Posted on 09/23/2004 2:51:20 AM PDT by kattracks
The hardest thing for Westerners to understand is not that a war with militant Islam is underway but that the nature of the enemy’s ultimate goal. That goal is to apply the Islamic law (the Shari‘a) globally. In U.S. terms, it intends to replace the Constitution with the Qur’an.
This aspiration is so remote and far-fetched to many non-Muslims, it elicits more guffaws than apprehension. Of course, that used to be the same reaction in Europe, and now it’s become widely accepted that, in Bernard Lewis’ words, “Europe will be Islamic by the end of the century.”
Because of the American skepticism about Islamist goals, I postponed publishing an article on this subject until immediately after 9/11, when I expected receptivity to the subject would be greater (it was published in November 2001as “The Danger Within: Militant Islam in America”). I argued there that
The Muslim population in this country is not like any other group, for it includes within it a substantial body of people—many times more numerous than the agents of Osama bin Ladin—who share with the suicide hijackers a hatred of the United States and the desire, ultimately, to transform it into a nation living under the strictures of militant Islam.
The receptivity indeed was greater, but still the idea of an Islamist takeover remains unrecognized in establishment circles – the U.S. government, the old media, the universities, the mainline churches.
Therefore, reading “A rare look at secretive Brotherhood in America,” in the Chicago Tribune on Sept. 19 caused me to startle. It’s a long analysis that draws on an exclusive interview with Ahmed Elkadi, the Muslim Brotherhood leader in the United States during 1984-94, plus other interviews and documentation. In it, the authors (Noreen S. Ahmed-Ullah, Sam Roe, and Laurie Cohen) warily but emphatically acknowledge the Islamists’ goal of turning the United States into an Islamic state.
Over the last 40 years, small groups of devout Muslim men have gathered in homes in U.S. cities to pray, memorize the Koran and discuss events of the day. But they also addressed their ultimate goal, one so controversial that it is a key reason they have operated in secrecy: to create Muslim states overseas and, they hope, someday in America as well. …
Brotherhood members emphasize that they follow the laws of the nations in which they operate. They stress that they do not believe in overthrowing the U.S. government, but rather that they want as many people as possible to convert to Islam so that one day—perhaps generations from now—a majority of Americans will support a society governed by Islamic law.
This Brotherhood approach is in keeping with my observation that the greater Islamist threat to the West is not violence – flattening buildings, bombing railroad stations and nightclubs, seizing theaters and schools – but the peaceful, legal growth of power through education, the law, the media, and the political system.
The Tribune article explains how, when recruiting new members, the organization does not reveal its identity but invites candidates to small prayer meetings where the prayer leaders focus on the primary goal of the Brotherhood, namely “setting up the rule of God upon the Earth” (i.e., achieving Islamic hegemony). Elkadi describes the organization’s strategic, long-term approach: “First you change the person, then the family, then the community, then the nation.”
His wife Iman is no less explicit; all who are associated with the Brotherhood, she says, have the same goal, which is “to educate everyone about Islam and to follow the teachings of Islam with the hope of establishing an Islamic state.”
In addition to Elkadi, the article features information from Mustafa Saied (about whose Muslim Brotherhood experiences the Wall Street Journal devoted a feature story in December 2003, without mentioning the organization’s Islamist goals). Saied, the Tribune informs us, says
he found out that the U.S. Brotherhood had a plan for achieving Islamic rule in America: It would convert Americans to Islam and elect like-minded Muslims to political office. “They’re very smart. Everyone else is gullible,” Saied says. “If the Brotherhood puts up somebody for an election, Muslims would vote for him not knowing he was with the Brotherhood.”
Citing documents and interviews, the Tribune team notes that the secretive Brotherhood, in an effort to acquire more influence, went above ground in Illinois in 1993, incorporating itself as the Muslim American Society. The MAS, headquartered in Alexandria, Va. and claiming 53 chapters across the United States engages in a number of activities. These include summer camps, a large annual conference, websites, and the Islamic American University, a mainly correspondence school in suburban Detroit that trains teachers and imams.
Of course, the MAS denies any intent to take over the country. One of its top officials, Shaker Elsayed, insists that
MAS does not believe in creating an Islamic state in America but supports the establishment of Islamic governments in Muslim lands. The group’s goal in the United States, he says, “is to serve and develop the Muslim community and help Muslims to be the best citizens they can be of this country.” That includes preserving the Muslim identity, particularly among youths.
Notwithstanding this denial, the Tribune finds MAS goals to be clear enough:
Part of the Chicago chapter’s Web site is devoted to teens. It includes reading materials that say Muslims have a duty to help form Islamic governments worldwide and should be prepared to take up arms to do so. One passage states that “until the nations of the world have functionally Islamic governments, every individual who is careless or lazy in working for Islam is sinful.” Another one says that Western secularism and materialism are evil and that Muslims should “pursue this evil force to its own lands” and “invade its Western heartland.” [links added by me, DP]
In suburban Rosemont, Ill., several thousand people attended MAS’ annual conference in 2002 at the village’s convention center. One speaker said, “We may all feel emotionally attached to the goal of an Islamic state” in America, but it would have to wait because of the modest Muslim population. “We mustn’t cross hurdles we can’t jump yet.”
These revelations are particularly striking, coming as they do just days after a Washington Post article titled “In Search Of Friends Among The Foes,” which reports how some U.S. diplomats and intelligence officials believe the Muslim Brotherhood’s influence “offers an opportunity for political engagement that could help isolate violent jihadists.” Graham Fuller is quoted saying that “It is the preeminent movement in the Muslim world. It’s something we can work with.” Demonizing the Brotherhood, he warns, “would be foolhardy in the extreme.” Other analysts, such as Reuel Gerecht, Edward Djerejian, and Leslie Campbell, are quoted as being in agreement with this outlook.
But it is a deeply wrong and dangerous approach. Even if the Muslim Brotherhood is not specifically associated with violence in the United States (as it has been in other countries, including Egypt and Syria), it is deeply hostile to the United States and must be treated as one vital component of the enemy’s assault force.
Daniel Pipes (www.DanielPipes.org) is director of the Middle East Forum and author of Miniatures (Transaction Publishers).
Join us in preserving strict intrepretation of our Constitution and denounce the descecration of our flag. Frankly it "matters'..
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1226625/posts
" Pipes accused Muslims of the OKC bombing because of the MO's similarity to the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. After the outcry from American Muslims, he backpeddled and apologized, even though there was ample evidence that Muslims had carried out the OKC bombing. "
I didn't know that.
Feel free to trivialize the issues. I, for one, refuse to play that game.
Our Constitution, not loose intrepretation of which.
Read this Mr. 5.56...
By Anthony F. Milavic
Recent U.S. Army laboratory tests have confirmed almost 40 years of demonstrated inferior lethality by the 5.56mm cartridge.
Since 1965, Americans have reported that enemy soldiers continued to fire their weapons after suffering multiple hits by 5.56mm bullets. Most recently, the Interim Report of these tests observes that “less than optimal” performance of the 62-grain 5.56mm M855 cartridge in Somalia and Afghanistan prompted many Special Operations Forces (SOF) units to switch to the heavier 77-grain 5.56mm MK262 ammunition.
All three 5.56mm bullets – 62-grain M855, 77-grain Mk262, and the Le Mas bullets – were inferior to the larger 110-grain 6.8mm and 149-grain 7.62mm bullets in gelatin performance tests. Although the 6.8mm round received the highest overall rating, it is the 7.62mm that “had the highest impact energy of those tested.”
This translates into, “knockdown power” and it is one-round knockdown power that is critical to the warrior’s survival. This is due to the fact that in combat, a warrior frequently gets only one shot; and in other situations, the time between the first and second shot is long enough for the enemy to kill him with one shot.
The demonstrated combat performance of even the largest 5.56mm bullet tested above is sorely inferior to this requirement; for example, on Sept. 12, 2003, after being hit by seven 77-grain 5.56mm bullets, an Iraqi insurgent killed both Master Sgt. Kevin N. Morehead and Sgt. 1st Class William M. Bennett with his 7.62mm Kalashnikov.
Then, Staff Sgt. Robert E Springer threw aside his 5.56mm M-4 carbine and knocked the insurgent down dead with one .45 cal. pistol bullet.
If the 2004 Interim Report doesn’t prompt the replacement of the 5.56mm cartridge, it is time to ask the Department of Defense: How many tombstones will be added to those of Master Sgt. Morehead and Sgt. 1st Class Bennett before you provide our warriors with one-round knockdown power?
"5.56". Indeed.
You must be replying to someone else. I've never made the above statement, "bud." Oh, and "bud," you've been here long enough to know that "5.56mm" is my tag line, not some idle threat. (Btw, I don't threaten people, it gives them a heads up).
5.56mm
You said it perfectly! Just once I'd like to see these alleged "moderate Muslims" spend even a fraction as much energy UNCONDITIONALLY condemning Muslim terrorism as they do giving finger-wagging lectures to the rest of us about how we need to learn more about Islam. And by "unconditionally" I mean without their usual snide insinuations that victims of Muslim terror somehow "have it coming" because of alleged wrongs done to the Muslim world.
What exactly are you referring to? Hindu/Sikkh war? It could happen...any number of things "could" happen, but for arguments sake, let's stick to the present conflicts.
Regarding Quran/ Mecca/Medina...the simplest way to put this is to say that the Medina "overrides" the more peaceful, benign Meccan sura/hadiths...
"Given that I'm not the brightest bulb on the tree [feel free to disagree:-)] what do you mean?" I disagree...I believe you are looking for information. I'm glad to help. You should check out a number of websites:
www.faithfreedom.org, www.danielpipes.org, www.jihadwatch.org....
All will give you specifics. You would be particularly interested in a symposium that included former muslim, Walid Shoebat...very informative. Let me know if you can not find the info and I will post.
"ISLAMERICA"
NEVER!!!!!!
You know, I`m willing to give people the benefit of the doubt, but this wahabist/islam-jihad $#*T has gone WAY TOO FAR and still SILENCE. If muslims REALLY believed in peace, you would think that at least SOME OF THEM would have done SOMETHING by now, right?
I was speaking specifically of "Mecca vs. Medina interpretations." Never heard of this before.
To quote Charlton Heston:
"From my cold dead hands..."
Which is why I referred you to the websites I noted.
This is a quote from the Symposium I referred you to.
"I think you know very well that the 114 “suras” in the Qur’an are separated by Muslim scholars into the two categories of “Meccan” and “Medinan” and that the Medinan verses follow and also nullify many of the former verses. And I think you are aware that even mainstream Islamic commentators regard Sura 9 as precisely the Qur'an's last word on jihad, because it was the last sura revealed. But this debate must occur at another time and place."
Also this...http://www.answeringislam.org/
Look under abrogation...
America already HAS an Islamic state. It is our northern neighbor Canuckistan.
"80% of our mosques here in the US are infected with wahabism."
I've read that too.
And less than 7% of this country's muslims attend weekly prayer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.