Almost immediately after Barack Hussein Obama’s speech to ‘the Muslim world’ on Al-Arabiya, we began to draft a blog post, originally entitled ‘Did Obama’s speech to the ‘Muslim world’ legitimize the Muslim Brotherhood?’. It’s no longer a question, rather a statement.
Here is what Obama stated on Arab television just days after taking office that drew our attention:
“And so you will I think see our administration be very clear in distinguishing between organizations like al Qaeda — that espouse violence, espouse terror and act on it — and people who may disagree with my administration and certain actions, or may have a particular viewpoint in terms of how their countries should develop. We can have legitimate disagreements but still be respectful.” Source
Our suspicions were confirmed when the Muslim Brotherhood’s English version website posted an article suggesting that among those groups that don’t espouse terror but disagree with Obama’s administration is none other than the Muslim Brotherhood (although it’s unclear what they disagree on). The article, written by the D.C.-based director of research for the Project on Middle East Democracy (POMD), states:
…when I think of “people who may disagree with [the Obama] administration and certain actions” or have a “particular viewpoint of how their countries should develop,” I think of Islamist groups and parties, the vast majority of whom are both nonviolent and committed to the democratic process, organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, the Islamic Action Front in Jordan, Morocco”s Justice and Development Party, Turkey”s AKP, Kuwait”s Islamic Constitutional Movement, Yemen”s Islah Party, the Islamic Salvation Front in Algeria, and al-Nahda in Tunisia (sorry, it”s a long list).
There are violent groups which seek to attack and harm America, and nonviolent groups which may dislike or even hate American policies, but are legitimate political actors with large constituencies, massive grassroots support, and religious legitimacy.
The American policies Islamist groups hate include most of our democratic principles which they would replace with sharia law, and the Muslim Brotherhood isn’t even legal in its home-base, Egypt. Yet commentary from a U.S.-based group that supposedly espouses democracy attempts to legitimize groups that openly seek to destroy the U.S.! Ignoring the fact that there is no evidence that the vast majority of Islamist groups are both non-violent AND committed to any democratic process, it is no coincidence that this article was published on the Ikhwan’s website. The Ikhwan is the Muslim Brotherhood, the very same Ikhwan that penned a lengthy memo ‘on the General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America‘:
The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim’s destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who chose to slack. But, would the slackers and the Mujahedeen be equal.
The last page of that memo lists 29 Islamic groups as Muslim Brotherhood subsidiaries (image below and full memo here):
“A list of our organizations and the organizations of our friends [Imagine if t they all march to one plan !!!]
CAIR and terrorist group Hamas also owe their origins to the Muslim Brotherhood. Should POMD be on the list as well?
Our concern was further confirmed when in yesterday’s Washington Post we read Frank Gaffney’s “Embracing of Shariah?“. Gaffney writes:
President Obama on Friday reiterated for the umpteenth time his determination to develop a “new relationship” with the Muslim world. On this occasion, the audience were the leaders of Saudi Arabia, Indonesia and the Philippines.
Unfortunately, it increasingly appears that, in so doing, he will be embracing the agenda of the Muslim Brotherhood – an organization dedicated to promoting the theo-political-legal program authoritative Islam calls Shariah and that has the self-described mission of “destroying Western civilization from within.”
[Obama] He will also participate in something called the “Alliance of Civilizations.”
The Alliance is a United Nations-sponsored affair that reflects – as, increasingly do most things the United Nations is involved in – the views of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). The OIC is made up of 57 Muslim-majority nations. Thanks to support from Saudi Arabia and its proxies, the Muslim Brotherhood has become a driving force within the Conference and their agendas largely coincide.
Ominously, as part of its bid to “criminalize” Islamophobia, the OIC is seeking “deterrent punishments.” It insists that not only freedom of expression but all human rights be circumscribed by the OIC’s 1990 Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, which concludes with the caveat that, “All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shariah.” Translation: Liberties enshrined in the United Nations’ foundational Universal Declaration of Human Rights are largely rendered null and void.
The demand that no criticism of Islam be permitted is the pre-eminent feature of the Muslim Brotherhood’s efforts in the West. In fact, it is but the leading edge of the Brothers’ bid to suppress public awareness of the threat posed by their program in societies that pride themselves on religious tolerance, thereby facilitating seditious penetration and influence operations by the Shariah-adherent.
A playbook for the latter can be found in a publication issued last fall by the U.S.-Muslim Engagement Project being aggressively promoted to the Obama administration and Congress by a number of its non-Muslim participants. Notably, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright recently effusively presented to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee the Project’s book titled “Changing Course: A New Direction for U.S. Relations with the Muslim World.” Former Minnesota Rep. Vin Weber did the same at Grover Norquist’s weekly meeting of conservative activists last week.
Underwritten largely by George Soros’ and other left-wing foundations, “Changing Course” seems to reflect predominantly the recommendations of groups the government has established are Muslim Brotherhood fronts, such as the Islamic Society of North America and the Muslim Public Affairs Council. Both are represented in the Engagement Project’s “Leadership Group.”
Again, no coincidence, another of the Muslim Brotherhood’s organizations (ISNA – see list above) shows up having influence deep within U.S. policy, foreign and domestic. Gaffney continues:
In response to a long-overdue decision taken by the FBI last year to terminate “sensitivity training” of its agents by one of the most prominent of these fronts, the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), assorted Brotherhood groups and operatives reportedly intend to announce that Muslims will henceforth cease any and all cooperation with U.S. law enforcement until CAIR is rehabilitated.
Such a step would call into question the patriotism of the many Muslims in America who do not embrace the Brotherhood’s Shariah agenda – something that would, presumably, be as offensive to them as it would be troubling to the rest of us. It could also expose those engaged in it to criminal charges of “misprision of felony,” conspiring to withhold information from the authorities concerning terrorist operations and activities in the Muslim community.
The message should go forth: Friends of the Muslim Brotherhood are no friends of America. We follow their guidance at our peril.
Unfortunately Frank, the Muslim Brotherhood and their friends have infiltrated our most sensitive agencies and policy-making bodies.