    19) WS sets himself up as the monopoly of due dilgence, in all likelihood pushing Frank Gaffney and Daniel Pipes data.

    20) WS takes exaggerated umbrage at having his methods rejected, claiming he had no other recourse.

    21) WS repeats himself and reveals that he ran to an online Hasbara when his request for a verbal duel was rebuffed.

    22) WS name-drops blogger Clare Lopez, her long bio, and begins advertising her Hasbara, taunting that he is now shaming WFU online.

    23) Clare Lopez is ex-CIA and in a signed affidavit testified that she is a liason to Mujahedeen-e Khalq (MEK) and Iran destabilization movements.

    24) WS now accuses Williams of thinking he knows more about Sharia than Clare Lopez (of the Clarion Fund/Raphael Shore, Gaffney, Pipes).

    25) WS claims the personal expertise of James Woolsey, and a laundry list of defense department specialists, a giant vicarious argument from authority.

    26) WS insinuates that Williams has read none of these people’s writings.

    27) WS directly accuses Williams or protecting terrorists and providing a terrorist recruiting ground at WFU.

    28) WS accuses Williams of being curt and claims to be a better lawyer than he is.

    29) WS accuses Williams of loving the university less than he does and of being naive and intellectually dishonest.

    30) WS accuses Williams of sweeping Der Muslimfrage under the carpet.

    31) WS accuses Williams of malfeasance for hiring Griggs.

    32) WS accuses Williams of “gross malfeasance and cover-up” for refusing to give him duelling time at the school.

    33) WS asserts that Williams is now trapped, and begins to repeat his condescending lecture about Sharia.

    34) WS issues a prosaic 9 point manifesto against the tenets of Sharia.

    35) WS implores Williams to read his unpublished work and then paraphrases it to him ad nauseam.

    36) WS accuses Williams of believing in and defending Sharia, and then threatens the finances of WFU with divestiture.

    37) WS wails about an alleged genocide by Muslims against all non-Muslims, and then cries out the name of Israel, and calls for war with Iran.

    38) WS then asks again to be indulged in a public verbal duel to be sponsored and hosted at WFU.

    39) WS then accuses WFU of being a closed-minded place which must prove its innocence.

    40) WS ends by accusing WFU and Williams of fear.

    • Ron

      41) maturin20 creates a hyperbole laced pseudo outline of fantastic assumptions after downing one-too-many cocktails.

  • Janet

    “an adherent to a philosophy that violence is an acceptable means to accomplish his goals.”

    • flankton

      this sounds like a subversive radical. i thought religion was supposed to be about love and peace? This sounds like a political speech!