O Brotherhood, What Art Thou?
O Brotherhood, What Art Thou?
Don't mistake Islamic extremists for moderates.
by Zeyno Baran
04/23/2007, Volume 012, Issue 30
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/524odzuf.asp
Even though Congress was in recess the first week of April, a number of lawmakers kept busy. A bipartisan delegation led by House majority leader Steny Hoyer paid a visit to Cairo, meeting with several Egyptian members of parliament, including members of the Muslim Brotherhood, a controversial Islamist group officially banned in Egypt. Hoyer's contacts with the Brotherhood have added new intensity to the debate over whether or not the U.S. government should "engage" with the group as an ally in the war on terror.
Making the case for such engagement, Robert Leiken and Steven Brooke wrote an article in the March/April issue of Foreign Affairs entitled "The Moderate Muslim Brotherhood." They conclude that the Brotherhood consists of "moderate Muslims with active community support" and that engaging with its members "makes strong strategic sense."
Yet this could not be further from the truth. The argument for a strategy of engagement flows from the incorrect belief that if Islamist groups that denounce violence are strengthened, they will then confront their more violent brethren and rob them of their support base. Although various Islamist groups do quarrel over tactics and often bear considerable animosity towards one another, a "divide and conquer" strategy will only push them closer together. This is illustrated perfectly by the response to Prime Minister Tony Blair's decision to ban the revolutionary Islamist group Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT) after the July 7, 2005, bombings in London. HT reached out to various British Islamist organizations, including the Muslim Brotherhood (despite their intense historical rivalry), and urged them all to stand united or "be the next in line to be proscribed." Sadly, HT's effort was successful and Blair was forced to withdraw his proposal.
Allies in this war cannot be chosen on the basis of their tactics--that is, whether or not they eschew violent methods. Instead, the deciding factor must be ideology: Is the group Islamist or not? In essence, this means that a nonviolent, British-born Islamist should not be considered an ally. Yet a devout, conservative Muslim immigrant to Europe--one who does not even speak any Western languages but rejects Islamist ideology--could be.
Moderate, non-Islamist Muslims have long tried to explain the inherent incompatibility of Islamism with a Western society that extols pluralism and equality. Islamists seek the total imposition of Islamic law upon society at large. To the Brotherhood and groups like it, the Koran and Islam are not a source of law but the only source of law. As the Muslim Brotherhood declares in its motto, "Allah is our objective, the Prophet is our leader, the Koran is our law, jihad is our way, dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope."
Moreover, engaging with Islamist organizations such as the Brotherhood lends legitimacy to an ideology that does not, in fact, represent the views of the majority of Muslims. Thus, American policymakers who advocate pursuing such a strategy are actually facilitating Islamism by endorsing it as a mainstream ideology. Some have already endorsed organizations that were founded by Brotherhood members and maintain a close ideological affiliation with the group, such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). Whether at home or abroad, such a policy is leading to disaster, as liberal, non-Islamist Muslims--having already been denounced by Islamists as apostates--are now being told by Western governments that they do not represent "real" Islam.
Empowering Islamists at the expense of non-Islamists hardly seems a wise strategy for the United States to pursue if it wants to win the war of ideas. After all, non-Islamists are already tremendously disadvantaged in terms of organization and funding. The Muslim Brotherhood has well-established networks of institutions, educational centers, and think tanks, as well as millions of dollars in donations from the Middle East. At the same time, many moderates are deterred from speaking out because of the ire doing so would provoke from Islamist groups. In the West, not only do critics have to worry about a fatwa calling for their death, but they are also faced with the prospect of getting sued for millions of dollars.
Indeed, Islamist organizations have flourished in the tolerant environment of the West, taking advantage of the freedom of speech to spread their hate-filled, anti-Semitic ideas without fear of reprisal. In the process, they actively and openly create a fifth column of activists who work to undermine the very systems under which Western societies operate. They are creating self-segregated societies in a process that has been called "voluntary apartheid." This tactic has been enthusiastically supported by the Muslim Brotherhood, whose unofficial spiritual leader Yusuf al-Qaradawi has repeatedly advised European Muslims to create their own "Muslim ghettos" to avoid cultural assimilation.
Islamist groups are engaged in a long-term social engineering project, by which they hope to lead Muslims to reject Western norms of pluralism, individual rights, and the rule of law. At the core of Islamist terrorism is the ideological machinery that works to promote sedition and hatred. That the tactics of the Muslim Brotherhood are nonviolent (or at least less violent) does not make the ideology behind those tactics any less antagonistic to the United States.
It may be that, when compared with al Qaeda or Hezbollah, the Muslim Brotherhood is the lesser evil. Yet engagement is worse than no engagement if it legitimizes Islamist ideology and alienates non-Islamists. Recognizing and responding to the threat posed by the Islamist ideology is an important part of the war on terror. Any American or Western engagement with Islamists should be critical in nature. Under no circumstances should we do them the favor of extolling Islamist ideologues as "moderates."
Don't mistake Islamic extremists for moderates.
by Zeyno Baran
04/23/2007, Volume 012, Issue 30
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/524odzuf.asp
Even though Congress was in recess the first week of April, a number of lawmakers kept busy. A bipartisan delegation led by House majority leader Steny Hoyer paid a visit to Cairo, meeting with several Egyptian members of parliament, including members of the Muslim Brotherhood, a controversial Islamist group officially banned in Egypt. Hoyer's contacts with the Brotherhood have added new intensity to the debate over whether or not the U.S. government should "engage" with the group as an ally in the war on terror.
Making the case for such engagement, Robert Leiken and Steven Brooke wrote an article in the March/April issue of Foreign Affairs entitled "The Moderate Muslim Brotherhood." They conclude that the Brotherhood consists of "moderate Muslims with active community support" and that engaging with its members "makes strong strategic sense."
Yet this could not be further from the truth. The argument for a strategy of engagement flows from the incorrect belief that if Islamist groups that denounce violence are strengthened, they will then confront their more violent brethren and rob them of their support base. Although various Islamist groups do quarrel over tactics and often bear considerable animosity towards one another, a "divide and conquer" strategy will only push them closer together. This is illustrated perfectly by the response to Prime Minister Tony Blair's decision to ban the revolutionary Islamist group Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT) after the July 7, 2005, bombings in London. HT reached out to various British Islamist organizations, including the Muslim Brotherhood (despite their intense historical rivalry), and urged them all to stand united or "be the next in line to be proscribed." Sadly, HT's effort was successful and Blair was forced to withdraw his proposal.
Allies in this war cannot be chosen on the basis of their tactics--that is, whether or not they eschew violent methods. Instead, the deciding factor must be ideology: Is the group Islamist or not? In essence, this means that a nonviolent, British-born Islamist should not be considered an ally. Yet a devout, conservative Muslim immigrant to Europe--one who does not even speak any Western languages but rejects Islamist ideology--could be.
Moderate, non-Islamist Muslims have long tried to explain the inherent incompatibility of Islamism with a Western society that extols pluralism and equality. Islamists seek the total imposition of Islamic law upon society at large. To the Brotherhood and groups like it, the Koran and Islam are not a source of law but the only source of law. As the Muslim Brotherhood declares in its motto, "Allah is our objective, the Prophet is our leader, the Koran is our law, jihad is our way, dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope."
Moreover, engaging with Islamist organizations such as the Brotherhood lends legitimacy to an ideology that does not, in fact, represent the views of the majority of Muslims. Thus, American policymakers who advocate pursuing such a strategy are actually facilitating Islamism by endorsing it as a mainstream ideology. Some have already endorsed organizations that were founded by Brotherhood members and maintain a close ideological affiliation with the group, such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). Whether at home or abroad, such a policy is leading to disaster, as liberal, non-Islamist Muslims--having already been denounced by Islamists as apostates--are now being told by Western governments that they do not represent "real" Islam.
Empowering Islamists at the expense of non-Islamists hardly seems a wise strategy for the United States to pursue if it wants to win the war of ideas. After all, non-Islamists are already tremendously disadvantaged in terms of organization and funding. The Muslim Brotherhood has well-established networks of institutions, educational centers, and think tanks, as well as millions of dollars in donations from the Middle East. At the same time, many moderates are deterred from speaking out because of the ire doing so would provoke from Islamist groups. In the West, not only do critics have to worry about a fatwa calling for their death, but they are also faced with the prospect of getting sued for millions of dollars.
Indeed, Islamist organizations have flourished in the tolerant environment of the West, taking advantage of the freedom of speech to spread their hate-filled, anti-Semitic ideas without fear of reprisal. In the process, they actively and openly create a fifth column of activists who work to undermine the very systems under which Western societies operate. They are creating self-segregated societies in a process that has been called "voluntary apartheid." This tactic has been enthusiastically supported by the Muslim Brotherhood, whose unofficial spiritual leader Yusuf al-Qaradawi has repeatedly advised European Muslims to create their own "Muslim ghettos" to avoid cultural assimilation.
Islamist groups are engaged in a long-term social engineering project, by which they hope to lead Muslims to reject Western norms of pluralism, individual rights, and the rule of law. At the core of Islamist terrorism is the ideological machinery that works to promote sedition and hatred. That the tactics of the Muslim Brotherhood are nonviolent (or at least less violent) does not make the ideology behind those tactics any less antagonistic to the United States.
It may be that, when compared with al Qaeda or Hezbollah, the Muslim Brotherhood is the lesser evil. Yet engagement is worse than no engagement if it legitimizes Islamist ideology and alienates non-Islamists. Recognizing and responding to the threat posed by the Islamist ideology is an important part of the war on terror. Any American or Western engagement with Islamists should be critical in nature. Under no circumstances should we do them the favor of extolling Islamist ideologues as "moderates."
0
-
All Muslims are the enemy, because all believe in the overthrow of infidels. 0 -
Correction...Muslims AND Marxists. We know which one Steny Hoyer is.[;)]
quote:Originally posted by thunderbolt
All Muslims are the enemy, because all believe in the overthrow of infidels.0 -
quote:Originally posted by thunderbolt
All Muslims are the enemy, because all believe in the overthrow of infidels.
Thunder, may I please have your definition of "infidel" before I respond to this post?
NS0 -
just a guess here....
definition of "infidel": non-Islamists.0 -
quote:Originally posted by bobski
just a guess here....
definition of "infidel": non-Islamists.
Bobski,
If that is the definition used, then the above statement is false. All Muslims DO NOT want to kill all non-Muslims. In fact, most live peacefully beside a multitude of various other religious sects without any issues.
We have made a sport out of "villianizing" all Muslims in an attempt to put a "one size fits all" face on our enemy. Unfortunately, this prevailing attitude only leads to our enemies' victories.
The problem with generalizations is that they are generally wrong. As Americans', we could get much further in our support of the GWOT if we demanded our elected officials and military leaders truly define our enemy instead of allowing the "Muslim Boogeyman" to be our unambiguous OPFOR.
That's all I've got for this post so I'll stand aside and put on my flame-resistant jacket and prepare for the onslaught of:
- "All Muslims must die"
- "You are not an American if you believe all Muslims don't want to kill us"0 -
What the heck is your pichur??
Looks like it might be interesting.
Doug0 -
quote:Originally posted by Doug Wilson
What the heck is your pichur??
Looks like it might be interesting.
Doug
Doug,
If your asking me about the FASTROPE picture, this is the best way to explain it....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VT0_zi8TxsQ
It's a great way to insert troops into an urban area.
The extraction TTP is called SPIES and it is also useful when operating in Afghanistan or other mountainous areas where the terrain prevents a full-on landing/loading of troops you are attempting to EXFIL.
All in all, it is a great addition to our kitbag.
NS0 -
Those who do not think that ALL muslims want the demise of the West and the supremacy of islam are those who DO NOT understand the true nature of islam. muslims who say they do not want to kill you fall into one of two categories: 1)those who do not understand the true nature of their own religion, or 2)those who are intentionally misleading you in order to gain advantage over you at the appropriate time. (It is blatantly advocated in the koran that muslims should LIE in order to get the upper hand over their adversary.)
You owe it to yourself, your offspring and your country to read some good books that honestly reveal that true nature: The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) by Robert Spencer; Why I left Jihad by Walid Shoebat; Religion of Peace: Islam's War against the West by Gregory Davis. There are many other titles, as well, available from Amazon.com and others.
Ignorance of islam's evil heart will not cause you to be immune to their venom. Use knowledge of their ploys to resist them. Or in ignorance, capitulate or become a victim. Whichever course you choose, please, PLEASE do not become an unwitting advocate FOR the demonic empire of islam. We have enough of those already in our government and media.
At the very least, you should follow these links from my signature:
www.JihadWatch.org
www.TheReligionOfPeace.com0 -
quote:Originally posted by Ramtinxxl
Those who do not think that ALL muslims want the demise of the West and the supremacy of islam are those who DO NOT understand the true nature of islam. muslims who say they do not want to kill you fall into one of two categories: 1)those who do not understand the true nature of their own religion, or 2)those who are intentionally misleading you in order to gain advantage over you at the appropriate time. (It is blatantly advocated in the koran that muslims should LIE in order to get the upper hand over their adversary.)
You owe it to yourself, your offspring and your country to read some good books that honestly reveal that true nature: The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) by Robert Spencer; Why I left Jihad by Walid Shoebat; Religion of Peace: Islam's War against the West by Gregory Davis. There are many other titles, as well, available from Amazon.com and others.
Ignorance of islam's evil heart will not cause you to be immune to their venom. Use knowledge of their ploys to resist them. Or in ignorance, capitulate or become a victim. Whichever course you choose, please, PLEASE do not become an unwitting advocate FOR the demonic empire of islam. We have enough of those already in our government and media.
At the very least, you should follow these links from my signature:
www.JihadWatch.org
www.TheReligionOfPeace.com
Ramtinxxl,
Wow, here I am in language school, wasting yet another year of my life learning Arabic and I could have just saved myself all that time and pain by following some of the links you posted here?
Come to think of it, look at all this time I lost:
1. 14 weeks of Advanced Regional Analysis Course (ARAC) training in Middle East Cultures and Societal Structures
2. More time lost by attending the Middle East Orientation Course (MEOC)
3. Two tours to Iraq and three to Afghanistan taking up nearly four years of my life
4. Reading the Koran, cover to cover in both English, and now with an attempt in Arabic
I could go on, but what is the purpose. I mean, heck, you probably have much, much more experience with this culture and the people of the Middle East than I could ever hope to, so I guess I should just stop constantly trying to improve my understanding of the world's fastest growing religion and society and refer to your "Kill em all and let God sort em out" answer to all of our questions about Islam.
Just one question for you. Have you ever met a Muslim, or are all of your thoughts, beliefs and prejudices taken on from the vast resources you have at the end of your fingertips here on the web? How lucky we are that no one can find any small sect of Christianity and blasphemes all Christians due to the behavior/thoughts of those few, dare I say "radical" believers?
Perhaps we should consider dealing with the small number of few diseased members of the Islamic faith who are causing such terrible havoc around the world, instead of attempting to destroy one of the world's largest population groups in an act of ignorance.
But again, I digress and stand before you as a man who has spent multiple years of my life contemplating this very issue.
NS0 -
Thanks, Night Stalker - my little screen is so small and your picture is dark enough that I can't make out any detail.
Three of my Sons are proficient at this insertion technique and have won "Air Assault" wings.
Thank you for being there for us !!
Doug0 -
quote:Originally posted by Night Stalker
Ramtinxxl,
Wow, here I am in language school, wasting yet another year of my life learning Arabic and I could have just saved myself all that time and pain by following some of the links you posted here?
Come to think of it, look at all this time I lost:
1. 14 weeks of Advanced Regional Analysis Course (ARAC) training in Middle East Cultures and Societal Structures
2. More time lost by attending the Middle East Orientation Course (MEOC)
3. Two tours to Iraq and three to Afghanistan taking up nearly four years of my life
4. Reading the Koran, cover to cover in both English, and now with an attempt in Arabic
I could go on, but what is the purpose. I mean, heck, you probably have much, much more experience with this culture and the people of the Middle East than I could ever hope to, so I guess I should just stop constantly trying to improve my understanding of the world's fastest growing religion and society and refer to your "Kill em all and let God sort em out" answer to all of our questions about Islam.
Just one question for you. Have you ever met a Muslim, or are all of your thoughts, beliefs and prejudices taken on from the vast resources you have at the end of your fingertips here on the web? How lucky we are that no one can find any small sect of Christianity and blasphemes all Christians due to the behavior/thoughts of those few, dare I say "radical" believers?
Perhaps we should consider dealing with the small number of few diseased members of the Islamic faith who are causing such terrible havoc around the world, instead of attempting to destroy one of the world's largest population groups in an act of ignorance.
But again, I digress and stand before you as a man who has spent multiple years of my life contemplating this very issue.
NS
Once again, you prove that vast "knowledge" and "experience" can still blind one to the truth. I don't know your mission or intent, but that of islam is painfully obvious, no matter what you think you know.
Enjoy your viewpoint and embrace the lies. Your blood won't be on my hands. When your muslim handlers are through with you, you will be treated with the same contempt they have for any non-muslim, unless of course, you have already capitulated to their seduction.0 -
quote:Originally posted by RamtinxxlEnjoy your viewpoint and embrace the lies. Your blood won't be on my hands. When your muslim handlers are through with you, you will be treated with the same contempt they have for any non-muslim, unless of course, you have already capitulated to their seduction.
Ram,
Based on your response, I reckon we're done talking about this issue.
I stand by my statement and pray the acidic nature of your hate and distrust is not the death of you.
Meanwhile, I'll keep soldiering on, and you can keep drinking all of the "All Muslims are Evil" Kool-Aid you can stomach before you explode.
NS0 -
quote:Originally posted by Night Stalker
quote:Originally posted by RamtinxxlEnjoy your viewpoint and embrace the lies. Your blood won't be on my hands. When your muslim handlers are through with you, you will be treated with the same contempt they have for any non-muslim, unless of course, you have already capitulated to their seduction.
Ram,
Based on your response, I reckon we're done talking about this issue.
I stand by my statement and pray the acidic nature of your hate and distrust is not the death of you.
Meanwhile, I'll keep soldiering on, and you can keep drinking all of the "All Muslims are Evil" Kool-Aid you can stomach before you explode.
NS
Sadly, you apparently buy into the same dim-witted notion so many liberals and others accept these days: that a desire for TRUTH and being unwilling to wink at evil is equal to hatred. I don't hate anyone. I DO hate the evil that is islam. I DO hate the anti-Christ reality of that demonic religion. I do NOT hate any person, regardless of how ignorant they are, or even how evil they are. I can discern the difference in the idea and the individual. The God I serve wishes ALL persons to come to salvation. It is not His intent--nor mine--that anyone should perish in error. But I will not mollycoddle the LIE; I will not white-wash the evil just to appear "enlightened" or "tolerant." As a wise man said, tolerance is the virtue of a man with NO CONVICTIONS. I HAVE convictions--based on TRUTH.
Nor do I drink the "kool-aid" of mass hysteria. The problem with islam is that the currently available kool-aid is being drunk by those like yourself who are BLIND to the horrible truth of an evil religion that, apparently unlike any other known religion, seeks the destruction of all else.
If you wish to wander on in your fog, go ahead. Even Jesus acknowledged that some would REFUSE to be saved. [xx(]
As for "exploding," that's something the ones you champion brought to the world...even using babies to conduct their mission. [:(]0 -
Convert or die. That is not religion. That is a cult. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
14 comments